Tuesday, April 2, 2013

What's not in the genes?

Wright writes his book in the context of most human action being a result of genetic evolution over the course of billions of years.  One can use this logic to state that human action is a result of genetic imperative.  What would Wright say about suicide?  Would he say suicide is simply a way of weak members of the herd not getting in the gene pool (i.e. people who kill themselves because of genetically inherited depression), a way for people who lack adaptive capabilities to create offspring (i.e. people who kill themselves because they lose their job) or is suicide an exemption from the rule that our actions are for our genes' interests?  (Our genes don't feel pain as we do, so we couldn't say an end to our suffering is an end to theirs as well.)

1 comment:

  1. This is one of the main problems that I have with Wright. It seems to me as though in proscribing all these genetic factors to human moral action,he is removing the very essence of humanity in our actions. If we are just acting on genetic factors, then is everything justifiable? Are we responsible for anything?

    ReplyDelete