The Source Of Morality
Posted by Brandon | Filed under Articles
If you have ever debated a religious person you will find a few key arguments that they will turn to in order to try and prove their side. One of these key issues are morals and where they come from.
Christians will argue that morals stem from god otherwise “Why would we do good things or help one another?”. They say that all good things come from a god and that all evil acts arise from the devil.
If you really want to study morals and get into the “meat and potatoes” of it’s philosophy I recommend reading about moral relativism, moral absolutism and moral universalism. However, the purpose of this post isn’t to get down and dirty with the finer aspects of philosophical debate but to try and provide a more basic and practical alternative theory.
We generally live our lives not truly understanding why we do things. Why is it that women with bigger hips are generally found more attractive than smaller hipped women? Why are we attracted to each other? Where does the desire to do good come from? For each of these there is at least some sort of scientific theory which tries to explain them and usually does a pretty god job. Some better than others as it is hard to differentiate between upbringing and genetics (currently at least). One good example is women with bigger hips: Men might find them more attractive because of a larger pelvis bone, which can make birth easier. These are things we probably aren’t consciously aware of, but are there instinctively for an evolutionary reason.
But we just don’t really think about it too deeply (at least some of us). All of these are great questions and some can be argued extensively by philosophers and scientists. I personally subscribe to a more evolutionary explanation. In that, we as a race have come together like no other species before us. We have built great civilizations, come to understand our universe better than any other animal and have mastered our environment to such a degree that was unheard of before our reign on this planet.
I believe that evolution and morality go hand in hand. Because of humans working together and helping out others near them in a community, we were able to cooperate to a much higher degree, enabling us to advance both intellectually and technologically. This sort of cooperation led to tribes and other such small communities and kept expanding until we come to what we have today.
I also think other things come into play when it comes to explaining morality; such as genes, society, upbringing, taboos and the like. The main point I am trying to make is that there are alternatives to explaining morality other than resorting to a deity which controls our every action. And that if you have any self respect you should at least try to do some research before falling back on “god explains all”.
I have one problem with your post. You say “why are we attracted to women with bigger hips?” as if it’s some form of problem. When it isn’t.
We’re attracted to women with bigger hips for an evolutionary reason – bigger hips means a wider pelvis, which means relatively easier births, less complications and therefore for the effort expended a greater chance of carrying on your genes.
I should have made it more clear. I know the reason why women with bigger hips are attractive. That was my exact point: That we don’t always think about why we do certain things or behave certain ways. And what I meant by “we” is the average person, not scientists. Ask the average person why they are attracted to a certain someone and I’d say most of the time you won’t get: “Well, because of evolution.” even though I personally believe that. I should clarify that right now actually thanks!
Another problem with the theistic argument from morality is that there is usually a conflation between morality per se and moral behavior. There are really two questions here: (1) Why are we normally inclined to act morally? and (2) Why are some actions right and some wrong? Evolutionary theory may well give us good answers to (1), much like the kind of answer you give about cooperation, etc. (1) is a simple empirical question, and I honestly don’t see why many theists think they have the upper hand here. (Some suggest that we do the right thing only out of fear of punishment, but this too does nothing to support theism.)
But (2) is a very different question, as you probably know since you seem to have done some research in metaethics. How one could appeal to evolutionary theory to adequately answer (2) is not at all clear to me — though how theists could appeal to god to adequately answer it (most or all seem to endorse some form of divine command theory, which has since Plato’s time been known to be very problematic) isn’t clear to me either. At any rate, you might want to flag this distinction — i.e., the distinction between asking why we are normally inclined to act in moral ways and asking why some actions are right/wrong — in your discussion. Evolution does seem capable of explaining why we normally prefer good things, but it isn’t at all clear how it can explain why some things are good in the first place. Given that divine command theory fails (and I’m pretty sure it does), I don’t think the existence of morality does anything to tip the scale for or against atheism. (Personally, I take it to be a primitive, necessary truth that some actions are right/wrong. There seems to be something fundamentally wrongheaded in asking why, say, killing just for fun is wrong.)
** there is no xian morality at all **
Xian ethics is irrational, otherworldly, and impractical. It promises much, and delivers nothing. Jesus’ “interim ethic” couldn’t outlast one generation of true believers. The fideistic irrationality of Paul of Tarsus with its anti-intellectualism, misogyny, and revenge seeking has poisoned the West for 2,000 years.
Chinese culture was far luckier. From that very rational, this worldly, and practical book, The Analects, attributed to Confucius (500 BCE!):
6:20 Fan Ch’ih asked what constituted wisdom. The Master said, “To give one’s self earnestly to the duties due to men, and, while respecting spiritual beings, to keep aloof from them, may be called wisdom.”
15:23 Tsze-kung asked, saying, “Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one’s life?” The Master said, “Is not ‘reciprocity’ such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.” [trans. S.R. McIntyre 2003]
No god is needed to police human behavior. All ethics is irreducibly social. Harming others can not be generalized; otherwise, no culture could exist.
There’s no need to invoke evolution (or memes) — unless they’re Lamarkian — each generation of persons teaches the next.
bipolar2
© 2008
Here is a file that deals with the origin of religion as we know it. Mostly it came from Sumer… and then through the influence of the original civil society from there.
Money-history&energy accounting.