Is morality a cultural trait or an evolutionary trait?

Life has been good lately. Made some big bucks recently (tip: learn to code). I like to read/think about shit like this when I'm not coding or stressed out. So I have a question for you BHW.

Is morality a cultural trait or an evolutionary trait?
-------------------------------

Two arguments.

Argument 1:
We figured out we can do a lot of things when we are in a group. Then came society. Then came culture and religion. Then came morals (do no harm to others coz that's bad).

Argument 2:
Some chemical reaction that is evolved that causes us to help each other (and not hurt each other). It is certainly good for survival. Whatever that was, that gave us "morals".

-----

You hardly see animals hurting their own species. Does this mean animals have morals?

My personal opinion: I think is it is mostly evolutionary. But cultural upbringings and things we are exposed to definitely has a big part in shaping up our morals

Humans hurt each other (a lot).

The ones who killed/kill people (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, terrorists, or even the army) - do they have morals? They somehow have justifications (fighting for the country/religion/race whatever) for their killings.

---

Cultural trait, I think. Good question.

I’m leaning more towards argument 1. I don’t think there’s any inherent chemical reward for having morals, if there were, we would be living in a different world. The pat on the back from society is what you might get and that could give you a chemical reward indirectly.

Also interesting that you should post this today as I’d been looking into the MAO gene and it’s implications on predisposition to violence, callousness etc.

javabro said:

Made some big bucks recently (tip: learn to code).

Click to expand...

It was the career of the future when I was starting out and it's the career of the future today.

Learn to code everyone.

BTW about your initial question: C++ is morality, everything else is profane

Nature vs. Nurture argument, and after working in psy for a few years, you can definitely see the upbringing being a huge factor. I saw parents that didn't care what it took to advance their kids, and their children went along with it, actually mirroring their behavior.
It's a fascinating topic, and again I don't think we can say for certain it's 100% either way but a combination of the two.

A bit of both. It comes down to not hurt others. Help who is in need.

javabro said:

Life has been good lately. Made some big bucks recently (tip: learn to code). I like to read/think about shit like this when I'm not coding or stressed out. So I have a question for you BHW.

Is morality a cultural trait or an evolutionary trait?
-------------------------------

Two arguments.

Argument 1:
We figured out we can do a lot of things when we are in a group. Then came society. Then came culture and religion. Then came morals (do no harm to others coz that's bad).

Argument 2:
Some chemical reaction that is evolved that causes us to help each other (and not hurt each other). It is certainly good for survival. Whatever that was, that gave us "morals".

-----

You hardly see animals hurting their own species. Does this mean animals have morals?

My personal opinion: I think is it is mostly evolutionary. But cultural upbringings and things we are exposed to definitely has a big part in shaping up our morals

Humans hurt each other (a lot).

The ones who killed/kill people (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, terrorists, or even the army) - do they have morals? They somehow have justifications (fighting for the country/religion/race whatever) for their killings.

---

Click to expand...

May I go with argument 3?
Argument 3: humanity has been (created/improved from monkeys/brought to Earth) by some aliens/God/Hyper consciousness/whatever.
So morality has been there or implanted since the beginning. Given that we need emotions like fear/courage/happiness/sadness and everything in between in order to survive, morality is on the second layer when it comes to decision making, so not everything we do is moral.
Is that a decent explanation?

Evolution is merciless. Animals have no morals when it comes violence. They kill for hell lot of reasons. Morality is clearly a cultural trait. Humans tend to understand the consequences of their actions and have the capacity to do things deviating from their species (like vegetarianism, non-violence etc.)

Seeing the first few posts, I don't want to comment on this as it seems to be a "Jr. Executive VIP" discussion.

javabro said:

Life has been good lately. Made some big bucks recently (tip: learn to code). I like to read/think about shit like this when I'm not coding or stressed out. So I have a question for you BHW.

Is morality a cultural trait or an evolutionary trait?
-------------------------------

Two arguments.

Argument 1:
We figured out we can do a lot of things when we are in a group. Then came society. Then came culture and religion. Then came morals (do no harm to others coz that's bad).

Argument 2:
Some chemical reaction that is evolved that causes us to help each other (and not hurt each other). It is certainly good for survival. Whatever that was, that gave us "morals".

-----

You hardly see animals hurting their own species. Does this mean animals have morals?

My personal opinion: I think is it is mostly evolutionary. But cultural upbringings and things we are exposed to definitely has a big part in shaping up our morals

Humans hurt each other (a lot).

The ones who killed/kill people (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, terrorists, or even the army) - do they have morals? They somehow have justifications (fighting for the country/religion/race whatever) for their killings.

---

Click to expand...

Mostly evolutionary. People usually feels good when they do good (you all know this warm feeling when you are giving a gift or making a favor). Its rare for people to do bad things and feel good about it and is always a case of psychological illness. Even Hitler did what he did for the good of his people (from his own perspective), not because he enjoyed mass murders. The reason for this evolutionary trait is pretty simple as well - a group of humans is way stronger than individuals that made the group and humans who fits in the group was more likely to have progeny and for their genes to survive. Lonely wolf types died out.

It depends on your upbringing I guess.
And people have to abide by the law as well.

You can't just hurt someone and get away without leaving a trace

kumbhak11 said:

Seeing the first few posts, I don't want to comment on this as it seems to be a "Jr. Executive VIP" discussion.

Click to expand...

You are smart, and your voice should be heard. It just happened that we all commented at once but don't ever feel that way.

Mrnewbie said:

You are smart, and your voice should be heard. It just happened that we all commented at once but don't ever feel that way.

Click to expand...

That was just a parody comment. Nothing serious

Morality gotta be a mix of the two arguments,

You can be born a sociopath, but taught to live "morally" according to society, or you can be born a sociopath and not give a fuck at all.

What exactly is morality, does it mean just following a set of morals, or beliveing them as well?

Both.

Serotonin and adrenaline causes us to adopt mortality from others in order to reduce cortisol or to maintain our own saftey.

javabro said:

Life has been good lately. Made some big bucks recently (tip: learn to code). I like to read/think about shit like this when I'm not coding or stressed out. So I have a question for you BHW.

Is morality a cultural trait or an evolutionary trait?
-------------------------------

Two arguments.

Argument 1:
We figured out we can do a lot of things when we are in a group. Then came society. Then came culture and religion. Then came morals (do no harm to others coz that's bad).

Argument 2:
Some chemical reaction that is evolved that causes us to help each other (and not hurt each other). It is certainly good for survival. Whatever that was, that gave us "morals".

-----

You hardly see animals hurting their own species. Does this mean animals have morals?

My personal opinion: I think is it is mostly evolutionary. But cultural upbringings and things we are exposed to definitely has a big part in shaping up our morals

Humans hurt each other (a lot).

The ones who killed/kill people (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, terrorists, or even the army) - do they have morals? They somehow have justifications (fighting for the country/religion/race whatever) for their killings.

---

Click to expand...

By "learn to code" I take that to mean LEARN PYTHON?

Am I correct?

There's a bit of a danger in ANTROPOMORPHIZING morality (ie., reading in "human" signals into animals)

For example:
Male lions routinely kill the young cubs of the females of the group they have just taken over.
This not only frees up resources for the cubs they father, it also TRIGGERS HEAT In the females.

Another example:
Female hamsters regularly eat some of their babies if food supply runs low

Closer to humanity, chimpanzees routinely raid and kill other chimpanzee groups

Viewed from this lens, HUMAN ALTRUISM isn't universal
It is restricted to FAMILY first, then CLAN, then maybe TRIBE

Human sacrifice, ethnocide, etc has always been "moral" when viewed from this prism

What OP should be asking is HOW DID "MORALITY" change

It's only been recently (since the 300s BC) that the idea of a UNIVERSAL humanity (and by extension "universal morality") is even a thing

Also, there's a CULTURAL difference in "morality"

In the old times, generally, morality is framed in terms of HONOR - I treat you right because I would be losing face and respect from my peers if I didn't treat you according to protocol.... has little to do with your worth as an individual or value as an organism but what HARM I FACE if I don't treat you according to accepted cultural protocol... would it be HONORABLE...

In this value system, few people want to be a 'victim' because victims routinely get destroyed, set aside, forgotten... it is usually 'dishonorable' to be a victim

Practical translation: it's easier to destroy/enslave others if there's more honor in it.

More recently, much of it articulated in the West (but a lot of it has the same BODHISATVA spirit of the East), the old school HONOR system has been gradually set aside by the idea of EQUALITY due to a UNIVERSAL LOVE whose standards are EXTERNAL (ie., outside the family, clan, etc etc) is now the standard and continues to grow...... Ideas of Human Rights, Human Equity, flow from here ALONG with the idea of UNIVERSAL UNCHANGEABLE MORALITY (example: Immanuel Kant)

Interestingly enough, among EVOLUTIONARY THEORISTS, there's the idea that there is such a thing as POSTMORALITY - that we're just chemical interactions so we shouldn't really freak out if we find ourselves on either end of a gun or knife. After all, according to this perspective, there really is no FREE WILL just the illusion of choice and, by extension, some moral order. But ultimately, evolutionary march of chemical reactions in response to external stimuli is the only thing that matters.... at least according to this MECHANISTIC view of humanity.

I tend to dive into such questions after I had some drinks.

Well, sometimes I feel when it comes to 'morality' we're just programmed to feel this way. Think about it, when you were a child, your parents teach you certain values and reward you for doing so. For example, you share your toys/food your parents/teachers/peers compliments you so you get that 'feel good' feeling - the release of dopamine or reward system in your brain. And sometimes our parents even reward us with candies which release dopamine further. Isn't this like Pavlov's effect? So we sort of expect this 'feel good' feeling when we do a good deed in future. Just like when you did something good right now you just have this 'feel good' feeling going on - the dopamine release. Exactly like Pavlov's effect. And just perhaps sometimes when we don't get the intended rewards (say, a thank you for helping, or recognition) we get pissed off and angry instead - because we EXPECT a thank you or recognition that we've programmed. (tip: don't expect, and your life would be happier).

And where does all these good values or teachings came from? It is very likely spurred up by our ancient ancestors who did something good and they felt that 'wow, what a nice feeling' thingy (dopamine release from the recognition) so they package it as values and morality and passed it down. It is then taught in schools, TVs, books, and so on. Then there's also the fear of being outcasted if you don't behave as expected by society (being called selfish, or the fear of having a bad reputation among peers). And religion plays a part too - why some people fear hell, so they abide or do something good (consequences - if you steal, you've sinned; if you commit audltery, you've sinned; etc etc and you will go to hell later. But if you help others and do good, you have a slot in heaven). Somehow these later splashed into what people create law and the justice system - steal, rob, rape, assault, kill and you will face jail or life imprisonment. They are similar in many ways... Instead of you facing the consequences in your afterlife (in hell for punishment) our justice system makes you face the consequences now (jail time, sentenced to death, caning, etc). It is because of the fear of the consequences, people abide the rules and have morality.

A good experiment would be putting a person on an island and letting him/her know no one is watching, no consequences, and whatsoever. Will he/she have morality and do the right thing and behave as if everyone's watching?
Or say a post-nuclear apocalypse (just like fallout games) and everyone have to do what they have to do for survival... Will they still have morality or is it a 'every man for himself' sort of scenario?

I don't know, I can go on and on... Just my 2 cents. Even if it is made up or we're just programmed to feell this way, I feel it is great. I'm the kind who wants a happy world where everyone is happy - no prejudice, no hate, no pain.

Stay happy and stay safe all!