Should an understanding of the theory of evolution have any effect on meta-ethics and if so is Michael Ruse inconsistent in rejecting meta-ethical realism whilst still defending a form of practical moral realism?

Glover, Nathan Harold Stephen (2013). Should an understanding of the theory of evolution have any effect on meta-ethics and if so is Michael Ruse inconsistent in rejecting meta-ethical realism whilst still defending a form of practical moral realism? University of Birmingham. M.Phil.

Preview

Glover13MPhil_1.pdf
PDF - Redacted Version
Download (1MB)

Abstract

This dissertation examines the implications of seeing moral beliefs and moral behaviour as evolutionary adaptations. In particular, it discusses whether or not an evolutionary explanation of human moral behaviour should lead us to reject the idea of objective moral facts. I agree with Michael Ruse that moral behaviour can be explained in naturalistic terms. However Ruse believes that this should not lead us to reject some forms of moral realism, as morality is a shared adaptation. My arguments against this are twofold. Firstly I believe that if morality is a product of natural forces then there will be variation between individuals’ moral sense; which should give us cause to reject all forms of moral realism. My second argument is that Ruse is internally inconsistent, and he is trying to ‘sneak’ moral facts back into the picture, having previously rejected them.

Type of Work:

Thesis (Masters by Research > M.Phil.)

Award Type:

Masters by Research > M.Phil.

Supervisor(s):