Dodaj nową odpowiedź

pisanie o związku polityki z genami to nic nowego u anarchistów, Kropotkin to dość znany anarchista i należy do tego nurtu a dzisiaj jest to Chomsky

http://libcom.org/library/interview-noam-chomsky-radical-anthropology-20...

natomiast to o czym zapominają liberałowie mówiący o naturze ludzkiej to że zmiany kumulują sie w czasie, dlatego nie uwzględniają historii
W końcu z ewolucyjnych teorii wynika, że natura ludzka ewoluuje prawda :)

Peter Kropotkin was surely on the left. He was one of the founders of what is now called ‘sociobiology’ or ‘evolutionary psychology’ with his book Mutual Aid, arguing that human nature had evolved in ways conducive to the communitarian anarchism that he espoused. Marx’s early manuscripts, with their roots in the Enlightenment and Romanticism, derived fundamental concepts such as alienation from a conception of human nature – what we would call genetically determined. In fact, anyone who merits attention and who promotes any cause at all is doing so on the basis of a belief that it is somehow good for humans, because of their inherent nature. To object that the facts about human nature set limits on our ability to change the world and ourselves makes about as much sense as the lament that our lack of wings sets limits on our ability to ‘fly’ as far as eagles under our own power. There is nothing more mysterious about the concept human nature than about the concept bee or chicken nature, at least for those who regard humans as creatures in the biological world. Like other organisms, humans have a certain genetic endowment (apparently varying little in the species, not a surprise considering its recent separation from other hominids). That determines what we call their nature.