From: Zero Powers (zero_powers@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Jun 13 2003 - 14:08:58 MDT
>From: Greg Burch <gregburch@gregburch.net>
>
> > From: Emlyn O'regan
> >
> > Except that we don't believe in natural law, do we? (I hope not)
>
>In a limited sense, I do. (As usual) without the time to be complete in
>explaining myself, I think that some elements of social interactions are
>universal and derive from the very nature of (thus, "natural")
>intentional beings interacting with each other.
Depends what you mean by "natural law." If by natural law you mean moral
laws legislated by "nature" (which may as well be "God"), obviously there is
no such thing. However, as Greg suggests, humans have a nature (a "human
nature") that influences how we interract. Yes of course, to a certain
extent we have free will. But even our "free will" choices are determined
entirely by our phenotype and environment. Given this shared "human nature"
there are certain "laws" that "naturally" follow.
For instance, as Greg also suggests, our moral laws derive indirectly from
game theory. They reinforce our cooperation instincts and counter our
cheating instincts. Human societies universally have laws against, say,
stealing because it is human nature to maximize ones own success, even if it
means minimizing the success of another human. The nature of the honey bee,
on the other hand, is to maximize the fitness of the group and the queen,
even at the expense of the individual drone. So there's no need for a honey
bee "law" against stealing nectar. It is not in the honey bee's nature to
do so.
So, to that extent, I firmly believe in "natural law."
-Zero
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 13 2003 - 14:18:07 MDT