First, I agree completely with Anonymous's response comments. I think Finley has missed the point of this discussion, but is a welcome addition. I would also point out that Finley's first assumption could very easily be invalid, so I would not accept evolution as "a fact the way gravity is." When my coffee cup hits the floor and shatters because I have dropped it from my hand, I know gravity is at work. However strongly evolution is supported by observational science, it is still a theory. I have studied biology for 30 years and have yet to observe any absolute proof of evolution at work. In fact, I have been in many discussions which included quite sound observational reasoning for a creation theory, and not one tied to the Bible or any religion. My arguments and questions concerning (and Anonymous's too) adaptive significance and natural selection are still valid in some creation models. There is one primary reason I see for separating science from culture or politics as much as possible: to allow science to do it's job. Morton Hunt's new text, "The New Know-Nothings: The Political Foes of the Scientific Study of Human Nature", points out just how politics and culture can stifle science and leave us in the dark (witness the Dark Ages). The exploration of the adaptive significance, or any other biological aspects of homosexuality, allow us to ask and seek answers for all questions, not just the ones the gay left or religious right want answered. The question isn't one of "right or wrong" or of "blame", but what is truth. And, I personally, would like to understand truth before teaching an assumed truth to my children and grandchildren. Or at least, to present the disclaimers that accompany the assumptions. For example, if we teach that homosexuality is nothing more than an alternative lifestyle, then let us also teach the known facts about higher levels of depression, suicide, AIDS, etc., associated with this lifestyle. Additionally, something that is alternative is not necessarily acceptable in a social context, but science can do much to dispel the here say and assumption that leads discrimination and hatred in society. My argument then, is this: let us continue to explore the adaptive advantage of sexual behaviors of all types, with the thought in mind that the alternative hypothesis is that there is no selective advantage, and thus we are not discussing biological phenomenon. This means conducting sound research in genetics, ethology, psychology, and other areas, not just a searching for an acceptable explanation, with a priori conclusions, such as we have seen to date.
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.