This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Marriage - two viewpoints

Cartomancer's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by Cartomancer

I also find Mr. Milbank's nigh-unreadable article the epitome of condescending faulty logic. "Natural Law" arguments applicable to all? No thanks, that kind of conceited scholastic wankery went out of general appreciation centuries ago, and has no valid evidential basis.

Indeed, the phrase "no valid evidential basis" pretty much sums up the piece. It is essentially thirteenth-century logic chopping redeployed to shore up the inherited homophobic prejudice he nurses. And as for the tosh about the "internal logic" of homosexuality... the man seems obsessed with the idea that the trouser furniture who you want to live with and sleep with has some profound implication for the stability and future prosperity of society. Not based on evidence and sociological and economic studies, which all point unambiguously to the fact that equality promotes better societies - but based on some weird aesthetic appreciation of "symmetries". This is not philosophy or ethics, this is a kind of personal, subjective art appreciation. Why Mr. Milbank thinks it has any relevance to the discussion we're having in the real world is anyone's guess.

More telling, he seems to assume that society needs his kind of abstract aesthetic onanism in order to thrive and prosper. The fact that people have been getting on with organising and living in and progressing with society for thousands of years while paying little or no attention to such rarefied fallacious conceptions seems to quite escape him. He has no understanding of the fact that a society, by and large, derives its cultural attitudes and rationalisations of its situation from its underlying social realities, and not the other way around.

Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:58:29 UTC | #927065