[x]

You might appreciate some of the National Review articles that the link in my last post leads to, particularly McGinnis and the responses to his article. He's trying to make an evolutionary grounding for conservative values of family, property and tradition.

The problem with such a secure scientific-materialist grounding for one's beliefs is that one doesn't move on to ethical and religious ways of thinking. The likely result is a shallow and complacent amorality or a pure pragmatism of expediency. And if our nature is defined by our material make-up, the temptation to change our nature by reengineering our genes may prove too strong to overcome. I'm not sure that evolutionary psychology or Darwinism provides a way to say "no" to dangerous experimentation with our species.

[betty boop]

And if our nature is defined by our material make-up, the temptation to change our nature by reengineering our genes may prove too strong to overcome. I'm not sure that evolutionary psychology or Darwinism provides a way to say "no" to dangerous experimentation with our species.

Well said, x. I share your concern. I'll go check out the McGinnis article.