simonperry955 OP t1_j5sjxa1 wrote on January 25, 2023 at 6:48 AM

Reply to comment by tkuiper in A response to the theory of Morality-as-Cooperation by simonperry955

It's a very good question - how do we link "everyday" goals with evolutionary ones? In a way, it doesn't matter too much for the paradigm. We survive in order to reproduce; we thrive to survive. Each one is pursued for its own sake. Thriving covers everyday goals. It's not often that we are faced with survival or reproduction problems. That works well enough.

I feel we're at or close to the stage where any aspect of morality can be theorised if not mechanised or codified.

A goal that would "destroy the moral system" is win-lose competition rather than win-win mutualism. So we see this from Mr Putin for example, a completely amoral person.

tkuiper t1_j5ulgzg wrote on January 25, 2023 at 5:58 PM

>Mr Putin for example, a completely amoral person.

Rather I sense the moral compass we inheret is in a similar category to other feelings, so it's also possible to develop disorders where you don't process that feeling correctly in addition to simply missing it. Similar to eating or emotional disorders where you process otherwise normal physiological cues in abnormal ways.

I think the most common version being a sort of face blindness to other human's status as a human. A disorder I expect is cultivated by extremist ideologies.

With regards to goals though, I don't see such exploration as adding to the moral structure. Rather it would be an evolutionary perspective on human psychology, which might be revealing of certain types of goals but it seems entirely exploratory. I'm not really sure if there would be any additional predictive power in trying to tie various non-moral goals to evolution.

The common one being sex and family, but taking it further to consider the nuance of desire for particular sports or activities. Why some activities might be boring despite seemingly similar evolutionary utility to exciting activities. Again, none of the goals are 'good' or 'bad' they're just data points.

simonperry955 OP t1_j5xl4kk wrote on January 26, 2023 at 6:39 AM

>face blindness

I think you're talking about narcissism. I believe it is responsible for a lot of extremist ideologies, and people are born like it if they are somewhere on the spectrum.

You're right, and I agree, there's not much further predictive power to be had in filling in the gaps between everyday and evolutionary goals. But it would be interesting.

Pleasure is a goal in itself. I think the function of pleasure is to reward us for achieving fitness benefits. There's a pressure to achieve fitness benefits, and hence, a pressure to seek pleasure. That's Freud's Pleasure Principle.

Like you say, I don't think goals can be moral in themselves. But some cause morality as we work jointly towards them, then others can lay claims on us and hold us accountable. Win-lose competition can't lead to morality as it's not a case of working jointly together.