Basically all you guys are saying is that certain types of moralities and societies propagate certain types of "People" or genes. So what? Thanks for wasting anybody who is reading this threads time.
Quote:
|
I think what we're talking about here is a descriptive account of how 'morality' came to be
|
Through genes, right? Genes created morality? lol just kidding. OR AM I?
I guess you're right about the genetic fallacy. I just wanted to mention it because where this argument comes from is something that relies on it's genes to justify it.
What you guys are doing is more like a red herring and bringing up irrelevant shit that has nothing to do with it for god knows what reason. What purpose does derrida have for bringing this up other than to be gay? He's just responding to some gay faggots point that the gay gene could be bred out and trying to show it won't necessarily be so - but that has nothing to do with morality. Not even the "origins of morality." I think you misunderstand derrida's gayness.
and all that relies on the notion that homosexuality is explicitely genetic and not environmental anyway.
Quote:
|
the morality we're talking about is doing good to your friends and harm to your enemies, not a philosophically sophisticated morality, but certainly a prominent one in human history.
|
Real morality begins when you start questioning who are your friends and what is a benefit and a harm ;/ i dont know I guess i just think you guys are talking out of your ass and not really adding anything to the conversation.