On 13 Feb 2012 05:26:55 GMT, "sweller" <
swe...@mztech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>steve auvache wrote:
>
>> Darwinism
>
>Interesting this - the "ism" is usually appended to a political
>philosophical approach, rather than a peer reviewed scientific piece of
>research.
>
>So, does the Darwin's theory of evolution count as philosphical
>political theory or a piece of peer reviewed science?
A bit of both I suppose. I haven't checked but judging by the reaction of
the world it seems to me that there is a fair chance it qualifies as peer
reviewed science and as some political theories hold that there is such a
thing as better breeding and that for the overall good of humanity they
should not relinquish power to the proles then that as well. Although
having said that we do have to consider that as far as stuff goes defining
what is or is not a source for political philosophy is a bit like me
predicting what you would get in your bag after a visit to the pix and mix
section of woolworths if they were still trading. All I know is is that
it would be stuff you like.
--
steve auvache