Why Homosexuality Is Gay

[Big Papa Goat]

Morality here clearly has to be understood as it has generally been understood throughout most of human history; doing good for your friends and harm to your enemies, which I guess is more like justice than morality as such, but still I think that's basically what we're talking about here. That kind of morality (=justice) is basically advantageous for any particular group; it's just that the concept of populations as a unit that is selected for in terms of biological evolution is tough to grasp. The way I always saw it was that the populations provided something like a context for the evolution of different genes within the population, but I never really got that far along in biology I suppose.

You raise a good point in general about the complexity of gene expression, I guess if we can't really know how genes get expressed that could say a lot about how much we can know about how genes get selected for. Makes talking about evolutionary biology and behaviour pretty complicated for sure.

As for kahljorn; I think what we're talking about here is a descriptive account of how 'morality' came to be, we're not trying to justify anything on the basis of it's origins, which I think is what you mean by the genetic fallacy. Like I said earlier, the morality we're talking about is doing good to your friends and harm to your enemies, not a philosophically sophisticated morality, but certainly a prominent one in human history. It is an opinion about what is right and wrong whose origins can be traced to evolutionary biology, tracing the origins of something is not the same as justifying it by those origins. But that doesn't mean we can just forget about nature and say that it's all just meaningless epiphenomena, the nature (=origins) of human things (like morality) is still important to understanding and dealing with them. Like this bad morality that evolution gave us; just because Plato showed what was wrong with it about 2000 years ago (and any reasonable person can see what's wrong with it on their own anyway) doesn't mean that it's gone away, so living with the biological reality of (biologically) evolved morality remains important.

I've been rambling, so let me just get to the point: being gay is gross.

[kahljorn]

Basically all you guys are saying is that certain types of moralities and societies propagate certain types of "People" or genes. So what? Thanks for wasting anybody who is reading this threads time.

I think what we're talking about here is a descriptive account of how 'morality' came to be

Through genes, right? Genes created morality? lol just kidding. OR AM I?

I guess you're right about the genetic fallacy. I just wanted to mention it because where this argument comes from is something that relies on it's genes to justify it.
What you guys are doing is more like a red herring and bringing up irrelevant shit that has nothing to do with it for god knows what reason. What purpose does derrida have for bringing this up other than to be gay? He's just responding to some gay faggots point that the gay gene could be bred out and trying to show it won't necessarily be so - but that has nothing to do with morality. Not even the "origins of morality." I think you misunderstand derrida's gayness.

and all that relies on the notion that homosexuality is explicitely genetic and not environmental anyway.

the morality we're talking about is doing good to your friends and harm to your enemies, not a philosophically sophisticated morality, but certainly a prominent one in human history.

Real morality begins when you start questioning who are your friends and what is a benefit and a harm ;/ i dont know I guess i just think you guys are talking out of your ass and not really adding anything to the conversation.