Subject:
|
Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 3 Jun 2001 13:24:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
297 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
>
> > > > But from an evolutionary standpoint, the denial of genetic lineage is a
> > > > far greater crime than the gouging out of eyes.
> >
> > I suppose. But so what? The individuals are the ones who'll feel the pain in
> > either case, and I think most people would rather have their eyes than their
> > eggs.
>
> Well, in terms of this discussion, the individual is irrelevant compared to
> the larger, longitudinal issue we're addressing.
Well...I'm not sure I'd say it that way. Certainly the picture over time is
more relevant to the issue of population control, but you originally stated
something like "it's more of a crime if you look at it genetically." The
criminality of things only effects the individual, not the genetic lines.
Only individuals are capable of feeling slighted, and most individuals would
feel worse about losing their sight than their fertility.
If the 90% were random, wouldn't that just make it OK? Of course, it
wouldn't _be_ random, but what can you do?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
