3 posts tagged “morality”

In an era when many many moral rules seem to be arbitrarily based on culture we need a deeper foundation.

Simple observation shows that humans are motivated by various and often different interests and desires. We know now that these interests are a combination of genetic, cultural, and upbringing factors. Initially one can not say one interest or motivation is inherently better than another. To do so is to arbitrarily value one interest or motivation more than the others then use that one as the rule by which others are valued.

If all individual interests and motivations are equally valued then society as a whole must maximize the expression of these interests. Consequently this maximization process thus should be the source for all moral guidelines because  the expression of certain interests by individuals will inhibit the expression of other interests by other individuals. In addition immediate expression of certain interests by a single individual can inhibit the expression of a greater number of their interests or some more highly valued interests over a longer term.

Since this morality involves working well with others in groups one should not be surprised that its core has been provided by our own evolution.

The maximization of the group experiential requires that each human develop wisdom which involves a deep understanding of how human emotions work within oneself and others combined with a knowledge of how the world works (its causal flows). All religions value wisdom yet wisdom never seems to be at the primary concern.

Wisdom stands upon three legs. The first leg is the development of one's spirituality, the understanding of oneself in the fullest sense realizing one's emotions and motivations are some unknown mix of genetics, culture, upbringing, and immaterial conscious sensations. In practice this requires the development of a certain level of emotional detachment so one can investigate ones own motivations and (often unexpected) emotional responses. This requires one seek out and explore emotion laden experiences. Our brains will inevitably put our experiences into some sort of mental framework that most closely matches what we feel depending on which frameworks we have run across in our life. To suppress this  direct experiential "natural" framework in preference to a framework that is supposed to be true based upon culture or rationality is to inhibit one's spirituality. Rationality and emotions are handled by two different regions of the brain so one should not expect them to be coherent. There is an appropriate time for each.

The second leg for developing wisdom is the understanding the motivations and emotions of others. This requires the development of empathy (love) in preference to a quick judgment. The key here is the realization that everyone may have a different spirituality, only some of which you may directly understand for unless you have experienced something similar you will really not understand it. Yet the maximization of the group experiential means you must accept it unless it is inhibiting to the long term experiences of everyone. Those with similar spiritual experiences will tend to group together to form various religions or spiritual movements so freedom of religion is a basic moral issue.

The third leg is the understanding causal flows, the cause and effect of everything. Like the development of spirituality this also requires the development of a certain level of emotional detachment so that one can analyze worldly evidence without having one's judgment blinded by one's own cultural biases. The scientific method with its mathematical theories that describe causal flows is a method that has proven itself successful at this. If one must make decisions that affect others one had better understand causal flows well for the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. One should not try to convince others to believe a certain way unless one is prepared to present evidence of causal flows. Often various religions revert to immoral coercion or propaganda methods to gain converts instead of allowing each human to discover their own spirituality in their own time. One can never have too much education although such education does not need to be formal.

In any sudden event something exceeds some kind of threshold. Common examples of this would be the start of an avalanche in which to weight of the snow or rock exceeds its stickiness or the creation of an action potential in a neuron when its charge exceeds its threshold.

The Big Bang which created our universe is another sudden event so what could possibly be exceeding a threshold there? It cannot be any sort of matter (mass / energy) since those are confined to the three dimensional space of the universe. So it must be something immaterial.

Now the key property of eternity (an infinity of time) is that what ever it consists of cannot be growing or shrinking by even a little bit since that something would then get infinitely large or small. Yet the things of eternity could be cyclic, increasing and decreasing in an infinite cycle.

This means that the creation of the universe is part of the cyclic process in which that eternal something is brought back into balance. The only non-material part of our universe is our conscious sensations, sometimes collectively known as the soul. What, if anything, these conscious sensations contribute to personality apart from our material biology is unknown. All we can say for sure right now is that conscious sensations are triggered by material experiences.

So one must conclude that the activation of conscious sensations is what will bring eternity back into balance. The universe was created for the purpose of developing creatures who could connect to these conscious sensations and activate them via there own experiences. The creation of complex life forms is the goal of the universe.

This metaphysical hypothesis should affect our morality at a cultural level. If we want to conform with the goals of the universe we need to promote the self-fulfillment and experiential possibilities of all complex life over the long term.

Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals

Frans B. M. de Waal

This is a great book on the evolutionary origins of morality in primates. The core concept is that any genetic trait that does does a better job at reproducing itself over time will become a characteristic of that particular species to which it belongs.

The benefit of a group cohesion trait such as aid in finding food, collective knowledge, and added security are obvious. Yet this trait also must compete against more selfish, non-group, traits. The resolution of this conflict ranges from strict hierarchical dominance behaviors (Baboons) to more egalitarian reciprocal exchange behaviors (Bonobos). Humans and Chimps are somewhere in the middle. This middle ground includes individual concern about the general state of relationships in the group. In Chimps this results in the dominant male breaking up fights with the females and adolescent males seeking peaceful reconciliation between high ranking male rivals. Only humans though seem to value altruistic behavior on a group wide basis and reward contributions to the quality of the social environment (page 34).

This book take the reader through all the stages towards morality with various and detailed examples of observed behavior including those from intelligent non-primates.

Chimp groups will enforce their will against individuals. When two chimps stayed outside at a zoo thus delaying the feeding of the rest of the group they were beaten the next morning when the group could get at them (page 89). Yet the fear of punishment is not the best way for a group work together. A better way is to internalize the submission to the group rules so that the group does not have to expend time and effort to keep each other in line which also risks destabilizing the group if revenge attacks start to occur. Rule internalization is exemplified by a need to please as shown in dogs and wolves leading the famous ethologist Konrad Lorentz to call dogs the animals with a conscience. In humans rule internalization is motivated by the desire to belong to, and be accepted by, a group. In return one will play by the group's rules.

Chimps mostly group conform due to fear of punishment but even then they do seem to have sense of guilt. When the ranking male is away low ranking males will seek to copulate with the females. If successful and the high ranking male returns a low ranking male will exhibit wide submissive grins and avoid the high ranking male. (page 110). Chimps are great at deception and trickery working to get their selfish way within the group rules.

Yet chimps also exhibit compassion to other group members when reciprocity can be expected. This compassion also only occurs as long as the behavior of the one needing help is not too different from the norm in which case compassion turns to fear and ostracism (as shown in the polio outbreak among the wild chimps at Gombe). An example of compassion is when a chimp will lower a rope to its mate trapped in a moat (page 82). Another example is when a chimp will keep a friend away from an angry higher ranking member (post page 88 pictures)

Yes chimp juvenile will even test group rules by teasing their elders just to see what happens as when one throws a stick at a resting elder. (post page 88 pictures)

Chimps have a sense of justice as indicate by their emotional responses when an expected  reciprocity is not forthcoming. If it is a lack of food sharing a temper tantrum will result (page 93). In the case of help against a rival where the helper is not protected against a revenge attack the helper will then angrily chase the one it previously helped (page 97).

After conflicts chimp males often reconcile with a formal display of the loser bowing and then receiving a kiss and an embrace from the winner. (page 104).

This book shows that the basic morality of getting along derives from our evolutionary inheritance and that appeals to some god for authority is not needed for moral rules. The rule are within us with behaviors that benefit the group considered good and those that harm the group as bad.

(Personal opinion of reviewer) Yet humans go one step further. Humans add culture to groups, which are completely arbitrary beliefs and patterns of behavior that signal group identification. While hints of pre-culture exist in chimps and bonobos in terms of certain patterns of tool use and gestures they do not seem important in terms of group identification. That is chimps are not hostile to chimps that do not exhibit these traits, in contrast to humans. Culture allows evolution to work at a higher level of organization. Those cultures with ideas that promote better group survivals relative to others will tend to expand. This in turn lead humans to evolve strong emotional attachments to these cultural rules and consider upholding these cultural rules as morally good, on par with earlier pro-group behaviors.