Re: Rogue Males/moral prescriptions

From: Francesca S. Alcorn (
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 05:11:12 GMT

  • Next message: Dace: "ality"

    Received: by id FAA05892 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 05:14:56 GMT
    Message-Id: <p0432041cb87bdbdd8fc9@[]>
    In-Reply-To: <>
    References: <>
    Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:11:12 -0500
    From: "Francesca S. Alcorn" <>
    Subject: Re: Rogue Males/moral prescriptions
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
    Precedence: bulk

    Scott said:

    >It's been a while since I read G.E. Moore's _Principia Ethica_, but
    >I think that, in short, justification of anything as being adaptive,
    >therefore right or good is a possible case of the naturalistic
    >There's also Hume's "is/ought" distinction.
    >How does one make moral prescriptions from descriptions which apply
    >to the factual sphere?

    But I like Grant's idea of the win-win situation, and looking at the
    *results* of a meme to determine it's "morality." It fits nicely
    into my line of work which is counseling - since it allows me a
    fairly non-judgemental stance, and by exploring the consequences of
    their beliefs and actions with clients, it allows them to develop a
    highly-personalized way of evaluating things. I must confess to
    having read neither of these books, so I don't know how well this
    response fits with what you were trying to say.


    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 29 2002 - 05:23:44 GMT