Well-said.
To add to comment:
OP: “Some examples to illustrate the absurdity of this logic: Mammals live outdoors; therefore, homelessness is good.”
A positive statement would be that, it may be an evolutionary ‘good’ even if distasteful. An example might be that homelessness people may have more partners than a high IQ autist that has a mansion. Or we can say, all else being equal, it is healthier for humans to be outside more, much more than in the modern world. Designed housing and modern urban systems need to take this into account.
OP: “Animals are illiterate; therefore, illiteracy is good.”
It may be distasteful, but many studies show that years of education means lower fertility; and that sexual selection TODAY actually does select for genes that are less-intelligent* (ADHD or even bad habits like alcohol and smoking.) Nature works in mysterious ways. A good way is that we need to think quite hard about underlying behaviors. Why are literacy rates so low? And persistently so?
*See: Life without sex: Large-scale study links sexlessness to physical, cognitive, and personality traits, socioecological factors, and DNA: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.07.24.24310943v1.full
All great points. But that is yesterdays question; tomorrows question is when people deliberately use the ambiguity (to the advantage of violence) to get elected mayor or congress, in the name of religion that is explicitly and in practice, anti-religious freedom. [They also use the ambiguity of words and law, to take away arms of defense].
We shall see which way the western world wants to go. Though I imagine that the Dual-sovereignty of the US -Fed and State- will start to clash more heavily. The dissonance will increase. Our agreement is crumbling under the paradox of tolerance.
We’ve also accepted the blatant use of hypocrisy (some amendments are sacred; others not so much. One has a first amendment right to riot and dog-whistle all sorts of discrimination, but not a first amendment right to segregate—though in practice we realize that we can’t do anything about it; save for the token national guard forcing children to comply). Both sides have gone down that road; the paradox has no party affiliation. And if we agree that to be moral, one has sometimes to be immoral, well where is that line?