[Tublecane]

“we are now experienceing a reverse evolution, or devolution, in the mind of at least one Nobel Prize winner”

Devolution is evolution. There is no reverse, because the process is neutral on the outcome. Who’s to say what’s upward or downward, better or worse, scientifically speaking? Whatever’s selected is selected, and what’s morally bad for the social organism is fine and dandy for the weak and stupid. So long as civilization lasts, that is, at which point they’ll die off and hunter-gatherers, or whatever, will take over and maybe we’ll be back to your “upward” trajectory.

[Diamond]

Whatever’s selected is selected, and what’s morally bad for the social organism is fine and dandy for the weak and stupid.

The statement, "whatever's selected is selected" is a meaningless tautology.

And do you not see the impassable gap between "whatever’s selected is selected, and what’s morally bad.."?

I would like to see you validly derive a moral "ought" merely from what "is". Go ahead. Give your best shot. Otherwise you don't get to presuppose or smuggle in any "morality".

Cordially,