Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:15:52 +0000 From: Mervyn Hartwig <mh-AT-jaspere.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: BHA: Flourishing, Aristotle, etc. OK, one could equally argue that competion and aggression have been necessary for biological evolution to proceed, and a eudaimonian society might well want to retain competition in various forms. But I think it remains the case that co-operation is ontologically prior within communities. The ability of the wolf to successfully attack the deer derives from co-operation and social love--if they spent most of their time fighting each other they couldn't do it, and what fighting they do do with each other is sustained by co-operation in a way that doesn't apply vice versa. Mervyn jamie morgan <jamie-AT-morganj58.fsnet.co.uk> writes >Might it not be that competition and aggression has proved successful within >evolution as much as cooperation and thus both have had their place in >species evolution and also in human social development - implying that both >are aspects of nature and of society where the concept of primacy or triumph >is not necessarily the best way of think about what we want to take from >each? > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mervyn Hartwig" <mh-AT-jaspere.demon.co.uk> >To: <bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu> >Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 6:18 PM >Subject: Re: BHA: Flourishing, Aristotle, etc. > > >> Hi Dick, >> >> But it hasn't, i.e. notwithstanding inter-(and intra-)specific >> aggression, species have proliferated and flourished. If aggression >> dominated both inter- and intra- the whole show would come to a halt (as >> of course it might yet owing to contingent aggression within a >> contingently powerful species, i.e. ours; it would remain the case that >> there could be no process of biological evolution if love did not >> triumph over evil, Eros over Thanatos). >> >> Mervyn >> >> >> >> >> "Moodey, Richard W" <MOODEY001-AT-gannon.edu> writes >> >Hi Mervyn, >> > >> >You wrote: >> > >> >"One can argue that, given that biological evolution proceeds, it must be >> >the case that co-operation, care etc prevails over self-preservation, >> >aggression etc within species." >> > >> >But isn't it possible that conflict among (between)different communities >> >may prevail over co-operation among (between)them, even as this >> >conflict requires high degrees of co-operation within each of these >> >communities? >> > >> >I don't write this out of any basic disagreement with the other arguments >> >for the either the existence or the fundamental goodness of something >> >(not yet fully specified, perhaps) that we can point to with the >heuristic >> >concept, "human nature." >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >> >> >> --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- >> > > > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005