Subject: 
        [evol-psych] Huxleyan dualism of Dawkins and EP
   Date: 
        Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:05:48 -0600
   From: 
        "Larry Arnhart" 
     To: 
        




I agree with Frans de Waal that this new statement from Dawkins confirms
the conclusion that Dawkins takes a dualistic view of ethics as
transcending biological nature that comes not from Darwin but from
Thomas Huxley.  Moreover, as I have argued previously on this list, most
proponents of EP have taken the Huxley-Dawkins path and thus rejected
Darwin's ethical naturalism.

I continue to be surprised by the fact that those defending EP
generally reject Darwin's claim that ethics can be rooted in the moral
sentiments of human biological nature.  Edward Westermarck remains one
of the few social theorists who adopted Darwin's naturalistic view of
ethics.  Since Westermarck, E. O. Wilson and de Waal have continued his
tradition of thought.  But most of the theorists of EP (such as Steven
Pinker and David Buss)  have insisted on a simple-minded is/ought
dichotomy--natural facts versus moral values--that presents morality as
a product of human culture that transcends human nature.  This radically
narrows the intellectual power of Darwinian theory because it puts
morality beyond the realm of Darwinian science.  If Darwinian science
cannot explain morality, then it cannot explain what is most fundamental
about human social behavior.

Larry Arnhart

Department of Political Science
Northern Illinois University
DeKalb, IL 60115