>Oh, and I'll repeat my objection to Michael Lorreys argument (similar to
>yours in some respects) - EVERYTHING IS NATURAL. Every human act,
>everything we do, whether social, individual, liked or disliked, genocidal
>or political or sexual or whatever is a natural act. There is no dividing
>line between 'natural' and 'unnatural' except in peoples heads, just
>some of us believe that we are 'above' nature or 'apart' from nature or
>'over in the corner, looking at ' nature.
I absolutely, 100% agree. What makes you think I believe in that bogus dichotomy? My postulating evolution as a basis for understanding ethics should've been enough to tell you where I stand on that.
Seems to me you're the one trying to get above or beyond nature in this discussion, by arguing against the evolutionary basis for decent behavior. Check your premises.