Response to Williams: Selfishness is not enough

Zygon 23 (4):413-416 (1988)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I agree with George Williams's most significant point: both questions and answers about our moral natures lie in our biological origins. He fails, however, to show that nature is morally evil and that therefore we should vigilantly resist it. The products of evolution are morally neutral, but the human moral sense is arguably a positive good. Morality is functional. It does not require ultimate justification in the sense of correspondence with or attack upon reality “out there.” It is an adaptation “intended” to make us social, and sociality—with its sense of right and wrong—makes us fitter than otherwise.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
47 (#471,734)

6 months
7 (#722,178)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Ruse
Florida State University

Citations of this work

Booknotes.R. M. - 1993 - Biology and Philosophy 8 (1):403-406.
Booknotes.R. M. - 1990 - Biology and Philosophy 5 (1):119-124.
Booknotes.R. M. - 1989 - Biology and Philosophy 4 (4):403-406.
Booknotes.R. M. - 1990 - Biology and Philosophy 5 (4):403-406.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Principia ethica.George Edward Moore - 1903 - Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications. Edited by Thomas Baldwin.
Principia Ethica.G. E. Moore - 1903 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 13 (3):7-9.
On Aggression.Konrad Lorenz, Robert Ardrey, Desmond Morris & Lionel Tiger - 1971 - Science and Society 35 (2):209-219.
Taking Darwin Seriously. A Naturalistic Approach to Philosophy.M. Ruse - 1988 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 50 (1):172-173.

View all 7 references / Add more references