Download pdf
Human Morality: From Evolutionary to Future Perspectives
- 1 Beijing Normal University-Hong Kong Baptist University United International College
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
When human labor is completely replaced by technology, what will become of human moral mechanism? The rapid changes in morality caused by the rapid development of science and technology undoubtedly make moral prediction more valuable. In this review, the theory of morality as cooperation, one of the latest moral theories, is used to speculate on the impact of this situation on human ethics. Through some discussion, this paper gets some hold prediction. Firstly, the principle of fairness predicts that an ostensibly altruistic society will emerge. Then some principles about distribution predict that labor value will be replaced by a value which, like labor, does not feel seriously unequal because of unmanageable gaps, and which is primarily for spiritual purposes. There is a pity that social institution can be predicted hardly, which silences a principle. This discussion may help people to make a necessary discussion in advance of a serious ethical conflict in the future, so as to make a trade-off and reduce the loss.
Keywords
moral psychology, fairness, labor value, morality as cooperation
[1]. Oliver Scott Curry, Daniel Austin Mullins, & Harvey Whitehouse. (2019). Is It Good to Cooperate?: Testing the Theory of Morality-as-Cooperation in 60 SocietiesCurrent Anthropology, 60(1), 47-69. https://doi.org/10.1086/701478
[2]. Curry, O. S., Jones Chesters, M., & Van Lissa, C. J. (2019). Mapping morality with a compass: Testing the theory of ‘morality-as-cooperation’ with a new questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 78, 106-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.10.008
[3]. Rowland, L., & Curry, O. S. (2019). A range of kindness activities boost happiness. The Journal of social psychology, 159(3), 340–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2018.1469461
[4]. dos Santos, M., Placì, S., & Wedekind, C. (2015). Stochasticity in economic losses increases the value of reputation in indirect reciprocity. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 18182–18182. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep18182
[5]. West, S. A., El Mouden, C., & Gardner, A. (2011). Sixteen common misconceptions about the evolution of cooperation in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(4), 231–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.08.001
[6]. Nowak, M., Sigmund, K. (1998). Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature 393, 573–577. https://doi.org/10.1038/31225
[7]. Maslow, A.H. (2020). Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.
[8]. Mathes, E. W. (1981). Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs as a Guide for Living. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 21(4), 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/002216788102100406
[9]. Holzknecht, J., & Holzknecht, J. (2007). Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Castalia Media.
[10]. Harrigan, W. J., & Commons, M. L. (2015). Replacing Maslow’s Needs Hierarchy with an Account Based on Stage and Value. Behavioral Development Bulletin (Philadelphia, Pa.), 20(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0101036
[11]. Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2010). Renovating the Pyramid of Needs: Contemporary Extensions Built Upon Ancient Foundations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 292–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369469
[12]. Zalenski, R. J., & Raspa, R. (2006). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: a framework for achieving human potential in hospice. Journal of palliative medicine, 9(5), 1120–1127. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2006.9.1120
[13]. Bar-Tal, D. (1986). Altruistic motivation to help definition, utility and operationalization. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 13(1/2), 3-14.
[14]. Hooker, B. (2005). Fairness. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 8(4), 329–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-005-8836-2
[15]. Zalenski, R. J., & Raspa, R. (2006). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: a framework for achieving human potential in hospice. Journal of palliative medicine, 9(5), 1120–1127. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2006.9.1120
[16]. Gintis, H., Smith, E. A., & Bowles, S. (2001). Costly signaling and cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 213, 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.2001.2406.
[17]. McAndrew, F.T. (2019). Costly Signaling Theory. In: Shackelford, T., Weekes-Shackelford, V. (eds) Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_3483-1
[18]. Hajikhameneh, A., & Iannaccone, L.R. (2023). God games: An experimental study of uncertainty, superstition, and cooperation. Games Econ. Behav., 139, 88-116.
[19]. Preuschoft, S., & van Schaik, C. P. (2000). Dominance and communication: Conflict management in various social settings. In F. Aureli & F. B. M. de Waal (Eds.), Natural conflict resolution (pp. 77–105). Berkeley: University of California Press.
[20]. Wei, X. (2015) Two abstract principles of distributive justice[J]. Philosophical dynamics, 12, 5-10.
[21]. Hill, J.E. (2016). Justice, Liberty, and Equality: Adam Smith’s Political Economy. In: Adam Smith’s Equality and the Pursuit of Happiness. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58412-0_2
[22]. DeScioli, P., Massenkoff, M., Shaw, A., Petersen, M. B., & Kurzban, R. (2014). Equity or equality? Moral judgments follow the money. Proceedings. Biological sciences, 281(1797), 20142112. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2112
[23]. Guglielmo S. (2018). Unfounded dumbfounding: How harm and purity undermine evidence for moral dumbfounding. Cognition, 170, 334–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.08.002
[24]. Hoerster, N. (1975). JOHN RAWLS, A Theory of Justice, Oxford 1972 (Book Review) [Review of JOHN RAWLS, A Theory of Justice, Oxford 1972 (Book Review)]. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 61(3), 458–. Franz Steiner Verlag, etc.
[25]. Saunders, B. (2010). Fairness Between Competing Claims. Res Publica (Liverpool, England), 16(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-010-9118-y
[26]. McNamara, R.A., & Henrich, J. (2017). Kin and kinship psychology both influence cooperative coordination in Yasawa, Fiji. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38, 197-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.09.004
[27]. Benjamin Enke, Kinship, Cooperation, and the Evolution of Moral Systems, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 134, Issue 2, May 2019, Pages 953–1019, https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjz001
[28]. Miller, S. (2009). The Moral Foundations of Social Institutions: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511818622.
[29]. Charles C. Verharen (2020) The future of ethics and education: philosophy in a time of existential crises, Ethics and Education, 15:3, 371-389, DOI: 10.1080/17449642.2020.1774718.
[30]. Krauss, S., & Orth, U. (2022). Work Experiences and Self-Esteem Development: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies. European Journal of Personality, 36(6), 849–869. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070211027142
Cite this article
Wei,Y. (2023). Human Morality: From Evolutionary to Future Perspectives. Communications in Humanities Research,9,58-63.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Innovation and Philosophical Inquiries
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).