[spunkets]

" What you're doing is claiming a) that we can derive moral principles from rational assessment of the evidence; and b) that any natural evidence is not to be considered."

The natural evidence you are claiming important is survival of the fittest. By definition there is no moral code governing that process of interaction; there is only nonrational physical driving forces. Men have introduced moral codes to govern there behavior. Rand holds the noninitiation of force principle that I have proven already, in a previous post, preserves the essence of all men, not just the ones that are adept at coercion.

Social darwinism is not a moral code, it is simply a nonrational, natural order.

[r9etb]

. By definition there is no moral code governing that process of interaction; there is only nonrational physical driving forces.

So you say. But you're just tossing out assertions and demanding that I accept them as true. I'm challenging you to prove your assertions like a good objectivist should.