Biological and cultural evolution of morality: the delusion of progress (original) (raw)
Related papers
On the Evolutionary Origin of Morality
Beytülhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, 2022
In this study, I will approach morality from a naturalistic perspective and defend that morality is a product of evolutionary processes shared by both human and non-human animals rather than that of human culture. My natural- istic approach is based on simpler components instead of high-level cognitive capabilities such as cognition. Rationality , judgment, and free will are indeed pre- sented as necessary for morality in classical definitions of morality. However, I will put forward that the roots of morality can be understood as the biological disposition in the evolutionary process. Moreover, in this paper, I will propose that morality is not a phenomenon that ought to be restricted to humans. I think morality is not a phenomenon that is exclusively human; rather, morality can be expanded to non-human animals. To defend this claim, I will indicate that mo- rality has a natural content and that this content does not have a structure that can only be justified on a rational basis, but that this normative structure can be established through biological/evolutionary mechanisms and can be explained in this way.
International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.)., 2015
Morality is a mess. This might seem like a strange place to begin a discussion of the origins of morality, but let me explain why I think it’s a useful starting point. Scientists strive for simple, parsimonious explanations for phenomena. Those that meet this standard are described approvingly as elegant explanations. It seems unlikely, however, that morality will ever have an elegant explanation, for the simple reason that morality is not an elegant phenomenon. Like many human institutions, it is a messy aggregation of a vast array of competing influences. These influences include inclinations rooted in the biology of human nature, such as a tendency to favour kin, a tendency to resent free loaders, and a capacity to empathize with the suffering of others. They also include influences that can be broadly classed as cultural. Among these are norms designed to rein in socially-disruptive aspects of human nature, norms aimed at furthering the interests of the individuals or groups promoting them, and also genuine efforts to work out the logical consequences of universal principles of justice and the common good. If we focus on any of these influences to the exclusion of the others, we will arrive at a lopsided view of the nature of morality - hence the importance of keeping in mind that morality is a mess. In this article, I consider both the biological and cultural evolution of our formal moral systems. I begin with the evolution of altruistic behaviour, which is the area of moral behaviour that evolutionary theory has shed the most light on. I then consider some of the putative evolved mechanisms underlying human morality, such as inhibitions against harming innocents, the capacity for empathy, and an aversion to incestuous mating. Finally, I consider the cultural evolution of morality and why some moral systems thrive and persist while others fade away.
Comparing and integrating biological and cultural moral progress.
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2017
Moral progress may be a matter of time scale. If intuitive measures of moral progress like the degree of physical violence within a society are taken as empirical markers, then most human societies have experienced moral progress in the last few centuries. However, if the development of the human species is taken as relevant time scale, there is evidence that humanity has experienced a global moral decline compared to a small-band hunter-gatherer (SBHG) baseline that represents a lifestyle presumed to largely account for 99% of human history. A counter-argument to such a diagnosis of moral decline is the fact that the living conditions of the modern world that emerged since sedentariness and the beginning of agriculture are completely different compared to those of SBHG due to cultural and technological developments. We therefore suggest that two notions of moral progress should be distinguished: a “biological notion” referring to the inherited capacities typical of the evolutionary niche of mammals and that unfold in a specific way in the human species; and a “cultural notion” that relates moral progress to dealing with an increasing diversity of temptations and possible wrongdoings in a human social world whose complexity accumulates in time. In our contribution, we describe these two different notions of moral progress, we discuss how they interact, how this interaction impacts the standards by which we measure moral progress, and we provide suggestions and justifications for re-aligning biological and cultural moral progress.
Complex animal societies are most successful if members minimise harms caused to one another and if collaboration occurs. In order to promote this, a moral structure inevitably develops. Hence, morality has evolved in humans and in many other species. The attitudes which people have towards other humans and individuals of other species are greatly affected by this biologically based morality. The central characteristic of religions is a structure which supports a moral code, essentially the same one in all religions. A key obligation to others is to help to promote their good welfare and to avoid causing them to have poor welfare. Human views as to which individuals should be included in the category of those to whom there are moral obligations have broadened as communication and knowledge have progressed. Many people would now include, not only all humans but sentient animals, e.g. vertebrates and cephalopods, as well. Amongst sentient animals, coping with adversity may be more difficult in those with less sophisticated brain processing.
An Investigation of How Human Morality Evolved
2015
Throughout the years, morality has been of keen interest to the many curious minds all over the world. Many wonder as to how it became what it is and why it is such an important part of human life versus why it is not exhibited to a great extent in other organisms that we share the world with. This deep contemplation resulted in morality bearing different principal meanings. In this paper, the question of how human morality evolved is tried to be investigated and answered. This investigation is done through looking at the origin, source, and evolution of morality and the connections between sexuality and morality and religion and morality also are examined.
Phylogenetic history of morality
Матеріали міжнародної науково-практичної конференції "Україна і світ: Діалог мов та культур", 2015
Among numerous theories of morality origins and human moral conduct the most widespread are those which postulate that a) morality derives from the child’s early adoption of socially approved patterns of behavior (cognitive-behavioral paradigm); b) morality is an inborn mechanism which restricts our basic instincts and passions from coming out on surface (psychodynamic approach); c) moral development cannot be considered apart from cultural context and its influence on the identity formation (sociocultural psychology, school of Vygotsky and his followers) etc. At the same time most of scientists usually skip (or only indirectly mention) the diverse lines of evidence which point to the fact that morality evolved and transformed into specifically human quality.