Subject: 
        [evol-psych] the right line on ethics for EP
   Date: 
        Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:42:50 -0600
   From: 
        "Hill, David" 
     To: 
        'John Cartwright' ,
        [email protected]




Exactly right.  It ill behooves a partisan of EP to fall into naive
non-cognitivism when there is an attractive cognitive alternative:  natures
are explicable in adaptationist terms, functions follow from natures, and
proper evaluations follow from functions.  (I use 'follow' in a loose sense,
including but not requiring valid deduction.) Using Sutherland's helpful
example, we know what a good internal temperature is for a human being
(nature provides it), and given certain means-end connections we can
therefore infer prescriptive corrections when the temperature is off.  The
hope is that similar considerations apply to human behavior, though the
arguments are of course much more complex.

David Hill