Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:38:24.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From objectivized morality to objective morality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2018

Joseph Jebari  and
Bryce Huebner
Joseph Jebari
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. 20057. jdj48@georgetown.eduBryce.Huebner@georgetown.eduhttp://brycehuebner.weebly.com
Bryce Huebner
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. 20057. jdj48@georgetown.eduBryce.Huebner@georgetown.eduhttp://brycehuebner.weebly.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Stanford holds that the externalization and objectivization of moral judgments are what sustain human cooperative lifeways. We reply that the central function of human moral psychology is to track and respond to the structural features of our social environment, and we argue that moral obligations are grounded in the relationship between individual agents and the stability of their social groups.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e105
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apicella, C. L., Marlowe, F. W., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. (2012) Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature 481(7382):497–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barkoczi, D. & Galesic, M. (2016) Social learning strategies modify the effect of network structure on group performance. Nature Communications 7: article no. 13109. doi:10.1038/ncomms13109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bicchieri, C. (2016) Norms in the wild: How to diagnose, measure, and change social norms. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Derex, M. & Boyd, R. (2016) Partial connectivity increases cultural accumulation within groups. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 113:2982–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fehl, K., van der Post, D. J. & Semmann, D. (2011) Co-evolution of behaviour and social network structure promotes human cooperation. Ecology Letters 14(6):546–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hare, B. (2017) Survival of the friendliest: Homo sapiens evolved via selection for prosociality. Annual Review of Psychology 68:155–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henrich, J. (2004) Demography and cultural evolution: How adaptive cultural processes can produce maladaptive losses-the Tasmanian case. American Antiquity 69:197–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. (2016) The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, K. R., Walker, R. S., Božičević, M., Eder, J., Headland, T., Hewlett, B., Hurtado, A. M., Marlowe, F., Wiessner, P. & Wood, B. (2011) Co-residence patterns in hunter-gatherer societies show unique human social structure. Science 331(6022):1286–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooker, C. (2013) On the import of constraints in complex dynamical systems. Foundations of Science 18(4):757–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hrdy, S. (2009) Mothers and others: The evolutionary origins of mutual understanding. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Isler, K. & Van Schaik, C. P. (2012) How our ancestors broke through the gray ceiling: Comparative evidence for cooperative breeding in early Homo. Current Anthropology 53(Suppl. 6):S453–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jebari, J. (in preparation) Empirical moral rationalism and the social constitution of normativity.Google Scholar
Klucharev, V., Hytönen, K., Rijpkema, M., Smidts, A. & Fernández, G. (2009) Reinforcement learning signal predicts social conformity. Neuron 61:140–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klucharev, V., Munneke, M., Smidts, A. & Fernández, G. (2011) Downregulation of the posterior medial frontal cortex prevents social conformity. Journal of Neuroscience 31:11934–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milgram, S. & Sabini, J. (1978) On maintaining urban norms: A field experiment in the subway. Advances in Environmental Psychology 1:31–40.Google Scholar
Montague, R. (2006) Why choose this book? Dutton Press.Google Scholar
Muthukrishna, M., Shulman, B. W., Vasilescu, V. & Henrich, J. (2014) Sociality influences cultural complexity. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 281(1774):e20132511. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2013.2511.Google ScholarPubMed
Ohtsuki, H., Hauert, C., Lieberman, E. & Nowak, M. A. (2006) A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs. Nature 441(7092):502–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rand, D. G., Arbesman, S. & Christakis, N. A. (2011) Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108(48):19193–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reber, R. & Norenzayan, A. (in press) Shared fluency theory of social cohesiveness: How the metacognitive feeling of processing fluency contributes to group processes. In: Metacognitive diversity, ed. Proust, J. & Fortier, M.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reia, S. M., Herrmann, S. & Fontanari, J. F. (2017) Impact of centrality on cooperative processes. Physical Review E 95(2):022305. (Online article). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.95.022305CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sterelny, K. (2012) The evolved apprentice: How evolution made humans unique. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2009) Why we cooperate. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, A. S., Wrangham, R. W. & Fitch, W. T. (2014) The “domestication syndrome” in mammals: A unified explanation based on neural crest cell behavior and genetics. Genetics 197(3):795–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wrangham, R. (2009) Catching fire: How cooking made us human. Basic Books.Google Scholar