[lit-ideas] Re: A serious inquiry: Hannah
- From: "Peter D. Junger" <junger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:20:27 -0400
"John McCreery" writes:
: This pattern is a familiar one in tribal and traditional societies
: where kinship and humanity are equivalent, so that non-kin equals
: non-human and exploiting, torturing or killing non-humans is, thus,
: not a moral issue.
:
: >From this perspective, liberal moral squeamishness reflects our
: embrace of the Kantian proposition that moral judgments should be
: universally applicable, at least in regard to members of the human
: species.
:
: Tangentially, this may, at least in part, explain the attachment of
: conservative thinkers to scriptural literalism and Linnaean
: classificaitons. Darwinian evolution is, among other things, a ground
: for regarding every member of the species homo sapien as kin; thus
: falling within the boundary to which moral judgments apply.
It's just as much a ground for regarding every living being as kin.
And anyway this hardly explains why conservative thinkers are so
morally attached to zygotes.
(I guess that I should have added "Conthinkcon" to my list.)
--
Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
EMAIL: junger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx URL: http://samsara.law.cwru.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
