The difference of being human: Morality
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 5 May 2010
- journal article
- Published by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Vol. 107 (supplement) , 9015-9022
- https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914616107
Abstract
In The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex , published in 1871, Charles Darwin wrote: “I fully … subscribe to the judgment of those writers who maintain that of all the differences between man and the lower animals the moral sense or conscience is by far the most important.” I raise the question of whether morality is biologically or culturally determined. The question of whether the moral sense is biologically determined may refer either to the capacity for ethics (i.e., the proclivity to judge human actions as either right or wrong), or to the moral norms accepted by human beings for guiding their actions. I propose that the capacity for ethics is a necessary attribute of human nature, whereas moral codes are products of cultural evolution. Humans have a moral sense because their biological makeup determines the presence of three necessary conditions for ethical behavior: ( i ) the ability to anticipate the consequences of one's own actions; ( ii ) the ability to make value judgments; and ( iii ) the ability to choose between alternative courses of action. Ethical behavior came about in evolution not because it is adaptive in itself but as a necessary consequence of man's eminent intellectual abilities, which are an attribute directly promoted by natural selection. That is, morality evolved as an exaptation, not as an adaptation. Moral codes, however, are outcomes of cultural evolution, which accounts for the diversity of cultural norms among populations and for their evolution through time.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Gene-culture coevolution in the age of genomicsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2010
- The cognitive niche: Coevolution of intelligence, sociality, and languageProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2010
- Adaptive specializations, social exchange, and the evolution of human intelligenceProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2010
- Repeated learning makes cultural evolution uniqueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009
- Does inequity aversion depend on a frustration effect? A test with capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)Animal Cognition, 2009
- Human uniqueness: genome interactions with environment, behaviour and cultureNature Reviews Genetics, 2008
- Are apes really inequity averse?Proceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2006
- Tolerance for inequity may increase with social closeness in chimpanzeesProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2005
- Monkeys reject unequal payNature, 2003
- A Mechanism for Social Selection and Successful AltruismScience, 1990