Discussion Thread: Evolutionary Ethics and God
Which of the problems McQuilkin and Copan mention in chapter
11 are most important—that is, which is the most compelling
reason to reject Evolutionary Ethics and why?
The problems with Evolutionary Ethics are merely possible, but
leaving unchecked, they become inevitable.
Emmanuel Kant was a philosopher in the 1700s and impacted the
philosophical world immensely. Even as the time periods were divided as
B.C and A.D. (before Christ and after the birth of Christ), modern
philosophy has done so with Kant in the textbooks. They commonly divide
the textbooks as “pre” and “post-Kantian.”
Kant puts emphasis on duty without character. Thus, I would suggest that
the second Evolutionary Ethics problem mentioned by McQuilkin and
Copan is the most compelling reason to reject Evolutionary Ethics.
McQuilkin and Copan write, “We don’t escape responsibility by appealing
to genetics.” They make a thought-provoking point using the illustration
1
of an accused telling the judge that his genes made him do it. That would
not stand in court, at least not in a righteous court.
It is very well possible that God, as we presuppose the existence of
