Alonzo Fyfe

A quick addendum to my post above.

I had not heard of Singer being classified as an evolutionary ethicist before, so I had to do some quick review. Unless I missed something, Singer uses evolution in ethics correctly. He uses it to EXPLAIN certain 'moral sentiments' (which is a legitimate derivation of 'is' from 'is'), but he does not use it to JUSTIFY those sentiments (which would be an illegitimate derivation of 'ought' from 'is'). Singer's justifications remain purely utilitarian -- and would cast a 'moral sentiment' as illegitimate, regardless of its evolutionary history, if it did not fit a utilitarian justification.

In this, I am in full agreement with Singer -- or at least this interpretaion of his work.

God Fearing Atheist

My quick two cents:

I agree with Alonzo that evolution has no per se applicability to normative ethics. However, I think that evolutionary endowed perferences or dispositions to behavior can widen or narrow the sphere of morality.

In Leviathan, Hobbes remarked that "[Justice and injustice] are qualities, that relate to men in society, not in solitude"; that they arise in the context of interpersonal conflict, and if such conflict were not present (or if other people were not present period) morality would be moot.

So if, for example, evolution were to endow us all with a deep revulsion for, say, infanticide, the killing of children would lose applicability as a moral question. We just wouldnt kill our kids, end of story. No need to override other interests which might push people toward it (with that trumping of self-interest being a fundamental quality of moral "oughts" as traditionally defined) -- closing the ethical sphere ever so slightly.

Or, it could go the other way.

-GFA

kctan

A deep revulsion does not mean that we won't do it. It's not the end of the game yet.

Many people have deep revulsion about things (like eating shit, drinking urine etc...) yet when the circumstances is such that it appears as if there's no other choice, they will do it.

Don't under estimate the power of self-interest.

What's the underlying part that drives every individual being ? Self-interest & emotions. What will affect them ? Our genes directly with environmental influence indirectly (hormonal changes due to environment). Does evolution play a small part or does it actually affects everything ?

Very true. We (every individual) does not have any ethics or morals. We only have these 'values' when viewed by another. By saying that I've such & such a code of ethics or such & such morals is the same as saying I've these behaviours or habits.

There's no right & wrong in it. The right & wrong comes from the critique.