Can the products of evolution judge the evolutionary process?

The AP reports:

QUITO, Ecuador—Ecuador officials say a volcano is erupting in the Galapagos Islands and could harm unique wildlife.

Ben W. comments:

“Harm” wildlife? Isn’t a volcano a part of nature and therefore a part of the evolutionary process? How could a volcano be harmful in the course of natural events? It just is, neither good or bad. So why the fear that it could “harm” wildlife? A volcano doesn’t “harm”—it just erupts “naturally” and nature accepts its effects.

LA replies:

Whence did we, products of the evolutionary process, develop the moral sense that told us that the death of wildlife on the other side of the world is bad, and the non-death of such wildlife is good? Has any Darwinian or evolutionary biologist explained that? Has sociobiology with its theories of “memes” as the basis of human society and human behavior explained it? I want to know.

But I know, even before they speak, that their explanations are going to be patently inadequate and unsustainable. I know this, based on all their past statements.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 12, 2009 08:14 PM | Send