2018/10/09 by Arnon Levy, Yair Levy
Neuroscience · Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment #Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation #Philosophical Ethics and Theory
paper · doi:10.1111/phpr.12554
Evolutionary debunking arguments appeal to selective etiologies of human morality in an attempt to undermine moral realism. But is morality actually the product of evolution by natural selection? Although debunking arguments have attracted considerable attention in recent years, little of it has been devoted to whether the underlying evolutionary assumptions are credible. In this paper, we take a closer look at the evolutionary hypotheses put forward by two leading debunkers, namely Sharon Street and Richard Joyce. We raise a battery of considerations, both empirical and theoretical, that combine to cast doubt on the plausibility of both hypotheses. We also suggest that it is unlikely that there is in the vicinity a plausible alternative hypothesis suitable for the debunker's cause.