Abstract
Michael Ruse, in ‘Taking Darwin Seriously’ seeks to establish that taking Darwin seriously requires us to treat morality as subjective and naturalistic. I argue that, if morality is not objective, then we have no good reason for being moral if we can avoid detection and punishment. As a consequence, we will only continue to behave morally as long as we remain ignorant of Ruse's theory, that is, as long as the cat is not let out of the bag. Ruse offers a number of arguments to show that his theory can overcome such problems. I argue that they all fail. Ruse also argues that he can offer a naturalistic account of ethics which steps around the naturalistic fallacy and avoids the confusion of reasons with causes. His principal argument for this view is an analogy between spiritualism and morality. I argue that this analogy fails.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barrett, J.: 1991, ‘Really Taking Darwin and The Naturalistic Fallacy Seriously: An Objection to Rottschaefer and Martinsen’,Biology and Philosophy 6, 433–437.
Mackie, J.L.: 1982,The Miracle of Theism, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Murphy, J.: 1982,Evolution, Morality and the Meaning of Life. Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ.
Plato: 1955,The Republic, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Rottschaefer, W.A & Martinsen, D.: 1991, ‘Really Taking Darwin Seriously: An Alternative to Michael Ruse's Darwinian Metaethics’,Biology and Philosophy 5, 149–173.
Ruse, M.: 1984, ‘The Morality of the Gene’,The Monist 67, 167–199.
Ruse, M.: 1986a, ‘Evolutionary Ethics: A Phoenix Arisen’,Zygon 21, 95–112.
Ruse, M.: 1986b,Taking Darwin Seriously, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Ruse, M.: 1987, ‘Darwinism and Determinism’,Zygon 21, 419–422.
Ruse, M. & Wilson, E.: 1986, ‘Ethics as Applied Science’,Philosophy 61, 173–192.
Ullman-Margalit, E.: 1977,The Emergence of Norms, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Winch, P.: 1958, ‘The Idea of a Social Science’, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. (AlsoAmerican Philosophical Quarterly 1, 4, October 1964).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Woolcock, P. Ruse's Darwinian meta-ethics: A critique. Biol Philos 8, 423–439 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00857688
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00857688