(FB 1544234280 Timestamp)
CONTRA WEINSTEIN VS DAWKINS
I would love to have this debate because the alternative is that while we have a natural neurological demand for stories (frames) the world has solved for the satisfaction of demand, and one can solve for the satisfaction of that demand by a host of means – some of which have entirely positive externalities, and some of which have entirely negative externalities. Some of which are in fact eugenic, and some of which are in fact dysgenic – a disease, or cancer. In other words, we SURVIVE some religions, but those religions that we survive appear to have been reproductively successful for that which does not lead to ends that put our survival under our CONTROL: domestication. And while a relativist might say ‘well evolution doesn’t make that distinction’ – saying so would be incompatible with (a) self determination of group or man, (b) the evidence that we achieve what we do through self and other ‘domestication’, or (c) that those who achieve the most domestication are responsible for dragging mankind out of his animal condition into his human rational condition with which he control his destiny (survival), in a universe arguably hostile to (costly) sentient life.