Aristotle

Aristotle
Aristotle’s Ethics of Darwinism (3): Holloway on the courage and nobility
Some 15 years ago, I took a graduate seminar in my country, “and the evolution of political theory” for the first time. One of the students in that category Carson Holloway. Although he was interested in the idea of a political theory of Darwinism, he also was skeptical about it, because he thought it did not recognize the importance of religious belief to moral and political system. In the second or third meeting of the seminar, it was a clear division of graduate students into two groups – those that defend the political theory of Darwinism and those critics. The two teams until he sat on opposite sides of the table seminar. Those attacking Darwinian science called themselves “priests”, and were led by Carson. He called on the Darwinism to defend themselves “scientists”, and led by another student – Dave Ivers, who now teaches at the University of Michigan East. The class was amazing. Normally, I would like to begin each class by asking a question. Then, the two opposing teams go after one another for the rest of the class. I was a little more of the referee. I always remember that this is the best example of what graduate seminar should like.Ever since then, and put his criticism of Carson’s “Darwinian natural right” in a series of publications, ranging from Darwin right? (Spence Publishing, 2006). Recently, an article contributed to Darwinian Conservatism: Conflict on the Question (2009). I have responded to him in this book in different functions of this blog. But I do not think I have ever received fully in chapter 3 of his book – “deification of democracy” (p. 41-70). Carson says that morality is Darwinism reduces morality to “mere sociability or morals”, and therefore ignores what Aristotle also recognizes the longing transcendent about the “nobility or the beauty of character,” which reflects the “nostalgia normal religious,” which requires “sanctions openly revealed religion”