Where do moral rules come from? Evolution, perhaps

Rationalists say moral sense comes from reason, believers say from God but the origins of what we think is right may lie in culture...

Where do moral rules come from? From reason, some philosophers say. From God, say believers. Seldom considered is a source now being advocated by some biologists, that of evolution. At first glance, natural selection and the survival of the fittest may seem to reward only the most selfish values. But for animals that live in groups, selfishness must be strictly curbed or there will be no advantage to social living. Could the behaviours evolved by social animals to make societies work be the foundation from which human morality evolved?

In a series of recent articles and a book, The Happiness Hypothesis, Jonathan Haidt, a moral psychologist at the University of Virginia, has been constructing a broad evolutionary view of morality that traces its connections both to religion and to politics. Dr Haidt pronounced height began his research career by probing the emotion of disgust. Testing people8217;s reactions to situations like that of a hungry family that cooked and ate its pet dog after it had become roadkill, he explored the phenomenon of moral dumbfounding 8212; when people feel strongly that something is wrong but cannot explain why.

Dumbfounding led him to view morality as driven by two separate mental systems, one ancient and one modern, though the mind is scarcely aware of the difference. The ancient system, which he calls moral intuition, is based on the emotion-laden moral behaviours that evolved before the development of language. The modern system 8212; he calls it moral judgment 8212; came after language, when people became able to articulate why something was right or wrong.

The emotional responses of moral intuition occur instantaneously 8212; they are primitive gut reactions that evolved to generate split-second decisions and enhance survival in a dangerous world. Moral judgment, on the other hand, comes later, as the conscious mind develops a plausible rationalization for the decision already arrived at through moral intuition.

Moral dumbfounding, in Dr Haidt8217;s view, occurs when moral judgment fails to come up with a convincing explanation for what moral intuition has decided. So why has evolution equipped the brain with two moral systems when just one might seem plenty?

8220;We have a complex animal mind that only recently evolved language and language-based reasoning,8221; Dr Haidt said. 8220;No way was control of the organism going to be handed over to this novel faculty.8221;

He likens the mind8217;s subterranean moral machinery to an elephant, and conscious moral reasoning to a small rider on the elephant8217;s back. Psychologists and philosophers have long taken a far too narrow view of morality, he believes, because they have focused on the rider and largely ignored the elephant. He has identified five components of morality that were common to most cultures. Some concerned the protection of individuals, others the ties that bind a group together.

Story continues below this ad

Of the moral systems that protect individuals, one is concerned with preventing harm to the person and the other with reciprocity and fairness. Less familiar are the three systems that promote behaviours developed for strengthening the group. These are loyalty to the in-group, respect for authority and hierarchy, and a sense of purity or sanctity.

The five moral systems, in Dr Haidt8217;s view, are innate psychological mechanisms that predispose children to absorb certain virtues. Because these virtues are learned, morality may vary widely from culture to culture, while maintaining its central role of restraining selfishness. In Western societies, the focus is on protecting individuals by insisting that everyone be treated fairly. In many other societies, selfishness is suppressed 8220;through practices, rituals and stories that help a person play a cooperative role in a larger social entity,8221; he said.