What is the source of morality?

[Jim__]

30. Since we are all members of nested groups, the morality of all the groups is important.

Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 02:47 PM - Edit history (1)

A citizen of the US is also a member of a family. At the present time, the morality of the US has a fairly long and successful record. A US family that accepts and lives according to that morality, is probably not going to be wiped out due to a systemic weakness in their morality. However, the US is a large complex society, and families within the US can implement moralities within their family that are not completely compatible with the larger group morality. Say your family has a habit of violent in-group fights where family members often get killed. While members of your family may survive, the morality of your family will be eliminated, either because you kill each other off, or because the larger group imposes a different morality upon you - the larger group will not tolerate the in-family killings. Notice, that an in-family morality that is not completely compatible with the larger morality and does not violate the morality of the larger group, can be successful for this small group.

On the other hand, suppose the US adopts a new moral code, say pacifism. During the implementation phase of this new morality, it disarms all of its citizens and then eliminates all its own national defense systems. My bet is that this new, pacifistic morality would not survive. Other nations would seize territory and resources from the US and its citizens would likely be used for the benefits of the new locally dominant power. As the US loses its power over its territory and people, its moral system would be wiped out - not likely that the newly dominant groups would embrace it. It's worth noting that a family living in the current US could live a pacifistic lifestyle and would have a high likelihood of successfully passing on that morality - the larger group provides protection.

These are simplistic examples. Is the world more complex than that? Of course it is. But, what is undeniable is that people live in groups; and, in order to live in groups certain in-group behaviors have to be adhered to. What is also undeniable is that some of our closest genetic relatives live in groups too. To me, this implies that a common evolutionary ancestor lived in groups. Some of our behavior is inherited from this ancestor; I'd bet that the elementary behaviors necessary for living in groups come from that ancestor.