Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T07:07:37.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The inevitability of normative analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2014

Sahotra Sarkar
Sahotra Sarkar*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712. sarkar@austin.utexas.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wilson et al. make the case for taking control of our future using evolutionary analysis. However, they are entirely silent on the ethical questions that must be addressed. This piece emphasizes this problem and notes that the relevant answers will require nontrivial analysis. This is where the humanities become relevant – in particular, philosophy and cultural anthropology.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , August 2014 , pp. 436
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bray, D. & von Storch, H. (2009) “Prediction” or “projection”? The nomenclature of climate science. Science Communication 30:534–43.Google Scholar
Ehrenfeld, D. W. (1978) The arrogance of humanism. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, T. F. & Lappé, M. A., eds. (1994) Justice and the Human Genome Project. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S. (1998) Genetics and reductionism. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S. (2005) Biodiversity and environmental philosophy: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S. (2012) Environmental philosophy: From theory to pratice. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar