I had an interesting mind-belching last night. This morning, I found out that the Catholic Pope wants to legalize homosexual civil unions. I don’t know if this is like a real thing or if it’s a stimulus to Conservatives to work harder to support Trump. Recall that President Trump is in the final stretches of his run for reelection to the highest office of this land. Those that want to protect the sanctity of marriage will surely be firing on all barrels after this last blow. America! The last bastion for conservative valued people.

Supposing that we are reasonable people. Supposing further that we believe in evolution as a most supported and most likely theory about how and why we came to be in recent times. What does evolution theory say about Human rights?

I would argue that evolution theory dictates that there are no fundamental rights to the species Homo Sapiens. I mean the existence of a God is not even a sure thing for most evolution scientists. Why would we believe that Human rights, one of God’s supposed creation, exist definitely? Freedom is not guaranteed above all else. Human freedom, much like freedom in mechanic physics, just is. If we are aware of it as a named idea, it is because this idea to interpret the happenings in the physical (and the social world within that) world helps us to explain and predict what happens next physical world. Us knowing about freedom and rights is possibly an evolutionary outcome and not a precursor requisite for evolution and progress.

The conclusion then is that there are no God given human rights. If we are mostly not even sure that God exists, there is no reason to believe all these liberal and egalitarian ideals like liberty, equality, justice, fairness, freedoms and rights, etc., exist in an absolute and metaphysical way as mandated by God.

My realization wipes clean the slate in my mind. I believe I will start anew and rethink all these ideas.

What about privacy? I yearned for some foundation to support my unbearable and ceaseless wanting to be assured of privacy in many domains. But I have not discovered it. There is no reason that we should expect privacy.

This, matter, again, seem to be a matter of physical world. Our physical world has light, sound, EM waves, and many many other things flowing around that carry information about. That organisms have evolved means to detect and interpret these physical artifacts is self evident.

The fact that we have not evolved too much to hide ourselves maybe that we have overcome the need for secrecy and privacy. We do not have skin that look like plants and rocks. We do not change our color of skin or fur based on surroundings or seasons. We in fact do not become transparent like we imagine some adaptive aliens can. We do not have P2P telepathy for communicating very stealthily. Would it not be reasonable to conclude that secrecy and privacy is of no existential importance to human beings? We seem to have overcome the need for individual secrecy and privacy by other intelligent and versatile means: We can build buildings, boxes, locks, etc. to protect ourselves. We can set up defensive perimeters using advanced weapons so as to efficiently deter attackers. We have been able to use smaller and smaller amount of our society’s resources towards successfully preventing everyone from been eaten by wolves or cannibalistic commies. All without hiding our bodies, the sounds and lights coming from our bodies and our whereabouts. We have better ways to do it.

In all, it doesn’t seem like there should be a supernatural or a natural reason why we would expect to have privacy. The fact that the physical world is as if it was designed without privacy in mind would suggest that we might spend our time on other solutions that do not require privacy.

(Come to think of it, it’s kind of funny that westerners use “Chinese Wall” is used to describe an information barrier when the Chinese say 天下没有不透风的墙 And they’re not referring to thermodynamic or barometric properties. The wisdom is that no secrets can really be kept for ever.)

I will also mention again that from the Read-Write perspective our evolutionary security(EvSec) policy has always been access freely but never mutate. Recall our DNA is often read, copied, interpreted and reproduced by all kinds of mechanisms inside the cell. We can create new copies of it, but for the most part we need the creation to be as exact a copy as possible without mutations. So I do believe that write-protection and any kind of mutative change should be defended against. With highest urgency superseding secrecy and copy protection.