Roger, just because it's wrong doesn't mean they're not right.

[Kai]

Yesterday, I was sitting in my insect behavior class. We were talking about altruism and mutilevel selection, and I asked the question, can these ideas of kin selection be applied to our species, since it seems we react in altruism for not only kin. My professor paused for a moment in his characteristic way, and motioned with his chalk. They do apply, he said, but talking about it gets very muddy. Applying behavioral study to humans is often difficult because the basic activities are obscured by culture, although culture can be considered a behavioral adaptation, but more often it is obscured by sensitivity.

He went on, Roger, to tell a story about the great sociobiologist EO Wilson. Back in the 70s, Wilson had proposed that racism in humans may be a sort of kin selection. Kin, in this case race, have to be recognizable to be considered same with self. And since the so called differences in skin color and surface features of different groups of humans are so immediately obvious, its very easy to see how racism could be a sort of kin selection, a selfishness related to passing on ones own genes and the shared genes of others.

Now, he was completely villanized for this, Roger. He would go to scientific meetings and people would pour water over his head while he was speaking and should "DR. WILSON, YOU'RE ALL WET!" It didn't matter if the science was there, people were so sensitive to the topic of racism in any way that they wouldn't hear a word of it.

But thats the issue, isn't it? People grasping to hypotheses and treating them like absolutes of a moral code. If Wilson was right, they would think, then that makes racism /okay/, wouldn't it?

Now, what kind of silly thought is that, Roger? Yes, there is kin selection in humans, and yes, it seems very likely that racism would be some form of group selection. BUT. BUT! That does not mean that racism is morally acceptable. That's the difference, the stupid, easy to see difference between the objective knowledge of science and the 'Truth' of society. We are dirty apes, Roger, but we live together in relative suprising harmony, considering. Just because racism has happened as an extention of biology, doesn't make it good. Just because, for example, fireflies attract mates with lights, doesn't mean we should all wear christmas tree lamps when going to the bar.

It's such a great and fatal mistake to believe that just because something has happened to be one way, that we are somehow stuck to it, that it's some sort of absolute. We might as well be practicing Christianity in the 12th century. Just because it's wrong to be racist, doesn't mean that Wilson isn't right.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Kai, the problem with Wilson was that he didn't take his ideas far enough.  There are basically two kinds of kin:  Humans and monkeys.  The jackass with the water was a monkey.  The proper response from Dr Wilson was to taser the bastard until his synapses all fused, as an example to the others.

Scientific Truth, much as my own field of Holyism™, is not a matter for mushy-headed PCisms, especially - as you point out - that Wilson was not condoning racism, but explaining its cause...But because the very subject is verboten, his information has been buried.  A tool for defeating racism has been abandoned, because some hippy fucker couldn't listen once a certain button got pushed.

Kai, the only acceptable answer to all of this is that I be appointed to a special panel dedicated to the rooting out and punishment of stupidity.  I realize that I will be a very busy man, but I can no longer stand the hooting of the hyper-democratic morons who insist that all opinions are equally valid, or that "belief" can equal "theory".

Arrange this, Kai, and I will fix everything, and we'll all march off into a Brave New World™ in which bad people get what they deserve, and stupid people are made to suffer for their sins.

And the trains, Kai, the trains will all run on time.

[Kai]

Scientific Truth, much as my own field of Holyism™, is not a matter for mushy-headed PCisms, especially - as you point out - that Wilson was not condoning racism, but explaining its cause...But because the very subject is verboten, his information has been buried.  A tool for defeating racism has been abandoned, because some hippy fucker couldn't listen once a certain button got pushed.

That is completely correct, Roger. Science had a chance to show the squishy biological, monkey mind rational for racism, and thus refute all the stupid reasons for allowing it. If it's from something as simple as kin selection, then it is equally simple enough to move beyond it. The number of people who are not racists clearly show this to be true.

And yes, it seems like some ignoramus beating logs to keep the evil spirits away has to go and spoil any sort of progression of understanding of and by humanity. Biology can hardly be considered to be humane, thus the point.

[Cain]

There is a real problem with some people.  And that problem is that they think because something is "natural" it is therefore right.

Such people never seem to eat their meat raw or sleep in a tree though.  Funny, that.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Scientific Truth, much as my own field of Holyism™, is not a matter for mushy-headed PCisms, especially - as you point out - that Wilson was not condoning racism, but explaining its cause...But because the very subject is verboten, his information has been buried.  A tool for defeating racism has been abandoned, because some hippy fucker couldn't listen once a certain button got pushed.

That is completely correct, Roger. Science had a chance to show the squishy biological, monkey mind rational for racism, and thus refute all the stupid reasons for allowing it. If it's from something as simple as kin selection, then it is equally simple enough to move beyond it. The number of people who are not racists clearly show this to be true.

And yes, it seems like some ignoramus beating logs to keep the evil spirits away has to go and spoil any sort of progression of understanding of and by humanity. Biology can hardly be considered to be humane, thus the point.

They won't be taught, Kai, because then they'd have to stop hating.  The asshole with the glass of water would have cheerfully joined the Klan 30 years earlier...or any other group or cause that gave him a chance to hate a person, group, or idea with society on his side.

Theirs is a small hate, sir.  A weak hate.  Frankly, it gives hate a bad name.  A proper hatred is all-inclusive and all-consuming, and is all to appropriate for the dark times in which we find ourselves.

These people are the enemy, Kai, and they are never so insidious as when they pose as "scientists" and preach ideology.

The horror...The horror...Exterminate the brutes.

[LMNO]

Arrange this, Kai, and I will fix everything, and we'll all march off into a Brave New World™ in which bad people get what they deserve, and stupid people are made to suffer for their sins.

And the trains, Kai, the trains will all run on time.

I read this, and I started laughing at my desk.  And I kept it silent, inside, as I sounded like an epileptic with an athsma attack.



And as I wheezed and panted, a single tear welled up in the corner of my eye, and slowly rolled down my cheek.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Arrange this, Kai, and I will fix everything, and we'll all march off into a Brave New World™ in which bad people get what they deserve, and stupid people are made to suffer for their sins.

And the trains, Kai, the trains will all run on time.

I read this, and I started laughing at my desk.  And I kept it silent, inside, as I sounded like an epileptic with an athsma attack.



And as I wheezed and panted, a single tear welled up in the corner of my eye, and slowly rolled down my cheek.

I was giggling when I wrote it.  I'm in a weird mood today.

[Elder Iptuous]

There is a real problem with some people.  And that problem is that they think because something is "natural" it is therefore right.

Such people never seem to eat their meat raw or sleep in a tree though.  Funny, that.

You're saying that if a person is born with some proclivity that other people might feel is immoral, they are can't rely on the argument that they were born that way and that it is 'natural'?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There is a real problem with some people.  And that problem is that they think because something is "natural" it is therefore right.

Such people never seem to eat their meat raw or sleep in a tree though.  Funny, that.

You're saying that if a person is born with some proclivity that other people might feel is immoral, they are can't rely on the argument that they were born that way and that it is 'natural'?

No.  They should rely on punching people in the face when their rights get trampled.

[Cain]

There is a real problem with some people.  And that problem is that they think because something is "natural" it is therefore right.

Such people never seem to eat their meat raw or sleep in a tree though.  Funny, that.

You're saying that if a person is born with some proclivity that other people might feel is immoral, they are can't rely on the argument that they were born that way and that it is 'natural'?

No.  They should rely on punching people in the face when their rights get trampled.

This.  I mean, yes, if people are saying, for example "gay sex is unnatural" then they are wrong and I can see the temptation in using someone's own argument against them.  But its not convincing, since you can say murder or rape are natural.  The arguments for gay sex are it does no harm and its no-one elses business what consenting adults do among themselves.  Naturalness is a stupid argument.

[Shai Hulud]

"DR. WILSON, YOU'RE ALL WET!"

Notwithstanding the fact having water poured on his head is a violation of Dr. Wilson's rights, it's not really fair to say that he was totally villainized.  He's still a very important figure in sociobiology today.  But it's one thing to say that kin selection is important in evolution, it is another thing to say it is responsible in whole or in part for the phenomenon known as racism.  It may be that certain people are made uncomfortable by the idea that racism is "natural" but it is unfair to say that all opponents of of EO Wilson are motivated by such unscientific concerns.  The real problem with Wilson's sociobiology is that it is fraught with bad science.  

Wilson sees "behavior and social structure as 'organs,'—extensions of the genes that exist because of their superior adaptive value." In speaking of indoctrinability, for example, he asserts that "humans are absurdly easy to indoctrinate" and therefore "conformer genes" must exist. Likewise, Wilson speaks of the "genes favoring spite" and asserts that spite occurs because humans are intelligent and can fathom its selective advantages. Similar arguments apply to "homosexuality genes" and genes for "creativity, entrepreneurship, drive and mental stamina." But there is no evidence for the existence of such genes. Thus, for Wilson, what exists is adaptive, what is adaptive is good, therefore what exists is good. However, when Wilson is forced to deal with phenomena such as social unrest, his explanatory framework becomes amazingly elastic. Such behavior is capriciously dismissed with the explanation that it is maladaptive, and therefore has simply failed to evolve. Hence, social unrest may be due to the obsolescence of our moral codes, for as Wilson sees it we still operate with a "formalized code" as simple as that of "members of hunter-gatherer societies." Xenophobia represents a corresponding failure to keep pace with social evolution, our "intergroup responses...still crude and primitive."

This approach allows Wilson to confirm selectively certain contemporary behavior as adaptive and "natural" and thereby justify the present social order. The only basis for Wilson's definition of adaptive and maladaptive, however, is his own preferences. While he rejects the "advocacy approach" and claims scientific objectivity, Wilson reinforces his own speculations about a "human nature," i.e., that a great variety of human behavior is genetically determined, a position which does not follow from his evidence.

Read the whole article here.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Thread roont.

Well done.

[BabylonHoruv]

There is a real problem with some people.  And that problem is that they think because something is "natural" it is therefore right.

Such people never seem to eat their meat raw or sleep in a tree though.  Funny, that.

You're saying that if a person is born with some proclivity that other people might feel is immoral, they are can't rely on the argument that they were born that way and that it is 'natural'?

It's natural is a proper defense against being accused of being unnatural.  It is not a proper defense against being accused of being immoral.

[Bu🤠ns]

Thread roont.

Well done.

I don't think that's possible.  Not this time. 


I love the thread, Kai.  I think your example stands.  Wilson was asking the questions.  Ridicule is still ridicule and that's the whole fucking problem.

[Jasper]

Ridicule is not to blame.

Reactionary liberalism is.