Linda Glines
Bettina Linke
Sean Cuypers
Evolutionary Psyc
Dr. Mills
12/2/99
Chapter 16: EVOLUTIONARY ETHICS
Twelve years after writing “The Origin of Species,” Darwin wrote “The Descent of Man,” in which Darwin tried to tie in morality to his evolutionary theory in order to explain how we became a civilized society even though it appears that ethics and morality are not favored by “Natural Selection.” If Darwin was correct on his theory of evolution, men would give up their noble and virtuous lives, and society as a whole would collapse from chaos and lack of morality. As to wonder where morals come from, it is unsure if it comes from anywhere. Darwin and ethical philosophers doubt that values come from a supreme being, or God, but rather that the possibility that they come from theories of reciprocal altruism and kin selection.
Thinkers look towards the processes that created us in order to find moral absolutes. And this “right” way to behave is in keeping evolution’s basic direction in that we should all go with its flow. Though this leads to a new problem in which we try to learn how to live our lives, and that is what direction or end is evolution heading towards. One answer some biologists have in common is that evolution has no discernible end. So our mission was to “nourish” these values, and the way we do this was to cooperate with one another and to be nice- to live in “permanently peaceful societies.” Of course this theory did not receive too much popularity G.E. Moore was one who assaulted this idea of draw-in values from evolution or from any aspect of observed nature. This error is labeled the naturalistic fallacy. Many look upon God who is benevolent and omnipotent, and bestows his values into what he creates such as nature and all living things. But the problem with this naturalistic fallacy, according to John Stuart Mill, was that how could a God so benevolent and omnipotent invent things that are painful and bad, which causes unhappiness and misery in this world?
Both Darwin and Mill had the same beliefs when it came to values and morals. One reasonable place to find moral guidance in a “godless universe” is through utili-tarianism. The idea of utilitarianism is that good things will bring on happiness and pleasure and bad things or actions will bring on suffering and pain. Humans pretty much conduct their own lives as if happiness were the object or goal of the game. The question is how their acts affect the happiness of others is an important part of moral evaluation. One problem is that people pursue different things that would make them happy. But the principle which would be a good starting point would be that people pursue things that would make them happy, and try to avoid things that would bring pain or suffering. So the next question would be why should people have a moral code, or why should people worry about the happiness of others? A simple and practical answer to this question is that everyone’s happiness goes up if everyone treats everyone nicely.
Another fundamental assumption by Mill is that everyone’s happiness counts equally; no one is privileged, and no one should act if they are. The entire message is that happiness is good but no one’s happiness is special. Though personally from our point of view, the basic mechanism by which our genes control us is the deep, unspoken conviction that our happiness is special. To be self-absorbed is very common on this planet. Organisms act as if their welfare were more important than the welfare of other organisms. Of course as Darwin fathomed Natural Selection, it seems to go against all of utilitarianism’s ideas and values. Especially since a single, slight advance in organic design is staggered by the amount of suffering and death.
To solve this problem, the New Darwinian Paradigm strips self-absorption of its noble raiment. At the root of this paradigm is the retributive impulse, one of the basic governors of reciprocal altruism. It evolved for the good of the individual, though the impulse’s ultimate function is to get the individual’s genetic information to be copied. It doesn’t mean that the “impulse” is bad, but it does give reasons to rethink about what is really good. A defense of retribution can be cast to solve the problems that any moral system faces; it punishes those who take more than they give and reward those who give more than they receive. Though humans do not try to punish only people who mistreated them, their moral accounting systems is wantonly subjective, informed by a deep bias toward the self. This general bias in calculating what is owed is one of several departures from clarity of moral judgments. Of course not everyone would agree with utilitarianism. There are those who do not believe in happiness brings good or vice versa. Many do not believe that everyone's happiness is important enough to make sacrifices or worth trying to achieve. The message that Darwin tried to explain about morals and values is that happiness is the basis of a moral system. Believing that humans are a moral one, Darwin stated that "A moral being is one who is capable of comparing his past and future actions or motives, and of approving or disapproving of them."
In Wright’s Chapter 17, Blaming the Victim, he discusses several various viewpoints explaining why human beings behave the way they do in their particular environment. He begins the chapter by relating his beliefs to the Darwinians. Natural or Genetic determinism were introduced to depict the actions of humans. Some believe that through heredity and environment, our actions are already mapped out for us. This belief causes much controversy in that humans that act in a despicable manner may respond “It comes natural to me”. This type of behavior is seen as ignorant. The main theme of “treat others as though you wish to be treated” remains consistent throughout the chapter.
We as humans want optimal happiness for our destiny. The term brotherly love was developed to teach others to love unconditionally no matter how repugnant their actions may be. However, there is a fine line for forgiveness. If we forgave everyone no matter their actions, then their repugnant behavior would increase and take over society.
The punishment for crimes is incredibly difficult to decipher. It is inevitable that not all human beings will act compassionately toward others. We could sit around and hope that one day the Utilitarian views will be adopted. However, this is highly unlikely in our day and age. A more recent, well-adopted idea is that a victim is a victim. This means that we are programmed to behave in the manner that we are acting. According to
Darwin, he saw that all behavior must boil down to heredity and environment. This is referred to as biological determinism. “ Darwin saw that thoughts, however unintelligible it may be, seems as much functions of organ as bile of liver” ( Wright 351). However, Darwin did not realize that there would be certain connections between the organs and the thoughts.
There is a definite relationship between our biological makeup and our behavior. We as humans behave in certain ways according to our increased or lack of various chemicals or neurotransmitters. For example, a person with low levels of serotonin may be more likely to commit crimes due to their need for material possessions. A defense lawyer convinced the jury that his client was not mentally stable due to consuming an exorbitant amount of Twinkies. The increased levels of blood sugar caused the client to commit murder without premeditation. This way of thinking is that we all have free will, however, “if biochemistry negated free will, then none of us would have free will”( Wright 349). Darwin’s beliefs were that we should give up on free will. We are all slaves of biology. We should view the wicked man as a sickly man to understand why someone would behave in such a manner.
These types of beliefs make it difficult to distinguish between guilty and not guilty. However, according to Wright, the correct way is to disentangle punishment from the impulses that drive it. It is highly important to punish those who have committed crimes. It is not so simple as retribution. This means the criminal will pay for the crime
that he or she committed. Wright explained his beliefs in that the criminal should be punished until they feel remorse for their crime, and society should feel confident that he or she will not commit anymore crimes when released. Darwin felt that moral codes should be instilled in society. We need to try and help those who are less fortunate rather than attacking them. Maybe society would be a better place to live in if we as humans did our part to reunite the human race, instead of dividing humans into different social and ethnic classes.
Chapter 16: EVOLUTION ETHICS
I. Evolutionary Dilemma
A. Natural Selections theory contradicts the idea of morals and values
B. If God does not exist, how could we base benevolence and omnipotent
Ideas on or from a God that creates a world that brings on pain to us.
II. Utilitarianism
A. "Good" things can bring happiness and pleasure, while "Bad" things bring
pain and suffering.
B. Different people pursue different things that would make them happy.
C. Everyone's happiness will go up if everyone treats everyone else nicely.
III. Utilitarianism and Darwin
Outline Chapter 17-Blaming the Victim
a. humans learn from environment and heredity
b. actions are seen as natural behavior
c. critics see natural determinism as ignorant
1. humans may act in a repugnant manner, and try to get away with it
II. Biological Determinism
a. chemical makeup cause us to behave in certain ways
1. increased or lack of chemicals or neurotransmitters affect human behavior
2. Some people do have increased levels of serotonin which ie. may lead the person to commit crimes
b. biochemisty negates our free will
1. Darwin thought we should do away with free will
2. we are slaves of biology
III. Punishment for Crimes
a. criminals should feel remorse for their crime
b. society should feel confident that the person will not commit another crime when released from being institutionalized
IV. Changes in Society
a. we as humans should aid the wicked instead of treating them poorly
According to Darwin, we need to assist and educate those who we would normally treat as beneath us
CRITICAL REVIEWS