Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that In a naturalistic universe, Darwinian evolution would be expected to select for moral judgments that track survival rather than objective moral truths

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Social cooperation requires tracking genuinely harm-relevant features of the world, making fitness and moral truth tracking convergent rather than divergent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Sharon Street's own evolutionary debunking argument concedes that valuing well-being and fairness is fitness-enhancing, which tracks what most moral realists count as moral truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If fitness-enhancing traits systematically track morally relevant properties like suffering and flourishing, evolution selects for moral accuracy, not mere survival indifference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The argument equivocates between 'tracking objective moral facts' and 'tracking mind-independent Platonic moral facts,' conflating distinct metaethical positions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Cornell realists like Sturgeon and Boyd hold that moral properties are identical to or constituted by natural properties, making evolutionary tracking of natural facts sufficient for moral tracking.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If moral properties reduce to natural properties, then an evolution calibrated to natural survival-relevant features is ipso facto calibrated to moral features, undermining the claimed gap.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Under metaphysical naturalism, the evolutionary process is unguided
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An unguided evolutionary process selects for traits that enhance survival, not for epistemic accuracy regarding mind-independent moral facts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.