Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reply to comment

Jenn Dodwell's picture

Morality: Darwinian or Absolute?

I have often wondered about morality, and whether the recognition that being a moral person and the decision to do so is a result of some absolute truth or calling that we perceive, or if it is merely something that is programmed into us biologically.  Biologically, there are many reasons to be moral.  Many things that are immoral seem like they are immoral for the simple fact that they harm members of our species, and thus our ability to adapt to life.  Stealing and killing someone are immoral because they harm members of our species; stealing by depriving someone of things they might need to live, and killing by taking their life away. 

 However, lying and cheating are also immoral; but how would lying to someone affect his/her chances of survival?  Likewise, how would cheating at something, like a game make any kind of biological difference?  It is less clear cut in these cases what the role of biology plays, if any, in the formation of our morals. 

 Nevertheless, all these morals and many more are ones that most humans agree to strictly live by, because they have been taught that it is the right way to live (and in some cases, such as killing, perhaps do not even have to be taught, but just instinctively know).  But what exactly is the reason why such teachings exist in the first place?

Reply

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
14 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.