Evolutionary Ethics Ann Kemper

We are discussing no small matter, but how we ought to live Socrates, in Plato’s Republic (CA. 390 B.C.)

An Ethical Background Moral Philosophy

“ Moral philosophy is the attempt to achieve a systematic understanding of the nature of morality and what it requires of us ” --Rachels, p. 1

What it requires of us: Normative Ethics 1) Virtue Theories  Aristotle’s eudaimonism the foundation  character traits determine if one is good  what is morally correct is what a good (practically wise) person determines is the proper course of action

What it requires of us: Normative Ethics 2) Duty Theories ( deontological )  Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law  Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only

What it requires of us: Normative Ethics 3) Consequentialist theories  An action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable  Ethical egoism, social contract theory, ethical altruism, utilitarianism

Minimum Conception of Morality - Philosophy “Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason—that is, to do what there are the best reasons for doing—while giving equal weight to the interests of each individual who will be affected by what one does” --Rachels, p. 14

The Nature of Morality 1) metaphysical issues concerning whether morality exists independently of humans  objectivism : moral values are eternal truths  relativism : morals are simply human conventions; no universal truths

The Nature of Morality 2) psychological issues concerning the underlying mental basis of our moral judgments and conduct, particularly what motivates us to be moral  Altruism and Egoism  Emotion and Reason  Three Psychological Models of Moral Development

The Psychology of Moral Behaviors Dennis L. Krebs Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology

Psychological Models of Morality  Psychoanalytic –“infants are assumed to inherit powerful sexual and aggressive instincts that induce immoral desires” –“behaving morally entails constraining instinctual, id-based, pleasure seeking urges” --Krebs, p. 337

Psychological Models of Morality  Social learning –“infants are viewed as infinitely plastic— shaped by parents and other socializing agents” –“behaving morally equates to conforming to the norms of society and entails obeying the dictates of authorities” --Krebs, p. 337

Psychological Models of Morality  Kohlberg’s Cognitive-Developmental –reigning theory of morality for past 30 years –children become moral in stages as they develop the cognitive structures capable of increasingly sophisticated moral reasoning –“behaving morally entails figuring out the most just solution to moral problems and acting accordingly” --Krebs, p

Morality involves… “the self-control necessary to resist animal urges, conformity to social norms, deference to legitimate authorities, understanding why certain acts are right and wrong, and caring for others” --Krebs, p. 338

Morality… “is, at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason—that is, to do what there are the best reasons for doing—while giving equal weight to the interests of each individual who will be affected by what one does” “involves the self-control necessary to resist animal urges, conformity to social norms, deference to legitimate authorities, understanding why certain acts are right and wrong, and caring for others”

Evolutionary Theory science meets humanity

Evolutionary Ethics…  What is the scope and nature of the relevance to human behavior and social structure?  Is ethics in important respects independent of the evolutionary history of humans?  What role does cognition play in ethics? --Thompson, p. 338

“If nature selects traits that enhance individuals’ fitness, and if, by definition, moral traits induce individuals to resist the temptation to enhance their fitness at the expense of others, how could moral traits evolve?” --Krebs, p. 338

Evolution of Moral Behavior “the types of behavior that came to be labeled right, wrong, good, and bad evolved before the labels; moral labels evolved before the articulated moral rules, and articulated moral rules evolved before the moral judgments people invoke to uphold them.” --Krebs, p. 340

Chicken or the Egg?  Kohlberg argued that moral judgment gives rise to moral behavior –Consistent with the rationalist views of morality  Evolutionary ethics argues that moral behavior gives rise to moral judgment –Provides broad framework for organizing, revising, and resolving the inconsistencies among most psychological approaches

Nature vs. Nurture  If human nature is fundamentally immoral, morality must be taught  Evolutionary ethics argues that natural selection has instilled humans with a moral sense, a disposition to be good –Moral behaviors can still be shaped through conditioning

Ends & Means?  If moral behaviors have evolved to allow social species to thrive, are non-human animals members of the moral community?  Does morality cross community lines?

Moral Behavior? “What ends up evolving in individuals is the capacity to develop conditional strategies: to behave morally when it pays off, to cheat when one believes one can get away with it, and to catch and punish cheaters when it is to one’s advantage.” --Krebs, p. 340

 “What ends up evolving in individuals is the capacity to develop conditional strategies: to behave morally when it pays off, to cheat when one believes one can get away with it, and to catch and punish cheaters when it is to one’s advantage.”  “Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason—that is, to do what there are the best reasons for doing—while giving equal weight to the interests of each individual who will be affected by what one does”  “Morality involves the self-control necessary to resist animal urges, conformity to social norms, deference to legitimate authorities, understanding why certain acts are right and wrong, and caring for others”

Cognitive Neuroscience Meets Morality the examined life

An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment Joshua D. Greene, R. Brian Sommerville, Leigh E. Nystrom, John M. Darley, Jonathan D. Cohen Although both reason and emotion are likely to play important roles in moral judgment, relatively little is known about their neural correlates, the nature of their interaction, and the factors that modulate their respective behavioral influences in the context of moral judgment. In two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies using moral dilemmas as probes, we apply the methods of cognitive neuroscience to the study of moral judgment.

The Trolley Dilemma

The Dilemmas  3 types: non-moral, moral-impersonal, and personal-moral  The moral dilemmas of which the coders said that the action in question (a) could reasonably be expected to lead to serious bodily harm (b) to a particular person or a member or members of a particular group of people (c) where this harm is not the result of deflecting an existing threat onto a different party were assigned to the "moral- personal" condition  the others were assigned to the "moral-impersonal" condition

Non-moral  You have decided to make a batch of brownies for yourself. You open your recipe book and find a recipe for brownies.  The recipe calls for a cup of chopped walnuts. You don't like walnuts, but you do like macadamia nuts. As it happens, you have both kinds of nuts available to you.  Is it appropriate for you to substitute macadamia nuts for walnuts in order to avoid eating walnuts?

Impersonal-moral  You are at the wheel of a runaway trolley quickly approaching a fork in the tracks. On the tracks extending to the left is a group of five railway workmen. On the tracks extending to the right is a single railway workman.  If you do nothing the trolley will proceed to the left, causing the deaths of the five workmen. The only way to avoid the deaths of these workmen is to hit a switch on your dashboard that will cause the trolley to proceed to the right, causing the death of the single workman.  Is it appropriate for you to hit the switch in order to avoid the deaths of the five workmen?

Personal-moral  A runaway trolley is heading down the tracks toward five workmen who will be killed if the trolley proceeds on its present course. You are on a footbridge over the tracks, in between the approaching trolley and the five workmen. Next to you on this footbridge is a stranger who happens to be very large.  The only way to save the lives of the five workmen is to push this stranger off the bridge and onto the tracks below where his large body will stop the trolley. The stranger will die if you do this, but the five workmen will be saved.  Is it appropriate for you to push the stranger on to the tracks in order to save the five workmen?

Our Results  Click to view our results Click  How did you react to the questions?  Did you recognize a difference as you answered them?  How long/difficult it took to come to a decision?  Appropriately classified?

Posterior Cingulate Gyrus Angular Gyrus Medial Frontal Gyrus Parietal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus

Reaction Time

Activity Across the Brain

“The present results raise but do not answer a more general question concerning the relation between the aforementioned philosophical and psychological puzzles: How will a better understanding of the mechanisms that give rise to our moral judgments alter our attitudes toward the moral judgments we make?” --Greene, et.al., 2001

Which Side of the Tracks?  “The final determination of the viability of evolutionary ethics does not rest with resolving the naturalistic fallacy or issues of determinism but with the results of theorizing in neurobiology and cognitive science.”  Do the results of cognitive neuroscience support an evolutionary theory of ethics?  Is this a line of research we should continue pursuing? --Thompson, p. 484

Challenges to Evolutionary Thinking more discussion questions

Challenges to Evolutionary Ethics  How can a trait that was developed under the pressure of natural selection explain moral actions that go far beyond reciprocal altruism or enlightened self- interest? How can, for instance, the action of Maximilian Kolbe be explained from a biological point of view? (Kolbe was a German priest who starved himself to death in a concentration camp to rescue a fellow prisoner.)

Challenges to Evolutionary Ethics  Could not human beings have moved beyond their biological roots and transcended their evolutionary origins, in which case they would be able to formulate goals in the pursuit of goodness, beauty, and truth that "have nothing to do directly with survival, and which may at times militate against survival?" (O’Hear, 1997: 203).

Challenges to Evolutionary Ethics  Morality is universal, whereas biologically useful altruism is particular favoring the family or the group over others. 'Do not kill' does not only refer to one’s own son, but also to the son of strangers. How can evolutionary ethics cope with universality?

Challenges to Evolutionary Ethics  Normative ethics aims to be action- guiding. How could humans ever judge an action to be ensuring long- term survival? (This is a practical rather than conceptual problem for evolutionary ethics.)

Challenges to Evolutionary Ethics  Hume’s 'is-ought' problem still remains a challenge for evolutionary ethics. How can one move from 'is' (findings from the natural sciences, including biology and sociobiology) to 'ought'?

Challenges to Evolutionary Ethics  Similarly, despite the length of time that has passed since the publication of Principia Ethica, the challenge of the 'naturalistic fallacy' remains The Is- Ought Fallacy

Commentary Question: Has science overstepped its bounds? Does science have a legitimate role in the humanities? Home