Kin altruism, reciprocity norms, and harm-aversion intuitions map onto inclusive fitness benefits, confirming a purely selective explanation with no remainder requiring moral facts.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Harm-aversion intuitions(as used in moral psychology): Our natural gut feeling that it's wrong to hurt others—an instinct we seem to be born with rather than something we learn.
Inclusive fitness(as used in evolutionary biology): A way of measuring success in evolution that includes not just your own survival and reproduction, but also how well your relatives survive and reproduce.
Kin altruism(as used in evolutionary biology and ethics): When you help family members or relatives even at a cost to yourself, because you share their genes and want them to survive and reproduce.
Moral facts: Facts about goodness, reasons, and obligations; normative facts about what matters.
Reciprocity norms(as used in social behavior and ethics): Unwritten social rules where people expect that if someone does something good for them, they should do something good back in return.
Selective explanation(as used in evolutionary theory): An explanation that says something exists because it gave organisms an advantage in survival and reproduction (natural selection), rather than for any other reason.
With no remainder requiring moral facts(as used in this statement to express skepticism about objective morality): A phrase meaning that evolution alone can fully explain why we care about morality, so we don't need to appeal to any objective moral truths to understand our behavior.

2 topics