There is nothing mysterious about the limitations of
Darwinian explanation: value-free science must eliminate questions of the value
domain. But is this legitimate for the question of evolution? Related to this is
the attempt to produce purely causal explanations of ethical behavior and its
evolution. The positivist methodology of scientific reductionism, by declaring
the rigid separation of facts and values, leaves us to wonder if nature itself
truly respects this division in all its processes, especially those of
evolutionary emergence. Sometimes the naturalistic fallacy is cited here. But
how do we know that evolution doesn't process values amidst facts, this in a
naturalistic fashion?
