* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Ethics
Individualism wikipedia , lookup
Arthur Schafer wikipedia , lookup
J. Baird Callicott wikipedia , lookup
Bernard Williams wikipedia , lookup
Neohumanism wikipedia , lookup
Paleoconservatism wikipedia , lookup
Cosmopolitanism wikipedia , lookup
Consequentialism wikipedia , lookup
Philosophy of history wikipedia , lookup
Social Darwinism wikipedia , lookup
The Sovereignty of Good wikipedia , lookup
Morality and religion wikipedia , lookup
Ethics in religion wikipedia , lookup
Lawrence Kohlberg wikipedia , lookup
Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development wikipedia , lookup
Ethical intuitionism wikipedia , lookup
Critique of Practical Reason wikipedia , lookup
Alasdair MacIntyre wikipedia , lookup
Morality throughout the Life Span wikipedia , lookup
Moral disengagement wikipedia , lookup
Ethics of artificial intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Moral responsibility wikipedia , lookup
Moral development wikipedia , lookup
Moral relativism wikipedia , lookup
Naturalism & Ethics Implications? National Chung Cheng University Chia-Yi Taiwan June 10, 2009 Owen Flanagan James B. Duke Professor of Philosophy Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience Co-Director Center for Comparative Philosophy Duke University Topic: What do the psychology and biology of morality have to do with normative ethics? Thesis/Topic?Question 1. Darwin + Cognitive Science & Neuroscience teach that the MIND is less UNIFIED than we think. 2. Disunity of Mind has implications for Philosophy of Mind & Ethics. 3. Possibility that the PROJECT OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT thinking of Ethics in terms of Rational General Purpose Rules is psychologically unrealistic. 4. Emotion Based Modular Theory (MORAL MODULARITY HYPOTHESIS) may be more credible (e.g. Trolley Problems) But, again What do the biology & psychology of morality have to do with OUGHT, with NORMATIVITY? Cautions Evolution can explain how, why, and which moral dispositions evolved & why, namely, to enhance inclusive genetic fitness Evolution alone cannot explain what produces flourishing, eudaimonia -- a new end for “fit beings” -- what else is needed Key Distinctions • AdaptationHistorical - a trait that increased fitness when it evolved, e.g., the appendix. • AdaptationCurrent Ecology - a trait that still enhances fitness in the current environment What is a Module? • A independent dedicated processor that has a “specialized job” in a complex system, e.g., heart, kidneys, liver, pancreas in the human body. • Each organ works over a particular kind of input and gives a particular type of output. What is a Mental Module? • An independent psychobiological processor that has a specialized job in mental life • The processor takes in a particular kind of input & gives a specialized kind of output, e.g., eyes take in light only, ears take in sounds only respectively produce sights and sounds as output. Modules in Cog Sci Fodorian Modules: e.g., REFLEXES; Five Senses; Face Recognition System • • • • • Fast acting Automatic Informationally encapsulated Cognitively impenetrable Breakdown Modularly Darwinian Modules: Same as F-modules but affectively loaded & action oriented, e.g., Basic Emotions Affect Programs (e.g. Darwin-Ekman Emotions) Classical Modularity Mencius & Human Nature Humans all have hearts that are not unfeeling toward others. Suppose someone suddenly saw a child about to fall into a well: everyone in such a situation would have a feeling of alarm and compassion – not because one sought to get in good with the child’s parents, not because one wanted fame among their neighbors and friends, and not because one would dislike the sounds of the child’s cries. [F]rom this we can see that if one is without the heart of compassion, one is not a human. (2A6) FOUR MENCIAN SEEDS If one is without the heart of deference, one is not a human. The heart of compassion is the sprout of benevolence. The heart of disdain (shame/disgust) is the sprout of righteousness. The heart of deference is the sprout of propriety. The heart of approval and disapproval is the sprout of wisdom.” (2A6; see also 6A6). “People having these four sprouts is like their having four limbs.” (2A6) “Then without realizing it one’s feet begin to step in time to them and one’s hands dance according to their rhythms.” (4A27) But Negligent Care of Sprouts “In general, having these four sprouts within oneself, if one knows how to fill them out…If one can merely fill them out, they will be sufficient to care for all within the Four Seas. If one merely fails to fill them out, they will be insufficient to serve one’s parents.” (2A6) Mencian Modularity Moral Modularity Descriptive: Human nature contains seeds for four different moral competencies. Moral Modularity Normative: Socio-moral excellence involves growing all four seeds to maturity. Mencius + Darwin (1) Evolution settled on four leg/four limb design because it was an adaptation = adaptationhistorical; (2) It is still adaptive = adaptationcurrent ecology (3) It emerges naturally in a universal species specific way across ecologies and thus (4) Human animals ought to grow their legs the way nature designs(ed) them to grow. Moral Analogy 1. Evolution settled on four moral seeds because they were adaptations = adaptationhistorical. 2. They are still adaptive = adaptationcurrent ecology. 3. The seeds emerge and grow and are tuned (roughly) the same way across all natural and social ecologies. 4. Therefore, we ought to grow the seeds the way Mother Nature designed them to grow. For morals #2 is QUESTIONABLE #3 seems FALSE “In order that primeval men, or the ape-like progenitors of man, should become social…they must have acquired the same instinctive feelings…They would have felt uneasy when separated from their comrades, for whom they would have felt some degree of love, they would have warned each other of danger, and have given mutual aid in attack or defence. All this implies some degree of sympathy, fidelity, and courage….[T]o the instinct of sympathy…it is primarily due that we habitually bestow both praises and blame on others, whilst we love the former and dread the latter when applied to ourselves; and this instinct no doubt was originally acquired, like all the other social instincts, through natural selection…. [W]ith increased experience and reason, man perceives the more remote consequences of his actions, and the self-regarding virtues, such as temperance, chastity, &c., which during earlier times are…utterly disregarded come to be highly esteemed or even held sacred…Ultimately our moral sense or conscience becomes a highly complex sentiment --- originating in the social instincts, largely guided by the approbation of our fellow-men, ruled by reason, self- interest, and in later times by deep religious feelings, and confirmed by instruction and habit.” Charles Darwin, Descent, 1871 pp. 498-500. 21st Century Modularity (SIM) • Five Darwinian modules • Function to meet adaptive challenges • Possess Normal Phenotypic Variation, e.g., gender MMH & P.F. Strawson Reactive Attitudes 1962 Indignation Resentment Gratitude Approbation Guilt Shame Hurt Feelings Feelings of Affection & Love Forgiveness Strawson claimed that (1) the reactive attitudes are part of the normal and original conative repertoire of members of the species Homo sapiens; (2) the reactive attitudes express normal human reactions to acts, traits, dispositions, or to whole persons; (3) the normal expression of the reactive emotions involves interpersonal relations where benevolence or malevolence is displayed or, at least, where they are at stake. Strawson writes: ”Compare the question of the justification of induction. The human commitment to inductive belief-formation is original, natural, and non-rational (not irrational), in no way something we choose or could give up.” The idea, I take it is to suggest that what goes for induction also goes for the reactive attitudes – they are “original, natural, nonrational (not irrational)…[and not something we ever] “could give up.” Ok But…The Question remains • Accept that the Reactive Attitudes can only be tuned up/down, moderated, modified, grown, suppressed… • What are the reasons/ social conditions / adaptive challenges that warrant developing them, and thus moral personality, one way rather than another? What is the right way? If MMH (Mencian or 21st c. SIM) is true, then one should see every moral tradition giving moral attention (+ or -) to the seeds-that-are-trying-to grow inside us Liberals moralize harm/compassion & justice/injustice/fairness (more than conservatives) Conservatives moralize all five (to significant some degree) Bodhisattva’s Virtues Brahmaviharas Compassion (karuna) Lovingkindness (metta) Appreciative/sympathetic Joy (mudita) Equanimity (upekkha) Hypertrophy of Compassion? Conclusions? Normative Consequences? 1. Understanding and/or Tolerance? 2. What else? What is the right way to tune the modules? And why? The End Thank You!