From Darwinian Conservatism:
‘This sounds a lot like John Locke’s argument for natural rights and social order constituted by a social contract. But, oddly, Searle rejects Locke and social contract reasoning, without realizing that his thinking largely coincides with that reasoning. Searle doesn’t see that in explaining how status functions arise from “collective intentionality” or “collective acceptance or recognition of the object or person as having that status” (8), he is adopting the Lockean argument for social authority as arising from the consent of human individuals.’
‘A fundamental claim of my argument for Darwinian conservatism–as combining traditionalist conservatism and classical liberalism–is that Darwinian science supports the constrained or realist view of human nature as fixed that is embraced by conservatism, as opposed to the unconstrained or utopian view of human nature as malleable that is embraced by the Left. ‘
Via Lapham’s: Four College Mascot Casualties and the reasons for their demise.
Michael Totten: ‘The Saudis Team Up With Israel’
What happens when you mix feminist ideals, equality and anthropology into a worldview? I’m not sure but the NY Times thinks it’s very important.
No tribalism and ignorance on display here. No sir.