🚀 go-pugleaf

          To address *fairness* and *justice* it seems to me that some sort
          of framework must be laid out such that those who says the
          concepts must be applied to nature and those who say the concepts
          cannot be applied to nature begin to talk about something similar
          (or the same thing from a similar perspective).  As such here is
          a possible framework based on the Metaphysics of Quality (Pirsig,
          1991).

          Begin with the premiss of four general levels of evolution:

          1) intellect
          2) society
          3) biology
          4) matter.

          In this context, the threads on overpopulation, etc. are intelect
          discussing society's impact on biology and matter.  Since these
          levels are evolutionary in nature, lower levels should not be
          allowed to destroy higher levels (creationism not forced on
          science as an unquestionable replacement for Darwinism, for
          example).  This evolutionary nature also implies that higher
          levels cannot heedlessly destroy lower levels and continue to
          exist (intellect creating DDT for a society that cannot see its
          dependence on nature/biology).  Most (if not all) morals/values
          are oriented to control the interaction between the four levels
          (birth control is the conflict between intellect and society
          attempting to control biology, for example;  evolution is
          biology's attempt to control matter, as annother example).

          Given this very brief outline,  I think it might be apparent that
          strictly speaking *fairness* and *justice* might be said to
          examples of intellect's attempt to control society (and are thus
          only human concepts).  If the terms can be considered more
          general, then the concepts can be used to describe and influence
          society's interactions with biology.  They can also be used to
          describe biology's influence over matter--those forms of life
          that can adapt and form greater diversity can justly replace
          those that can't--if they don't destroy themselves in the
          process.  This, I think, is the crux of all of the discussion:

          How can we maintain or expand the diveristy of intellect and
          society without destroying the biology that we are dependent
          upon?


          Alan Brenner       "It's not like you've been exiled to Siberia."
          GeoscIentiSt             `You're right--New Jersey's worse.  ;-}'
          U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II
          All opinions are my own and may not reflect Agency policy, etc...
          BRENNER.ALAN@epamail.epa.gov  OR  abrenner@wicdgserv.wic.epa.gov