Sexual Selection and the Brotherhood of Humans: Does the argument of The Descent of Man confirm The sacred cause thesis?

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Santiago Ginnobili
{"title":"Sexual Selection and the Brotherhood of Humans: Does the argument of The Descent of Man confirm The sacred cause thesis?","authors":"Santiago Ginnobili","doi":"10.5007/1808-1711.2023.e90604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Desmond and Moore point out that the key to understanding Darwin’s The Descent of Man is his abolitionist motivation and his advocacy that races constitute subspecies. Roberta Millstein raises some doubts about the importance of this motivation. She points out that the inclusion of the extensive section devoted to non-human animals is not justified by Darwin’s treatment of humans per se, because his explanation of the origin of races is peculiar. In this sense, she argues that Darwin’s specific explanation of the origin of races does not confirm the central importance that Desmond and Moore give to Darwin’s abolitionism. In this paper I have two different aims. On the one hand, to show that the human case actually is based on the treatment of nonhuman animals, and consequently, Darwin’s argument is not as poor as Millstein believes. My second goal, taking Millstein’s challenge seriously, is to show that Darwin’s explanation of the origin of races does confirm the Desmond and Moore thesis in a deeper sense than the one they propose themselves. For the anti-slavery motivation could not only explain the fact that Darwin sees all humans as forming the same species, but the specific explanation he gives for the origin of races.","PeriodicalId":38561,"journal":{"name":"Principia","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Principia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2023.e90604","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Desmond and Moore point out that the key to understanding Darwin’s The Descent of Man is his abolitionist motivation and his advocacy that races constitute subspecies. Roberta Millstein raises some doubts about the importance of this motivation. She points out that the inclusion of the extensive section devoted to non-human animals is not justified by Darwin’s treatment of humans per se, because his explanation of the origin of races is peculiar. In this sense, she argues that Darwin’s specific explanation of the origin of races does not confirm the central importance that Desmond and Moore give to Darwin’s abolitionism. In this paper I have two different aims. On the one hand, to show that the human case actually is based on the treatment of nonhuman animals, and consequently, Darwin’s argument is not as poor as Millstein believes. My second goal, taking Millstein’s challenge seriously, is to show that Darwin’s explanation of the origin of races does confirm the Desmond and Moore thesis in a deeper sense than the one they propose themselves. For the anti-slavery motivation could not only explain the fact that Darwin sees all humans as forming the same species, but the specific explanation he gives for the origin of races.
性选择与人类的兄弟情谊:《人类的起源》论证是否证实了神圣原因论?
Desmond和Moore指出,理解达尔文《人类的起源》的关键是他的废奴主义动机和他主张种族构成亚种。Roberta Millstein对这种动机的重要性提出了一些质疑。她指出,从达尔文对人类本身的看法来看,收录大量关于非人类动物的章节是不合理的,因为他对种族起源的解释是独特的。从这个意义上说,她认为达尔文对种族起源的具体解释并没有证实戴斯蒙德和摩尔对达尔文废奴主义的核心重要性。在本文中,我有两个不同的目的。一方面,为了证明人类的案例实际上是基于对非人类动物的治疗,因此,达尔文的论点并不像米尔斯坦认为的那样贫乏。我的第二个目标是,认真对待米尔斯坦的挑战,证明达尔文对种族起源的解释确实在更深层次上证实了德斯蒙德和摩尔的论点,而不是他们自己提出的论点。因为反奴隶制的动机不仅可以解释达尔文认为所有人类都是同一个物种的事实,而且可以解释他对种族起源的具体解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Principia
Principia Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信