Where did morality come from?

[Dezerte]

We're social animals, and much of our success is owed to our ability to cooperate with each other. It seems to be a rather useful evolutionary trait to have.

[Eroginous]

I know some people say evolution but since when was being 'good' a survival advantage? And in fact being self-centered, competitive and an outright douche would more than likely ensure your survival in a Darwinian world.

There are two types of morality 'subjective and objective' with the latter being the holy grail.

Beyond this I was also wondering why some people are more moral than others? For example, I am more moral than a lot of the people in my life and to the same extent more judgmental.

There are no different 'types' of morality. There is no morality other than what emerges from a given society, because like culture, morality is an emergent property. Morality will only ever be emergent, and anyone who says otherwise will be voted off the island (trust me). This is why it's okay to kill gays according to the laws of many middle eastern cultures. Their culture comes largely from a bronze-aged book, with bronze-aged ideals, making for a very different set of 'morals' than western society.

Who is more moral? No one. Morality isn't a matter of who is more right or less wrong. It's a matter of what's accepted by society. So if tomorrow, we vote that being gay is a bad thing, it becomes an immoral practice, carrying whatever punishment society has determined is fit for being 'immoral.' You, as an individual, can continue to believe it's okay to be gay, while society disagrees with you and the reality you find yourself in becomes morally different than what you believe in.

Obviously, at that point morality becomes about what society believes, and not what you believe. The real world consequences of your ideals will be realized by society regardless of what's personally believed to be 'good' or 'right.' Some might say 'well then society is wrong, I'm morally justified in my beliefs, so there.' Good luck with that as you face whatever consequences society brings down on your for being immoral.

There is no 'objective morality' because people are never objective, especially when their own self interest is at stake. Even a creator would be incapable of objective morality (if god is deciding what's right and wrong, that's still subjective morality, based on a god's perspective). Does this mean morality is entirely subjective? No. It just means that morality is never free of subjectivity, whether that subject is my best interests, your best interests, or god's.

To that end, the only correct way of looking at morality is from a utilitarian perspective. Does killing gay people serve a useful purpose? No (at least, that's what the answer should be). So maybe don't kill gay people?

And before you frame your responses within 'human rights,' well rights have to be granted by an authority. So it doesn't do much good to profess your 'right to be gay' when the authority governing your society does not recognize that as a 'right,' much less the interest in granting such a right to anyone. It's a much better idea to appeal to utility when discussing things such as morality.

[Osmeric]

Natural morality (evolution derived) is completely different from morality which comes from societal norms and social teachings.

Morality doesn't (mostly?) come from evolution, but the biological mechanisms that allow something called morality to come about do come from evolution.

It's the same sense languages aren't dictated by our genes, but our capacity to have languages (and learn them so quickly when young) is.

There's a dark side to morality, btw: it's the basis for most violence. People don't kill because they're insane killers, they mostly kill because they feel the victim had it coming (which is a moral concept). Morality drives violence even when the violence is costly to the perpetrator.

[Osmeric]

Why then are some people more moral than others and some people (in fact many than you would expect) amoral and plain rude/evil/nasty.

All traits controlled by genes are variable, because genes come in different variations. You wouldn't argue that because people have legs of different lengths that walking wasn't a product of evolution, would you?

[Adam Jensen]

They were only enabled by the fact of some measure of teamwork.

Did you ever see Cities, built by 1 man, with a 1 man wall?

Trump is one man and Trump is going to build one wall!

[Shadowferal]

I know some people say evolution but since when was being 'good' a survival advantage? And in fact being self-centered, competitive and an outright douche would more than likely ensure your survival in a Darwinian world.

There are two types of morality 'subjective and objective' with the latter being the holy grail.

Beyond this I was also wondering why some people are more moral than others? For example, I am more moral than a lot of the people in my life and to the same extent more judgmental.

Morality grew from the same place religion grew...50,000 years ago mankind "woke" up and spirituality and the imagination kicked in. There are some select examples that this happened earlier in specific instances, but in general the 50k mark serves as a good starting point since you won't find much if any actual art, cave paintings and such, before that timeframe. Plenty of tools, but no art. Re: Behavioral Modernity

[Deleted]

It's a result of the need for human cooperation.

When you rely on each other it is in your mutual interest to not kill or damage each other.

Just like wolves don't generally attack the members of their pack, we generally do not attack each other and morality is just a contruct built upon a basic instinct.

[Grimbold21]

Are you saying that people are moral because they want someone to talk to?

No, im saying that we're not dicks because we interact with each other.

I don't stab you in the gut cause i know that's bad for you.

[Deleted]

I know some people say evolution but since when was being 'good' a survival advantage? And in fact being self-centered, competitive and an outright douche would more than likely ensure your survival in a Darwinian world.

Humans are social pack animals, while being also self-aware and intelligent. From that point of view, morality makes sense. Helping someone who's in trouble increases the chances of getting help when you are in shit yourself. Also, if you don't help someone in trouble, and yet they somehow manage to survive, it's going to create a lot of friction within the community.

Other important source of morality is empathy. But since it can go to absurd lengths, reason is sometimes needed to rein it in. For example, "feeding all these refugees would in principle be the right thing to do, but if I do it, my own people will starve, and I can't let that happen."

Yet it seems that while people usually think about their family's, community's or nation's benefit (which is perfectly in line with darwinism and evolution psychology), personal safety can go down the drain when shit really hits the fan. Time and again we have seen how ordinary people can go to extreme lengths to help others in danger, even risking their own life in the process.

[Ryme]

Why are some people more moral than others?

Why are some people more subservient than others or kind, or pessimistic, or literally any other psychological attribute. You're looking to enter a bit a rabbit hole there; I'm fairly sure that no one really knows definitively.

[Cyanu]

my guess would be as the need of the group so it can avoid falling apart due to internal conflict/chaos

[Powerogue]

I know some people say evolution but since when was being 'good' a survival advantage? And in fact being self-centered, competitive and an outright douche would more than likely ensure your survival in a Darwinian world.

There are two types of morality 'subjective and objective' with the latter being the holy grail.

Beyond this I was also wondering why some people are more moral than others? For example, I am more moral than a lot of the people in my life and to the same extent more judgmental.

We've got two things essentially from my experience: Selfishness and selflessness.

Selfishness drives us to protect ourselves. This evolved for obvious reasons, the ones who didn't died.

Selflessness is more complicated. It's better for the group, and potentially better for yourself as long as you don't die in the process by said group rewarding your action with safety and potential mates in the long run. Yet it's directly diametrically opposed to selfishness, so they wind up fighting for dominance, thus leading to that critical choice we tend to label "good and evil". Soceties tend to promote behaviors that benefit the society as a whole as "good" and condemn ones that hurt the society in the long run as "evil".

As for why some people are more moral than others, nature and nurture. Your experiences as you grow up shape you, combined with factors such as lower/higher ability to feel empathy.

[Deleted]

Morality is product of intelligence, not genes . It has nothing to do with evolution. In my opinion, it's a natural consequence of having high level of intelligence capable of asking questions.

Nah it is a social construct to keep people from becoming overly selfish and choosing their group over whats good for them personally. Unfortunately it has become an antiquated relic and has lost its usefulness.

[Kraenen]

I know some people say evolution but since when was being 'good' a survival advantage? And in fact being self-centered, competitive and an outright douche would more than likely ensure your survival in a Darwinian world.

It actually increases your chances of being ganged up on. Nobody likes a douche, although they do sometimes get away with it. Hence people try to punish them.

[InventiveMeasures]

I know some people say evolution but since when was being 'good' a survival advantage? And in fact being self-centered, competitive and an outright douche would more than likely ensure your survival in a Darwinian world.

There are two types of morality 'subjective and objective' with the latter being the holy grail.

Beyond this I was also wondering why some people are more moral than others? For example, I am more moral than a lot of the people in my life and to the same extent more judgmental.

I think a lack of empathy and self-respect is the cause of low morality.