Is cannibalism wrong, immoral, or unethical if it doesn't involve people being *intentionally* killed?
-
-
elaborate one step more?
-
I mean that because people are used to thinking of widely proscribed actions in terms of harm done, when it comes to purity violations, they...
-
...(if they are arguing said violations ought to be punished) try to construct the violation in terms of harm norms because it's how they think of transgression
-
eg "close relation incest is wrong because it could produce a malformed child, the victim of the action!" what if they use birth control and if it fails abort? "there's still a chance!" etc
-
when the right argument is, it's banned because it's so disgusting that it offends our sensibilities as a society
-
anyway to segue to the "why tho" it's obvious avoiding cannibalism and incest carry a fitness benefit
-
it's probably unlikely all these societies discovered inbreeding depression or prion disease and took steps to reduce them proactively
-
especially since these taboos usually get imposed *very* early. I don't know of any cannibalistic societies that aren't pre-literate, and...
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
it is simply that these acts defile those who participate in them
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interesting... what purpose do purity norms serve?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.