Evolutionary Ethics
Our ethics and values in todays society are mostly a bit muddy but maybe they are getting clearer.
Have you ever stopped to wonder why it is that you have certain ethics and values? I mean sometimes being a “good” person can get in the way. Have you ever just thought hang it all, I’m going to just be a complete arsehole and not care about anyone else until I’ve got what I want. What difference would it make? Will you be struck by lightning? Why do you bother with this whole concept of being good or nice anyway? Maybe you already don’t and are living a happy life just looking after number one. I mean morality is all relative, nobody has the absolute authority on right and wrong anymore – as long as I’m not hurting anyone (within reason: sometimes just existing means hurting someone) pretty much anything I do should be ok.
Many of us might feel that our values are central to who we are as human beings. Beyond all other forms of pleasure and gratification is the need to identify ourselves in a positive way. Many of us link this to happiness, the delayed gratification that comes from being at peace, at finding harmony with ourselves and others.
Ok, the scientists among us might put forward the theory that we have ethics or morals or values because our evolutionary path has made us into social creatures. We are nice to each other so that we can form a society which enables us to survive more strongly: i.e. the less social amongst us died out through natural selection. Over millions of years, our genome has been shaped by the environment to choose a humanity that has a sense of morality.
But as our societies become more global, we are rejecting tribalism and nationalism and we have become more aware that we all share the same humanity. There is a growing set of values within secularism which feels the need to protect the poor, to lift up all of humanity and find the answers to our problems on a global scale.
I think I agree with the scientists to some extent on the idea of evolution affecting our values but why does evolution have to be something that happened millions of years ago? Maybe our values are not some outmoded and superseded evolutionary sidetrack, maybe our values are the future of our evolutionary path.
Perhaps the early Christians were thinking this too as they started their radical outward looking faith that embraced all of humanity, constructing their liturgy: We are the body of Christ, for we all share in the one bread. May the peace of the Lord be always with you.
And also with you.
Posted: November 9th, 2007 under Big Questions, Social Justice, Moralising, Spirituality.
Comments: 5
Comments
Comment from Will
Time: 14/11/2007, 4:16 am
As another scientist, I’m going to delve into the detail of Matt’s argument. Sorry this is probably longer than Matt’s original post!
So, in the 1960s, economists showed that it is possible to design a mathematical game where the winning strategy is to be honest and forgiving. They suggested this as a way that business ethics could come about—businesses are guided by shareholder self-interest, so why should businesses ever act ethically? Some scientists have co-opted this argument to suggest that human ethics could be part of evolution (“if it’s an advantage, then it’s an evolutionary pressure”). However, the economists were not relying on DNA transfer or one business evolving from the code of another—but on reasoned intelligent businessmen changing their behaviour. Trying to co-opt the economic argument into evolution (which evolutionary psychologists try to do) is an extraordinary and unsubstantiated leap of faith, for reasons I’ll explain.
Scientists have a bad habit of “fad thinking”—the latest fad field is going to be the magic bullet. In the 1960s, AI was going to be magnificent and run the world within twenty years. Um, no. At the moment, spurred by advances in genetics, DNA is seen as the magic bullet and answer to everything—and so, in turn, evolution is seen by some as the answer to everything.
For ethics to have evolved, in terms of selfish genes, DNA would need some way of encoding high level reasoning about abstract concepts. Unfortunately, the empirical evidence is that it doesn’t do that. There is some (very little) evidence our brains are genetically wired to understand concepts such as numbers and ownership, but they do not appear to be wired for the relationships between those concepts. In other words, we might be born with(*) a vague understanding of the concepts of “1” and “2”, but we’re not born knowing how to add. Or if we are, why the heck do we have to spend so much time and money teaching kids primary maths! And we clearly are not born understanding ethics: children without good role models are many times more likely to be involved in crime, so ethics certainly appear to be learned.
There is a weaker sense in which ethics could evolve: parents teach their children differently depending on their own past life experiences (“I’ll teach my children based on what worked best for me”). But that’s not exactly a scientific revelation! And once again, it is not evolution, but plain old fashioned reasoning.
So far as Christianity is concerned:
Your argument seems to be “Jesus’s arguments were revolutionary and convinced a lot of people; so let’s call this ethical evolution.” Isn’t it rather more obvious to say “Jesus’s arguments were revolutionary and convinced a lot of people; because Jesus was right.”
(*) Even this is very hard to establish.
Comment from Jen
Time: 14/11/2007, 9:55 am
Ethics for me, simple really God called me to be Christ like not a door. I mean who was the best at ‘righteous anger’, wow compassion and a sense of justice you’ve got to love that. Do I live up to it, no afraid I am still human but He is who I strive to be like!
Comment from djfoobarmatt
Time: 14/11/2007, 10:48 am
My main point was that while some people see ethics/values/morality as old fashioned baggage from a past age, something to be embarrased about and to intellectualise away, I see it as something that humanity needs to grow towards and that shouldn’t be thrown away so contemptuously. I think that secular society will rediscover the value of religion as we start to realise this.
Comment from rhys
Time: 14/11/2007, 9:10 pm
In replying to this post, I was searching for a quote by the Dalai Lama and found this speech. I think it sums my response perfectly.
http://www.spiritsound.com/bhikshu.html
To pull some quotes
“Action motivated by compassion and responsibility will ultimately bring good results. Anger and jealousy may be effective in the short term, but will ultimately bring us only trouble.”
I would agree with him.
Although religion has encouraged a sense of ethics/values to its followers, the benefits of say, compassion, can be felt right now religious or not. I think as time goes on people will increase their sense of ethics/values simply because it makes them happier.
Comment from Doc Martin
Time: 14/11/2007, 1:08 am
As one of the scientists reading this – evolutionary theory gives no room for morals or ethics. Survival of the fittest doesn’t have a sub clause for looking after the poor, weak, and needy.
Also as one of the Christians reading this, we as people know right from wrong because Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. I know God’s intentions for my behaviour through the Bible. Jesus said that the law can be summed up as love God (Spend time in relationship with him receiving his boundless love and praising him back) and love your neighbour (i.e. love those around you especially those whose needs you can identify and help meet).
I am now working on valueing relationships and not material things and letting God look after me so I can care for others. I worry that as society becomes more secular then morality and values become more relative.