“First, in order that materialist ethics be consistent with the idea that life evolved by chance and continues to evolve over time, ethics must be built on human social instincts that are in a continuous process of change over evolutionary time. “
And this is bad how? Some people used to burn “witches.” But fortunately that’s sort of “evolved.” The Old Testament contain many strictures that we just ignore now. Thank goodness.
The whole point of those that push evolution is the exclusion of a Creator, and more to the point, of the existance of truth and rules that are objective and outside of human manipulation.
Once you’ve destroyed the concept of an absolute truth, then your society is open for the “truth” as promoted by the strongest, the cruelest, and the most politically powerful.
gracesdad: “First, in order that materialist ethics be consistent with the idea that life evolved by chance and continues to evolve over time, ethics must be built on human social instincts that are in a continuous process of change over evolutionary time. “
And this is bad how?
Irish: Tell me, exactly whose ‘social instincts” (impulses, etc) shall morality be based upon? Already millions of people have suffered and died in regimes where the “social instincts” of Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, etc have served as the ‘standard.” The Marquis de Sade had his own version of ‘social instincts’ as did Jeffrey Dahmer, the Columbine killers, etc.
You haven't been reading your Bertrand Russell enough. There is no goodness to thank or evil to condemn at all in a universe that is nothing but an accidental by-product of impersonal chance or necessity. Ascribing to concatenations of atoms the attributes of good or evil makes about as much sense as praising or condemning the orbit of the moon around the earth.
“Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way.” (Russell, “Why I am not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects,” 1957, p. 115)
Cordially,