Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 1 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 2 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 MORAL ARCHETYPES: ETHICS IN PREHISTORY Roberto Thomas Arruda, D. Phil. 2019 (+55) 11 98381 3956 terra@vista.com.br Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 3 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents 3 Remarks 5 Abstract 6 CHAPTER I – Introduction 10 CHAPTER II Methods and Materials 13 1 – Situation 13 2 – Method 15 3 – Materials 16 4 – Process 18 CHAPTER III – Results 20 CHAPTER IV – Traditional Theories on the Origins of Morality 21 1The Divine Command Theory 23 2Objections to the Divine Command Theory 27 3Other Theories on the Origins of Morality 33 3.1The Kantian Theory 33 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 4 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 3.2 –The Utilitarian Theory 37 3.3 Virtue Ethics 39 3.4The Rights-Based Theories 41 3.5– The Moral Relativism 43 3.6 – The Moral Realism 46 CHAPTER V –An Evolutionary Understanding of the Origins of Morality 50 1Preliminary Assertions 50 2 – The Archetypal Nature of Moral Foundations 55 2.1– Introduction 55 2.2– Concept and Nature of Archetypes 62 2.3-Transmissibility of Archetypes 72 CHAPTER VI – The Basic Tenets of Morals in Prehistory 80 1 – Introduction 80 2 The Human Context 81 3 – The Context of the Imaginary and the Divine 98 CHAPTER VII – Recomposing a Paleolithic System of Morals 104 CHAPTER VIII – Relations between the Paleolithic Moral System and Modern Society 117-140 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 5 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 REMARKS We will adopt the MHRA (Modern Humanities Research Association Referencing Guide) Style 3rd edition1, concerning quotations and citations contained in this work. Exceptionally, in some citations, we may apply the APA (American Psychological Association) Style. All formatting features of this paper will follow the corresponding guidelines of the majority of the European and North American Universities, complemented, when necessary, by the ABNT-NBR rule #14724. We will use in this work, both American and British English language vocabulary, spelling, grammar, and semantics without restrictions or preference. 1 MHRA Style Guide Modern Humanities Research Association1 January 2013 • 120pp ISBN: 978-1-781880-09-8 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 6 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 ABSTRACT The philosophical tradition approaches to morals have their grounds predominantly on metaphysical and theological concepts and theories. Among the traditional ethics concepts, the most prominent is the Divine Command Theory (DCT). As per the DCT, God gives moral foundations to the humankind by its creation and through Revelation. Morality and Divinity are inseparable since the most remote civilization. These concepts submerge in a theological framework and are primarily accepted by most followers of the three Abrahamic traditions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam: the most considerable part of the human population. Holding faith and Revelation for its grounds, the Divine Command Theories are not strictly subject to the demonstration. The opponents to the Divine Command conception of morals, grounded in the impossibility of demonstration of its metaphysical and religious assumptions, have tried for many centuries (albeit unsuccessfully) to devalue its importance. They held the argument that it does not show material evidence and logical coherence and, for this reason, cannot be taken into account for scientific nor philosophical purposes. It is just a belief and, as so, should be understood. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 7 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Besides these extreme oppositions, many other concepts contravene the Divine Command theories, in one or another way, in part or in full. Many philosophers and social scientists, from the classic Greek philosophy up to the present date, for instance, sustain that morality is only a construct, and thus culturally relative and culturally determined. However, this brings many other discussions and imposes the challenge to determine what is the meaning of culture, which elements of culture are morally determinant, and finally, what are the boundaries of such relativity. Moral determinists claim that everything related to human behavior, including morality, is determined, once free will does not exist. More recently, modern thinkers argued that there is a strict science of morality. However, the scientific method alone, despite explaining several facts and evidence, cannot enlighten the entire content and full meaning of ethics. Morals' understanding requires a broader perception, and an agreement among philosophers, which they have never achieved. All of these questions have many different configurations depending on each philosophical strand, and start complex analysis and endless debates, as long as many of them are reciprocally conflictive. The universe and the atmosphere involving this research are the dominions of all these conceptual conflicts, observed from an objective and evolutionary standpoint. Irrespective of this circumstance and its intrinsic importance, however, these questions are far distant from the methodological approach of an analytical discussion Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 8 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 on objective morals, what is, indeed, the aim and scope of this work. We should briefly revisit these prominent traditional theories because this work shelters a comparative study, and its assumptions at least differ profoundly from all traditional theories. Therefore, it becomes necessary offering direct and specific elements of comparison to the reader for valid criticism, dispensing interruptive researches. However, even revisiting the traditional theories, for this comparative and critical exposure purpose, they will be kept by the side of our primary concerns, as "aliena materia." Irrespective of the validity of any or all of the elements of this discussion, and their meaning as the philosophical universe of our rtesearch, the purpose of this work is demonstrating ad justifying the existence and meaning of prehistoric moral archetypes arisen directly from the very fundamental social needs and efforts for survival. These archetypes are the definition of the essential foundation of ethics, its aggregation to the collective unconscious and corresponding logic organization and transmission to evolutionary stages of the human genome and different relations space-time, irrespective of any contemporary experience of the individuals. The system defined by these archetypes composes an evolutionary human social model. Is this a metaethical position? Yes, it is. Moreover, as in any metaethical reasoning, we should look carefully for the best and coherent routes, as the Analytical Philosophy offers them. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 9 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Thus, this work should reasonably demonstrate that morals are not a cultural product of the civilized men or modern societies and that despite being subject to several cultural relative aggregations and subtractions, its essential foundations are archetypal and have never structurally changed. This reasoning induces that morality is a first attribute of the "homo sapiens"; it is not a property and nor an accident: it integrates the human essence and belongs to the realm of the ontological human identity. The human phenomena is a continuing process, playing its role between random determination and free will, and we need to question how morality began and how did it come to us in the present. Key Words: archetype, culture, behavior, deities, ethics, evil, evolution, God, good, humanity, method, moral, morality, Paleolithic, philosophy, prehistory, religion, society . Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 10 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Evolution is a process that involves blind variation and selective retention.2 Demonstrating the archetypal structure of all the existing moral systems is a complex assignment. However, is this demonstration important at all? For sure, it is. The philosophical praxis and the scientific investigation limited to the elements shown by the current time-space situation often are vulnerable to flaw conclusions. The same applies to observations of time-space situations different from the current one, without the proper methodological severity. Two very clear examples are applicable. The first one comes from the classic Greek philosophy, stating that initially, humanity was much better than it is in the present (400 BC), and adopting the theory of the three regressive ages (gold, bronze, and iron). The opposite happened with some radical contemporary historical materialists, and their claim that present humankind is much better than the ancient societies deprived of science and technology, grounded on primitive infrastructures and living in the shadows of ignorance, violence, and mysticism. Both assertions are the inconsistent result of modern biases and do not find any kind of reasonable coherence nor any possibility of demonstration. Significant parts of the 2 T.D. Campbell "Variation and Selective Retention inSocio-cultural Evolution," in H.R. Barringer, B.I. Blanksten, and R.W. Mack, eds., Social Change in Developing AreasNew York: Schenkman, 1965. – 32. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 11 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 available studies on ethics bring different and recurrent biases in their formulation. The concepts, elements, and claims contained in this study in no way are new nor reveal unknown objects. No discoveries, revelations, unveiled realities, astonishing theories, nor complex reasoning, airtight language proper for erudition, will be found here. Philosophy is not an investigative science nor an exercise of complexity, but only a continued praxis whose intention is only thinking about things in the best way. Philosophers do not have the need nor have the opportunity to be unique. They need to be coherent. This work aims to suggest a proper way of thinking about morality without the contamination of metaphysical issues: a philosophic way to treat a philosophic subject from an objective position. This choice is the ground of the simplicity (and difficulty) of this work. In the program "Introduction to Philosophy," at the University of Edinburgh, Prof. David Ward and Prof. Duncan Pritchard suggest, through their pedagogical methodology, that academic works, as far as possible, should be written to everyone's comprehension and not exclusively to the highly specialized academic dialect speakers. In many strands of Analytical Philosophy, this simplicity is the vest of clarity, as exposed by Matthew McKeever: In trying to understand the vagaries of language use or of morals or of reality itself, analytic philosophers frequently produce these sorts of creative juxtapositions of ideas the mere contemplation of which should appeal to anyone with a taste for bold visions of reality. So next time you have a yen for philosophy, but are put off by turgid prose and numbered premises, Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 12 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 think about persevering, in the hope that you might find, with Keats, both truth and beauty.3 One of the most debated assignments of epistemology and ontology ever known is summarizable in only three words: "Cogito, ergo sum" René Descartes (1596 1650). Descartes's motto is a pursuit of philosophical truth, and this is beauty. For sure, the reasoning and demonstration we will adopt must consider an appropriate and integrative methodological framework not limited to the philosophic thinking, nor the fragmented available scientific elements resulting from the empirical observation of the material reality. Along with human history, many different theories and concepts looked forward understanding and explaining the moral phenomena and, as long as all of them means a valid and constructive contribution to the enlightenment of these extremely complex studies, none of them is to be ignored, wrongly understood, despised or referred to with stereotypes, personal bias or prejudice. They are the universe of this research. For these reasons, it is not possible to advance with this work without revisiting this so rich heap of the human culture, even though in a very simplified and concise way imposed by the very narrow boundaries of this study. We will try to summarize this visit, making it as short as possible. After arriving at the outcomes of this paper, it will be possible for anyone to analyze the degree of compatibility between them and the traditional philosophical theories, exercising his criticism, and building up his autonomous opinion 3McKeever,Matthew – The Beauty of Analytic Philosophy. https://mipmckeever.weebly.com/things-ive-written.html Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 13 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER II METHOD AND MATERIALS 1. Situation. In this work, we understand "prehistory" as the Paleolithic period (3.3 million to 11,650 years ago), from the earliest known use of stone tools by hominins to the end of the Pleistocene. We may eventually take into account earlier periods when the subject recommends, and our research finds material elements. The reasons for electing the Paleolithic as the chronological universe of this study are various. The most general one is the fact that the adopted methodology looks for contexts the more remote as possible, totally isolated from any trace of the influence of elements of civilization whatsoever, and the near as possible to the very early advent of humankind. We are talking about very remote archetypes. Paleolithic is the earliest period of the Homo sapiens development and the most prolonged phase of humankind's history. One of the most critical features of the period is the successive evolutionary episodes of the human species, causing many changes in the human genome, going from an apelike creature, or near human, to the definite Homo sapiens. Evolution is particularly vital to the neuroscientific studies on the development of the human brain and the corresponding mechanisms involved in the constitution of the more remote Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 14 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 archetypes. During the Paleolithic, the born of humankind happened, and only in this time window, we can contemplate its very original features. The human population during all this long period was very scarce. Modern scholars calculated this population in no more than one million individuals. Small nomad groups progressively spread for a very extensive geographical area. The Paleolithic societies practiced an economy based on a hunt-gathering activity. Humans hunted wild animals for meat and gathered food, firewood, and materials for their tools, clothes, or shelters. Factors of extreme importance to the existence of any moral principles began during the period, such as the capacity to abstraction, the ability to the semiotic interpretation of symbols, and the born of oral communication using sound and visual codes – the first logical language traces. The conjunction of all these features avoided the dispersal of the material elements that are useful to the constitution of the contexts intended to ground our analysis, despite the vast geographic area explored by our remote ancestors. Our chronological universe ends with the advent of the Neolithic period, 11,650 years ago. The advent of the Neolithic period brought a full stop to all these social features because of what scientists call "the Neolithic revolution," represented by the emergence of agriculture, the seating of populations in defined territories, and the beginning of urbanization. All the Neolithic elements are entirely strange to the primitive contexts we are looking for and, even as we consider them as part of the prehistory, for our work, the Neolithic is a "modern period." Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 15 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Therefore, just in this study, prehistory ended 11,650 years ago. All these ingredients will help us with the definition of the several contexts demanded by the adopted methodology. 2. Method We will predominantly adopt Analytic Philosophy concepts based on epistemological methods. In this case, it will mean emphasizing precision, cogency, and thoroughness about a specific topic and deemphasizing all imprecise or offhanded discussion of broad topics. The essential characteristics to be adopted are: (i) an emphasis on clarity; (ii) employ of rigorous argument; (iii) the disregard of metaphysics, irrespective its relations with human behavioral matters; iv) contempt of obscurantism, of the imaginary, bias or supposition whatsoever; v) sound arguments, besides the inclusion of auxiliary contributions of many other non-philosophical sources. The methodology admits the constant use of coherent reasoning and scientific elements, such as but not limited to archeology, social and paleoanthropology, history, paleontology, social and cognitive psychology, behavioral sciences, and many others. Referring to these scientific elements, we will prefer the most accessible and simple ones, because their adoption in this philosophical study is complementary and aims only to ground the validity and cogency of arguments with known elements of the experimental empiric world. The most cogent methodological reasons for adopting the auxiliary elements are: (i) the acceptance of induction, (ii) few material elements, (iii) features of the object (antiquity, nomad populations, and absence of written and urban material elements). Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 16 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 3. Materials Looking at the remote past, Philosophy does not walk alone anymore. Presently, Archeology and Anthropology find their grounds on advanced theories and specific methods and occupy a relevant position in all social sciences issues in a very far sophisticated manner than in the past. The innovative methodologies of current multiscalar archeological researches offer much deeper perspectives on ancient changes on human social structures and bring material evidence of variation affecting human behavior and interaction in very distant time-space contexts. The National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America published the complete article "Archaeology as a social science" by Michael E. Smith4, Gary M. Feinman5, Robert D. Drennan6, Timothy Earle7, and Ian Morris8 in which the authors affirm that For those interested in modeling long-term change in socioeconomic phenomena or understanding the deep background of 4 Associate Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida. https://www.pnas.org/content/109/20/7617 5 MacArthur Curator of Anthropology, The Field Museum 6 Distinguished Professor at the Department of Anthropology of the University of Pittsburgh 7 Chair of the Department of Anthropology, and President of the Archaeology Division of the American Anthropological Association 8 Department of Classics. Stanford University Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 17 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 modern practices, the days of fanciful speculation about the past on merely commonsense grounds or of uncritical extrapolation from the present are over. The dirt-derived findings of archaeology are now providing an empirically sound account of what people did, and how they organized their affairs, in the distant past.9 Our argument will take into account to have these demonstrated empirical elements as its ground. The most important contribution comes from all the nonlinguistic semiotic contents that these sciences can offer to become interpreted, as human remains, ancient burials, human sacrifices, animal remains, the ritual remains artifacts, locations inhabited in the period, and material elements with symbolic semiotic content (such as petroglyphs and others). 4. Process. How this fragmented evidence and scattered elements could be relevant and determinant in this study, aggregating conclusions to the philosophic reasoning? The contextualization method takes place here. This method, in its several variations, has been successfully applied in philosophy and social sciences. The start point is the definition of various specific and independent contexts composed by evident elements of the same space-time situation brought from the contribution of several sciences. In each of these contexts, the necessary 9 Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 May 15; 109(20): 7617– 7621.Published online 2012 Apr 30. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1201714109/ and Michael Tomasello // A Natural History Of Human Morality, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/73681/1/bjpsbooks.wordpress.comMichael%20Tomasello%20% (accessed June 30, 2019). Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 18 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 relations of causation and correlation are logically deemed to be mandatorily present (employing preexistent evidence or knowledge), despite being still unknown. From this point on, deductive and inductive processes can cogently demonstrate the existence or inexistence of the object of the research. In the case of this research, it will work like the epistemological example of the soccer match. The soccer match occurred two years ago, and it is the context of our research. This context will be our framework. The only material element that we have is a colored photo. In the photo, we may see some of the players in an apparent movement, a part of the field, some spectators, a man with a black uniform very different from those used by the players, who supposedly could be the referee – and nothing else. However, we are searching for a ball, and the picture does not show a ball. The existence of a ball is a "sine qua non" condition for the existence of a soccer play in progress (a particular material element without which the context could not exist). Therefore, very cogently, we may affirm: "a ball is being used in this match," despite it not being visible. The method adopts the epistemological idea that "the demonstration of the existence of the whole contains the demonstration of the existence of all its essential parts." This inferential knowledge is considered by Bertrand Russel,10 once an investigation of the reality observed by this work cannot use any experience-based interaction, and depends on many referential and descriptive elements. 10 Russel, Betrrand - "Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description" Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 11: 108–128., 1912, The Problems of Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 19 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 In the application of this method, we will build coherent contexts with fragmented evidence related to the same space-time situation, in such a way that none of these contexts could be possible without the existence of moral tenets – the ball that with we will play. We are looking for the ball, and in this case, the ball is any moral tenet essential to the existence of the context. After their identification, all the moral foundations we can bring to the evidence may be organized and arranged in a moral system: the supposed and possibly existing moral system of prehistory. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 20 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER III RESULTS In this paper, we will: a) Argue that Ethics is a multidisciplinary and autonomous philosophical matter. Despite its interactions with other philosophical structures, such as metaphysics and ontology, we may better understand it when we see it as a social phenomenon subject to the analytical observation, from a specific methodological view. b) Demonstrate that morality is an archetypal system and keeps unchanged its foundations since the most remote human experience, being plausible to consider it as a first attribute of the "homo sapiens," albeit being somehow cultural relative and adaptable to social and technological evolution. c) Demonstrate that understanding morality imposes looking back at the origins of this archetype and its remote contents. d) Demonstrate how this archetype evolved up to the present days through genetic and neural evolutionary mechanisms. e) Recompose the prehistoric moral system and compare it with modern moral, social, economic, and political models and behaviors. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 21 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER IV TRADITIONAL THEORIES ON ORIGINS OF MORALITY 1– The Divine Command Theory. Divine Command Theory (also known as "theological voluntarism," "theistic subjectivism," or simply DCT or DCM) is a meta-ethical theory that claims that morals are a consequence of God's wish and that there is a universal moral obligation of obedience to God's commands. Revelation gives God's commands to humankind, and its content resides in the sacred books. We may understand DCT as belonging to moral absolutism, which holds that humanity is subject to absolute standards that determine when acts are right or wrong. Moral absolutism, in turn, falls under the umbrella of deontological ethics, which teaches that actions are moral or not based on their adherence to given rules. That is the reason why DCT looks very close to the philosophy of law. The divine command theory says that an act is moral if it follows the command of God. God's commands dictate right and wrong-what He says to do is right, and what He says not to do is wrong. Human intent, human nature, nor human character are the basis of morality. The consequence of the action, as well, does not qualify its moral content, which finds It is foundations solely on what God says. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 22 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Most followers of the three Abrahamic traditions have universally accepted this theocentric, metaphysic, and deontological-grounded theory: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The specific content of these divine commands varies according to the particular religion and the particular views of the individual theorist, which gives specific relativity to the concepts of commands keeping, however, the uniform structure of its foundations. Many versions of the theory emerged since its original formulations. The theory claims that moral truth does not exist independently of God and that his divine commands determine morality. Harder conceptions of the DCT states that God's command is the only tenet that a good action is morally valuable and, last but not least, the more concessive variations indicate divine command as a vital component within more significant reasoning. Being somehow relative, the DCT had the full acceptance of many prominent philosophers and theologians, mostly in the Christian world, during the last twenty centuries, including St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, Rene Descartes, William of Ockham, Blaise Pascal, Martin Luther, Philip Quinn, and Robert Adams. The foundations of the DCT, as well, have permeated the Muslim tradition for centuries11, albeit modern scholars refute the contemporary ideas that Islam is a defining case of ethical voluntarism.12 Considering that the traditional moral concepts of the Jewish culture are 11 Abdullah Sliti (2014) Islamic Ethics: Divine Command Theory in Arabo-Islamic Thought, Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations, 25:1, 132-134, DOI: 10.1080/09596410.2013.842089 12 Al-Attar, Mariam. (2010). Islamic Ethics: Divine Command Theory in Arabo-Islamic Though. 112 Avi Sagi an Daniel Statman Divine Command Morality and Jewish Tradition in The Journal of Religious. Ethics Vol. 23, No. 1 (Spring, 1995), pp. 39-67 / 0.4324/9780203855270 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 23 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 theocentric, as they are in Christianity and the Islamic culture, for sure, the theory found its place among Jewish philosophers and religious thinkers. However, nowadays, as it happens with Islamic thinking, modern Jewish scholars refuse the idea of generalization and permanence of such influence. Avi Sagi and Daniel Statman13 state that we should expect that DCT theories were founded in Judaism, considering their presence in Christianity and Islam. However, the authors demonstrate that in the Jewish texts, this presence is not confirmed, and, unlikely this supposition, some texts are opposed to the DCT concepts. Attempting to demonstrate the absence of the theory, they claim that the moral and rational character of God according to Judaism, as well as the rational nature of "halakha," do not configure sufficient grounds for accepting DCT thesis. Irrespective of its many variations, the foundations of all Divine Command philosophical doctrines initially link to the central idea of the existence of a Natural Law, one of the most controversial matters of human culture and human thinking since its early beginning. Formally, the natural law is understandable with simplicity, and we may reduce it to the announcement of its original foundations. Nevertheless, the importance of these concepts to any philosophical exercise related to morals imposes widespread attention to their meaning, moreover because the concept of morality under the natural law theory is not subjective. Therefore, the definition of what is 13 Avi Sagi and Daniel Statman Divine Command Morality and Jewish Tradition in The Journal of Religious Ethics Vol. 23, No. 1 (Spring, 1995), pp. 39-67 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 24 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 'right' and what is 'wrong' is the same for everyone, everywhere, as it persists in other deontological theories.14 This approach of DCT with natural law traditions accentuates its deontological structure and brings an inevitable immersion in practical ethics, as explained by Felix Ayemere Airoboman15: Divine command theory seems to blur the difference between law and morality. It posits its claims as if God's law stands for human morality. What God has given a man is law just as a nation gives its statutes to its citizens through its constitution. Failure to comply with the law either of man or God is backed with the threat. But morality springs from the free will or free action of the moral agent, independent of law or threat. However, divine command theory has the merit of addressing some problems of morality inherent in other ethical theories Divine command theory, as well as natural law ideas, are widely held to be refuted in many ways. In this paper, we will not discuss the validity of the oppositions to the Divine Command concepts from the standpoint of any bias linked to conflicts between religion, philosophy, and science, usually taken into account in this discussion. From the eyes of the modern Analytic Philosophy strand adopted by the author, science and religion should not conflict. Science is a mental process from human 14 Brittany McKenna in Natural Law Theory: Definition, Ethics & Examples https://study.com/academy/lesson/natural-law-theorydefinition-ethics-examples.html#transcriptHeader 15 Ewanlen. A Journal of Philosophical Inquiry. "3. 1.1 (2017): 17–31. Print Felix Ayemere Airoboman A Critical Reflection on Divine Command Theory of Morality Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 25 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 rationality and never will succeed in denying the existence of God. On the other hand, holding or denying science has never been the meaning or scope of Religion. The conflict between science and religion is mostly a very mistaken personal or ideological bias from philosophers, scientists, or religious thinkers. Eduard Osborne Wilson16 once said that it is not productive opposing Science and Religion because they are the two most powerful forces in the World. Abdulla Galadari17 emphasizes that Scientists would not ever be Scientists if they are not Theologians at the same time and vice versa. They are complementary, attesting and justifying one for each other The most vigorous and most known opposition to the Divine Command Theory is a repetitive argument of implicit refutation known as "the Euthyphro Dilemma." The Dilemma rests on the followed questions in a Socratic dialogue whose events occur in the weeks before his trial (399 BC), between Socrates and Euthyphro, who came to present charges of murder against his own father. Socrates asks Euthyphro: "Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because God wills them?" Each of these two possibilities leads to consequences that the divine command theorist cannot accept. Whichever way the divine command theorist answers this question, he would be refuting his theory. It is possible to formulate this argument as follows: 16 Eduard Osborne Wilson in https://www.age-of-thesage.org/science-versus-religion-debate.html 17 Galadari, Abdulla. (2011). Science vs. Religion: The Debate Ends Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 26 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 (1) If divine command theory is true then either (i) morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, or (ii) morally good acts are morally good because God wills them. (2) If (i) morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, then they are morally good independent of God's will. (3) It is not the case that morally good acts are morally good independent of God's will Therefore: (4) If (ii) morally good acts are morally good because God wills them, then there is no reason either to care about God's moral goodness or to worship him. (5) There are reasons both to care about God's moral goodness and to worship him. Therefore: (6) It is not the case that (ii) morally good acts are morally good because God wills them. Therefore: (7) Divine command theory is false. This argument is the kind of "battle of syllogisms," widespread in some philosophical discussions. Some of them shelter important philosophic truths. Some others, however, are mistaken, just useless or sterile fallacies. An example is a popular argument called "a brain in a VAT," offered by the radical determinists and other skeptics. Anyhow, all "battle of syllogisms" have in common the essential feature of being strictly limited to formal logic in a linguistic format. Doing philosophy wearing this straightjacket is the same as conceiving the human thinking as being like a simple digital calculator: something that understands all about syntax, none about Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 27 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 semantics, and that is useless in semiotics once being blind before the real world. Many philosophers answered the Euthyphro Dilemma, and the most highlighted responses are the arguments known as "Bite the bullet," "Human Nature," and "Alstons Advice." Despite being an essential reference to a more in-depth study on the DCT, there is no space left in this work to go over and over with this specific subject. Furthermore, this is an endless debate. Anyhow, the Euthyphro Dilemma, irrespective of being the most "taken into account" argument opposed to the Divine Command Theory, is not the only one nor the most considerable. Several others oppose with variable arguments. Objections to the Divine Command Theory. Semantic objection. Michael Austin18, reports that the Philosopher William Wainwright considered a challenge to the theory on semantic grounds, arguing that "being commanded by God" and "being obligatory" do not mean the same thing, contrary to what the theory suggests. Wainwright believed it demonstrated that the theory should not be used to 18 Austin, Michael (21 August 2006). "Divine Command Theory". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 3 April 2012). Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 28 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 formulate assertions about the meaning of obligation. Wainwright also noted that divine command theory might imply that one can only have moral knowledge if one knows God. Edward Wierenght argued that, if this is the case, the theory seems to deny atheists and agnostics moral knowledge. Hugh Storer Chandler has challenged the theory based on modal ideas of what might exist in different worlds. He suggested that, even if one accepts that being commanded by God and being morally right are the same, they might not be synonyms because they might be different in other possible worlds. The epistemological objection. According to the epistemological objection to divine command ethics, if morality is grounded in God's commands, then those who do not believe in God cannot have moral knowledge. Without moral knowledge, they do not hold any moral responsibility and have not any obligation related to God's wishes. Moreover, In terms of this objection, DCT is deficient because certain groups of moral agents lack epistemic access to God's commands, for many reasons, mostly because of the communication problem. How does God communicate to us his commandments? These questions started a long and complex discussion between philosophers and theologians about the communication of God's commands in such a way that we could understand if God has or not communicated his will to us. This objection has been raised– and answered before. However, the objection persists, it is reasonable to argue that it has not been substantially improved upon and does not deserve a second hearing. Whether or not God's commands provide the basis of moral facts does not imply that unbelievers cannot have moral knowledge Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 29 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 since the ability to know that something is true does not depend on our ability to know what makes it true.19 The Omnipotence Objection The modified Divine Command Theory faces the problem of the inference that, somehow, God could command acts of cruelty and other abhorrent behaviors. The DCT defenders strongly deny this inference. However, the opponents of DCT argue that this denial is not coherent because it would contravene the assertion that God is omnipotent. If God is capable of creating, extinguish, and modify everything, the supposition that he could not determine these abhorrent commands is a contradiction. Thomas Aquinas (1225 –1274) responds to this understanding of omnipotence based on the argument of possibility. According to the philosopher, the meaning of "all' is not an absolute concept. Once this concept is a relative attribute, it should attempt to the principles of possibility and adequacy. Thus, God is capable of doing everything possible and adequate for his Divine Plan. For this reason, God never acts in a contradictory, false, or anyhow abhorrent manner. Pursuant Aquinas, the nature of sin, such as giving abhorrent commands, is contrary to omnipotence. Hence, God being unable to do immoral actions is not a limit on his power, but rather, this comes from his omnipotence. In other terms, Aquinas claims that God 19 Danaher, J. SOPHIA (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-0170622-9 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 30 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 cannot command cruelty precisely because he is omnipotent.20 The Omnibenevolence Objection. To the nihilists, God's quality of Omnibenevolence makes logically evident a limit to his Omnipotence; thus, anyhow, it is a contradiction. Nevertheless, the problem of Omnibenevolence is formulated because, if all actions containing a positive moral value is a consequence of God's commands, this is the same as God doing precisely what he commands himself to do, what is considered an incoherent conclusion. Facing the argument, William Wainwright argued that, although God does not act because of his commands, it is still logical to say that God has reasons for his actions. He proposes that God is motivated by what is morally good and, when he commands what is morally good, it becomes morally obligatory.21 In this meaning, God is in "virtue of himself," and all his acts are cases of agent-causation. The Autonomy Objection Claiming that any concept of good is whatever God determines it to be, the DCT somehow denies the autonomous human structure and takes morality into 20 Austin, Michael W. in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy https ://www.iep.utm.edu/divine-c/#H7 21 Wainwright, William – Philosophy of Religion Cengage Learning; 2 edition (August 4, 1998)p.101 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 31 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 account only as something entirely dependent on God's will. From this argument, many questions arise related to human moral liberty, identity, and responsibility, having reduced the possibility of independent thought and free will sharply. Michael W. Austin22, at Eastern Kentucky University, defends the DCT considering: We are no longer self-legislating beings in the moral realm, but instead followers of a moral law imposed on us from the outside. In this sense, autonomy is incompatible with Divine Command Theory, insofar as on the theory we do not impose the moral law upon ourselves. However, Adams (1999) argues that Divine Command Theory and moral responsibility are compatible because we are responsible for obeying or not obeying God's commands, correctly understanding and applying them, and adopting a self-critical stance concerning what God has commanded us to do. Given this, we are autonomous because we must rely on our Independent judgments about God's goodness and what moral laws are inconsistent with God's commands. Additionally, it seems that a divine command theorist can still say that we impose the moral law on ourselves by our agreeing to subject ourselves to it once we come to understand it, even if it ultimately is grounded in God's commands. 22 Austin, Michael W. in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy https ://www.iep.utm.edu/divine-c/#H7 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 32 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 The Pluralism Objection Another objection refers to the fact that the notions of God are many, and for sure relative to very different historical and cultural elements. Moreover, many understandings of God may be conflictive and follow various foundations. A moral theory grounded in God's will cannot be universal, and so is always limited to each existing concept of the Divine, declares the pluralist argument. Martin Austin23 believes that the argument contains a flaw for the reason that the existence of many religions and different concepts of God and divinity does not mean that they should be in conflict or are reciprocally excluding in such a way that the moral foundations become incompatible. He points out that this subject involves personal analysis and proper choices and that anyone must decide by himself which understanding of the divine to adopt. The same way, he should find which understanding of divine commands, within her particular tradition, is the most compelling. He compares this situation with the deliberative process of a secular moralist facing a decision about which moral principles to elect to govern his life, among many moral traditions and several interpretations within those traditions. Despite denying the axiological validity of the theory, the author considers that it is consistent with the belief that many religions contain moral truth and the same moral foundations. This fact makes it possible to know our moral obligations apart from revelation, tradition, and 23 Austin, Michael W. in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy https ://www.iep.utm.edu/divine-c/#H7 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 33 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 religious practice. "It is consistent with Divine Command Theory that we can come to see our obligations in this and many other ways, and not merely through a religious text, religious experience, or religious tradition," says Austin (op.cit) 3 – Other Theories on the Origins of Morality. 3.1The Kantian Theory Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804), one of the most influential philosophers at any time, brought to Western Metaphysics one of its most structured conceptions. It is impossible analyzing Kant's Ethics theory without a first general understanding of his complex philosophic thinking. The Prussian philosopher understood any philosophy as driven to the solution of three questions: "What is the world?" What should I do?" "What may I hope?" 24 His Ethics theory is the philosopher's epistemological answer to the second question: "What should I do?" This understanding of Philosophy derives from his concept of three "ideas of reason," which are the world, the self, and God. As far as the "world" is concerned, In the Critique of Pure Reason, he considers that theoretical reason itself cannot prove their reality. According to this concept, "they are 24 Kant, Immanuel (Critique of Pure Reason-1781). Translated by J. M. D. Meiklejohn -web edition published by eBooks@Adelaide. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 34 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 not constitutive, but are regulative, as they add systematic unity and coherence to our experience. Since they are related to morals in significant ways, they have immense practical importance".25 Referring to the "self," he takes very complex reasoning that finally offers his conception of "humans as rational beings, worthy of dignity and respect. Anyone should treat Humanity as an end, not merely a means. To treat someone as a mere means to an end is to use that person to advance one's interest. Nevertheless, to treat a person as an end is to respect that person's dignity by allowing each the freedom to choose for oneself."26 Kant, as an "ens realissimum or most real being", takes the notion of God into account. This most real being is also considered by reason to be a necessary being, that is, something that exists necessarily instead of merely contingently.27 From this rational spectrum, Kant brings his absolutist deontological concept of morals, stepping aside from any consequentialist or normative ideas. No moral codes are necessary because morality does not depend on specific rules defining what is good, or not good, referring to human actions. What determines the moral value of an 25 Chapter 23, 26 You Would Not Be Acting Autonomously As You Had No Control ... (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.coursehero.com/file/p2k8bd1/You-would-not-beacting-autonomously-as27 Immanuel Kant Internet Encyclopedia Of Philosophy. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantview/ Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 35 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 action is only the intention: an act only is morally good if its performance envisages the sake of duty. Kant organized his ethical assumptions around the notion of a "categorical imperative," which is a universal ethical principle, consisting of the determination that everyone should always respect the humanity in others and that one should only act by rules that could hold for everyone. Kant argued that moral law is a truth of reason, and hence that the same moral law binds all rational creatures. Thus in answer to the question, "What should I do?" Kant replies that we should act rationally28, by the universal moral law. Any person may find the moral law by himself, once it is a part of the reason. Hence, the moral law is a predicate of human reason, in such a way that only one moral law binds all rational beings. This approach is the answer to the question, "What should I do?" The supreme principle of morality is named "categorical imperative," meaning the foundation we must follow, which is rational, and unconditional. Despite any natural desires or inclinations, we may have to the contrary. The submission of the humankind to the "categorical imperative" is entirely independent of anyone's features or experience. The "categorical imperative" is the scale to assign the moral validity for any action: "Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."29 The intention is the 28 Kant, Immanuel | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantview/ 29 Ethics According To Immanuel Kant Ethics Sage. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.ethicssage.com/2017/05/ethics-according-toimmanuel-kant.html Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 36 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 background of the human activity defined by the "maxim" of our acts. The duty derives from the maxim, the origin of all the reasons to act. The action in itself cannot be morally qualified. Therefore, when we ask, "What am I doing and why?" we are talking about the relation between the intention and the maxim. The second imperative is named the "hypothetical imperative," "that is a command that also applies to us in virtue of our having a rational will, but not simply in virtue of this. It requires us to exercise our wills in a certain way, given we have antecedently willed an end. A hypothetical imperative is thus a command in a conditional form30." A feature of the moral conduct is the "goodwill," understood in Kant's terms as a will whose decisions are wholly determined by moral demands or, as he often refers to this, by the Moral Law. Human beings inevitably feel this Law as a constraint on their natural desires, which is why such Laws, as applied to human beings, are imperatives and duties.31 When the Moral Law is decisive to a human will, it is the thought of duty grounds it. Kant also argued that his ethical theory requires belief in free will, God, and the immortality of the soul. Although we cannot know these things, reflection on the moral law leads to a justified belief in them, which amounts to a kind rational faith. Thus in answer to the question, "What may I hope?" Kant replies that we may hope that our souls are 30 Ibidem 31 Kant's Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 37 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 immortal and believe that32 God designed the world by principles of justice. 3.2 The Utilitarian Theory Utilitarianism is a Normative Ethics consequentialist theory, claiming that the happiness of the most considerable number of people in the society is considered the human experience. Human actions are morally right if its consequences lead to happiness, the highest good. Pleasure and pain are the two sovereign masters governing the concepts of right and wrong. The action is right when it brings pleasure and wrong if it ends in unhappiness (pain). Since the inter-relation between actions and their happy or unhappy outcomes depends on the circumstances, no moral principle is absolute or necessary in itself. The word "utility" is used to mean general well-being or happiness.33 Emerged with the Enlightenment, its creator, Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832), gives the best concise description of Utilitarianism: Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand, the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. 32 Kant, Immanuel | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantview/ 33 What Is Utilitarianism? Definition And Meaning .., http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/utilitarianism.html (accessed June 30, 2019). Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 38 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 They govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think: every effort we can make to throw off our subjection, will serve but to demonstrate and confirm it. In words, a man may pretend to abjure their empire: but in reality, he will remain subject to it all the while. The principle of utility recognizes this subjection and assumes it for the foundation of that system, the object of which is to rear the fabric of felicity by the hands of reason and law. Systems which attempt to question it, deal in sounds instead of sense, in caprice instead of reason, in darkness instead of light".34 Considered a hedonistic theory, sustained actively "that the purpose of morality and laws was to promote the welfare of citizens and to maximize human happiness, not to enforce specific intuited unchangeable divine moral laws that label actions as wrong in themselves, without regard to their consequences. Bentham also believed that his utilitarian ethical theory was implicit in what we call moral 'common sense' or "intuitions" because utilitarian considerations are underlying all our moral intuitions."35 For many authors, as Ian Shapiro36, Utilitarianism, along with Marxism and Nozick's Libertarianism, is an extreme 34 Bentham, Jeremy – An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation – New York, Hafner Publishing Co. 1948 Chapter 1 Of the Principle of Utility. 35 Hare's Preference Utilitarianism: An Overview And Critique, http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101317320130002000 (accessed June 30, 2019). 36 The Moral Foundations of Politics – Yale University Press – ISBN 978-0-300-18545-4 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 39 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 theory, in the measure that his author has sustained it up to their last arguments and under any circumstances. Following the creator, John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873), whose father had been a Bentham's disciple, adopted the Utilitarianism but introduced many moderating and adaptive features in his book "Utilitarianism" (1861), reaching a better approach with the libertarian ideas ( "The Liberty" – 1859) that made him become one of the most influential philosophers in the Twentieth Century political thinking. 3.3 Virtue Ethics. Virtue ethics is a part of Traditional Ethics, and currently represents one of the significant approaches in Normative Ethics. Its central concept, in a very simplified way, could be considered as the assertion taking into account the virtues, or moral character, as a causation for the human moral acts. For sure, it is an individual-based theory, and unlikely the deontological or the objectivist approaches emphasizing duties, rules, and objective standards, or the consequentialist theories based on the consequences of actions, the Virtue Ethics grounds itself on two essential ideas: the Virtue and the Practical Wisdom. The Virtue: Pursuant Aristotle, a virtuous person is the one who has ideal character traits. These traits derive from natural internal tendencies, but need to be nurtured; however, once established, they will become stable. Therefore, we may see Virtue as a trait of character, aggregate to the essence of an individual, and determining how he should act in any circumstances. This individual behavioral feature does not relate to the act itself, but the reasons for Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 40 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 action will qualify it. To act with virtue means taking for the relevant reason for the moral behavior, the assumption that "to do otherwise would be dishonest." This character-based approach to morality assumes that "we acquire virtue through practice. By practicing being honest, brave, just, generous, and so on, a person develops an honorable and moral character, and learns how to make the right choice when faced with ethical challenges."37 The Practical Wisdom: The second essential idea sustaining the Virtual Ethics Theory is Practical Wisdom. We may understand it as meaning the same as the "phronesis" considered by Greek Philosophy. It is a very complex concept, but Barry Schwartz38 and Kenneth Sharpe39 offer a simplified and very understandable description, comparing Practical Wisdom to the set of skills that an artisan needs to build a boat or a house, or that a jazz musician needs to improve. They are selective and intentional efforts to achieve a chosen result, as near as possible of perfection. The difference resides in the fact that practical wisdom is not a technical or artistic skill. It is a moral skill-a skill that 37Virtue Ethics Ethics Unwrapped, https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/virtue-ethics (accessed June 30, 2019). 38 The Dorwin Cartwright Professor of Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College. 39 The William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Political Science at Swarthmore College Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 41 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 enables us to discern how to treat people in our everyday social activities.40 As far as Western Philosophy is concerned, we may find Virtue Ethics' origins in Plato and Aristotle's Philosophy. In the East, this theory relates to Mencius and Confucius. From classic Philosophy until the beginning of the Enlightenment, the theory played a crucial role in all axiological discussions. When Determinism and Utilitarianism started, they stepped aside the Virtue Ethics ideas. However, it reborn in the Anglo-American Philosophy after the Second World War, and any contemporary axiological analysis considers it. 3.4 – The rights-based Theory. Some contemporary philosophers, as Ronald Myles Dworkin(1931-2013) claimed that morality originates from rights and, in the last instance, that moral rights are grounded on the idea of correspondence and causality between duty and natural rights. Humans are supposed to act according to the moral rights by them possessed as a natural consequence of their human conditions. These rights are an individual and inalienable property of the human being. To any individual right corresponds a social duty of accepting and respecting such rule; in other terms, the individual natural right causes the social duty of respect and preservation. 40 Practical Wisdom: The Right Way to Do the Right Thing Riverhead Books; Ed: Reprint (2011 ISBN-10: 1594485437ISBN-13: 9781594485435 p17. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 42 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 The theory holds a patient-centered deontological structure, similar to some post-Kantian concepts, and claims that the foundations of morals are not originated from the social experience, but instead in human nature itself. The particular notion of what "right" could mean is relevant to distinguish the theory from other libertarian concepts. John Leslie Mackie, (1917–1981), an Australian philosopher, explains this peculiar meaning: A right, in the most critical sense, is the conjunction of freedom and a claim-right. That is, if someone, A, has the moral right to do X, not only is he entitled to do X if he chooses he is not morally required not to do X, but he is also protected in his doing of X others are morally required not to interfere or prevent him. This way of putting it suggests that duties are at least logically prior to rights. This sort of right is built up out of two facts about duties: that A does not have a duty not to do X and that others have a duty, not to interfere with A's doing of X. 41 These rights may be natural (also called moral rights) when pertaining to us by our humanity (as such they apply to all persons), or conventional when they are created by humans, generally within the context of social and political organizations. 41 Mackie, J. L. (1978). Can there be a right-based moral theory? Midwest Studies in Philosophy 3 (1):350-359.125 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 43 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 They could also be detrimental when they impose duties of noninterference on others, or positive if they impose duties of assistance on others. The rights-based theories on morals origins are roughly the opposite of the utilitarian theories and play in the present a relevant roll in the development of the Human Rights movements, institutions, and public agencies. 3.5 – Moral Relativism. Moral relativism is the idea that several possible moralities or behavioral contexts of reference, and whether something is morally right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust, is always a relative matter. There is no universal or timeless moral structure. Any moral foundation is comparable to others, and they may disagree in full. Therefore, relativeness exists as a connection to one or another morality or moral frame of reference. Something can be morally right relative to one moral frame of reference and morally wrong relative to another 42 We may understand Moral relativism in several ways. The cultural relativism states the many different cultural structures, including various languages with multiple semantic coincidences and disagreements connected to nonlinguistic elements, cannot have the same moral frames. It is evidence the fact that each culture developed its own and proper moral structure without any universal ingredient or any foundation brought from a 42 Harman, Gilbert and Thomson, Judith Jarvis – "Moral Relativism and Moral Objectivity" WB; 1 edition (January 9, 1996) ISBN-10: 0631192115/ ISBN-13:978-0631192114 pp. 3-5. 3 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 44 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 different culture, albeit some few references that seem nearly universal, but that are only linguistic elements. The meta-ethical concept of moral relativism states that there is not possible the determination of any prevailing concept from a culture on other cultures. Each society organizes its moral tenets using its intrinsic experiences and generalized beliefs. The normative moral relativism claims that others must respect each different moral structure, even though these differences could mean offense to the other cultures' moral or legal structure. The development of Moral Relativism theory has suffered the influence of two cultural movements: the so-called "new anthropology" and the several countercultural groups and activities of the second half of the XX Century. The "new anthropology" was a post-war understanding of the meanings of "culture," its structures dimensions and contents. Clyde Kluckhohn (1905 –1960) in his book "Mirror for Man: The Relation of Anthropology to Modern Life" (1949) brought the aim to criticize all "ethnocentric ethical conceptions," and started new discussions on the meaning of "cultures."43 The new anthropologists stepped aside from the concepts of universality and focused on fragments of culture and society, proposing the study of small elements of culture, rather than the traditional topics anthropologists have ever taken into account. New anthropology may have contributed to unhelpful fragmentation in understanding culture and intercultural 43 John S. Gilkeson - "Anthropologists and the Rediscovery of America,1886–1965" 2009, p.251 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 45 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 communication, inserting concepts of micro-cultures in opposition to the broader traditional anthropological assertions. This split was part of a constant repositioning in anthropology on how to understand the concept of culture. Some anthropologists wished to see the concept abolished. Others, such as Kluckhohn (cited), wished to make Americans more "culture-conscious." This approach probably stimulated an essentialist reading of culture, and it continues to influence intercultural communication today. The countercultural movements are the second factor responsible for the expansion of moral relativism ideas. The American Sociologist John Milton Yinger44 created the term and gave to it the following meaning: Wherever the normative system of a group contains, as a primary element, a theme of conflict with the values of the total society, where personality variables are directly involved in the development and maintenance of the group's values, and wherever its norms can be understood only by reference to the relationships of the group to a surrounding dominant culture. 45 The term "subcultural" is also in use, having in mind that the counterculture needs by assumption the existence of a dominant moral culture. 44 Former President of the American Sociological Association and Emeritus Professor of Sociology at Oberlin College 45 "Contraculture and Subculture" by J. Milton Yinger, American Sociological Review, Vol. 25, No. 5 -Oct. 1960-pg. 625-635 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 46 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 These movements have ever happened. In sociological terms, Christianity, in its origins, has all the ingredients of a countercultural movement. Since the Enlightenment up to the present days, the prominent have been the Romanticism(eighteenth and nineteenth Centuries), the Bohemianism (nineteenth and twentieth Centuries), the Beatniks, the Hippies and the Punk (second half of Twentieth Century), and more recently the LGTB and the modern feminist countercultures. As a philosophical proposal, however, the moral relativism is needy of axiological foundations, precisely because of its fragmentary concepts and opposition to the universality of moral structures. The focus of this theory is the minorities, which only are minorities because a different and dominant moral system exists. Therefore, in a very incoherent way, the theory denies the existence of one of its necessary causations. If the approach of the theory denies the dominant culture to affirm the prevalence of the minorities, the theory is not related anymore to ethics but would be proposing the shattering of the social fabric or the social chaos in other terms 3.6 –Moral Realism Among many metaphysical approaches and theories related to the nature and structure of morality, Moral Realism plays a significant role in the understanding of many ethical issues. Summarizing: the grounds of Moral Realism reside on the assumption that there are moral facts and propositions, which are supposed to be true and objective, precise, global, phenomenologically manifested, mindindependent, and subject to epistemological cognition. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 47 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 These facts are the moral foundations and may be known, observed, and analyzed objectively "in ipsis," independent of their evidence, of our perception of them or our beliefs, feelings, or other attitudes towards them.46 The realistic moral ideas find their ground the same way as scientific realism do: "the reality described by scientific theories is mostly independent of our theorizing. Scientific theories describe reality, and reality is "prior to thought."47 There are many variations of this theory, and some of them may conflict as long as some concepts are involved. Internalist and externalist arguments may differ profoundly in the formulation of the moral realism grounds, as well as naturalism and non-naturalism face the same grounds with different arguments. The broad discussions about the realist foundations reside in cognitivism, moral truth, moral knowledge, descriptivism, and moral objectivity.48 However, David O. Brink, at MIT, argues that all these diversities orbit around the same foundations: There may be a single formulation of realism in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions that are both global and precise, or perhaps the various versions of realism form only a family or cluster of metaphysical theories, all of which 46 https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_moral_realism.html retrieved on July,05 2019 47 Boyd, Richard,at Cornell University (1988). How to Be a Moral Realist. 48 Hanuk University of Foreign Studies Korea Shin Kim in https://www.iep.utm.edu/moralrea/ (retrieved on July 05 2019) Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 48 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 assert some kind of mind-independence claim.49 In its essence, moral realism finds its grounds on the same concepts of scientific realism following the approach that the reality described by scientific theories is mostly independent of our theorizing. Scientific theories describe reality, and reality precedes the knowledge and the reason. Different moral realist approaches, independent of their specific claims, are plausible, compatible, and somehow mutually supporting. The incompatible opposition comes from the nihilism, once the cognitive epistemology contained in the realist ideas are denied in full by this theory. David O. Brink makes this very clear: The traditional opponent of moral realism is the nihilist or non-cognitivist, who denies that there are moral facts or true moral propositions or, as result, any moral knowledge. Nihilists and noncognitivists must, therefore, be moral skeptics.50 Despite these various and recalcitrant oppositions do the realism foundations, and precisely because of their epistemological position, the trends of the Philosophy of 49 Brink David O, - "Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics" – Cambridge Studies in Philosophy – Cambridge University Press –ISBN 0 52135937. pg 15 50 Op.cit. pg 19 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 49 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Sciences keep this theory in evidence as Richard Boyd considers: Some philosophical opportunities are too good to pass up. For many of the more abstract challenges to moral realism, recent realistic and naturalistic work in the philosophy of science is suggestive of possible responses in its defense. Thus, for example, it has occurred to many philosophers (see, e.g., Putnam 1975b) that naturalistic theories of reference and definitions might be extended to the analysis of moral language. If we could do this successfully, and if the results were favorable to a realist conception of morals, then it would be possible to reply to several anti-realist arguments.51 51 Boyd, Richard,at Cornell University (1988). How to Be a Moral Realist. Item 4.1 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 50 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER V AN EVOLUTIONARY UNDERSTANDING ON ORIGINS OF MORALITY Once Darwin said: I fully subscribe to the judgment of those writers who maintain that of all the differences between man and the lower animals; the moral sense or conscience is by far the most important. This sense, as Mackintosh remarks, "has a rightful supremacy over every other principle of human action."52 1 – Preliminay assertions. To introduce our reasoning, we should state that we adopt an approach to the Evolutionary Ethics Theories. For a whole century, the ideas of evolutionary ethics caused clamorous conflicts among philosophers, and up to the present days, induce many discrepant interpretations. Rayner offers a balanced analysis of the philosophical position we adopt: 52 Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man -1871b, Chap. IV par.97 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 51 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Evolutionary ethics originated in the 1850's in the works of Herbert Spencer (1850). The theory gained some support and was debated throughout the nineteenth century until the criticisms of many philosophers, notably Thomas Huxley (1893) and G. E. Moore (1903), all but completely defeated the popularity of biological interpretations of morality. The field of evolutionary ethics, until relatively recently, remained plagued by bad interpretation of scientific research and unfounded speculation (such as the faulty idea that altruism originated via the process of group selection). The emergence of new theories of altruistic evolution, however, caused evolutionary ethics to experience a resurgence. This resurgence was brought about largely by E. O. Wilson's seminal work: Sociobiology (1975), the development of Hamilton's theory of kin selection and the concept of inclusive fitness (1964), Trivers' hypothesis of the evolution of reciprocal altruism (1971), and the application of mathematical and game-theoretical models to evolutionary theory (e.g., Smith and Price, 1973). Today, evolutionary ethics is certainly a tenable position, with a breadth of empirical and theoretical evidence supporting it.53 From the metaethical position, primarily adopted by analytical philosophers, we objectively understand morality as necessarily belonging to the realm of human social behavior. The moral tenets are semiotic and 53 Rayner, Sam (2005) "Too Strong for Principle: An Examination of the Theory and Philosophical Implications of Evolutionary Ethics," Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 15 : Iss. 1 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol15/iss1/6Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 52 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 hypothetic systems of commandments and propositions for the beacon and control of human behavior, envisaging the viability, stability, and development of human social life. In other terms, morality is an essential and original social need of the "zoon politikon," a material, social fact, independently of its metaphysical grounds. It is possible structuring these tenets in systems precisely like the juridical law, and irrespective of some extrinsic differences, moral and juridical systems embody commandments, propositions, or both. Only understanding these two different forms of content makes it possible to recognize the whole system. Moral principles are not limited to linguistic structures, nor encapsulated in texts, and their expression may happen by any means of semiotic content, such as gestures, visual elements, symbols, sounds, dressing, natural elements, and so on. The modern written moral codes whatsoever are just a teleological attempt to certify to the society, systematically, the existence of certain principles to be observed, generally summarized to the most important ones. Therefore, the written moral codes are a limited instrument of moral praxis and do never express the content of the existing morality. For this reason, we may not declare expressively many moral elements, but we may naturally deduct them from other elements of the system. Hence, the hermeneutic of written moral codes is not sufficient to enlighten the entire human moral universe, and this broader entire understanding of such universe imposes the challenging task of submitting the human behavior to a rigorous analytical process. The objective framework of this work is to follow the analytical process. We will consider everything else about Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 53 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 morality, which could not fit in this objective model, as belonging to the realm of abstraction. We will consider morality exclusively as this human behavioral phenomenon that we will observe from its intrinsic and extrinsic elements. These elements are visible and cognizable within reach of the methods adopted by the Philosophy of Social Science. We will be attentive "with the differences and similarities between the social and the natural sciences, causal relationships between social phenomena, the possible existence of social laws, and the ontological significance of structure and agency."54 To understand morality, we should accept the proximity between philosophical thinking and the methods of the human sciences, recognizing the indivisible nature of human knowledge. Questioning morality sometimes involves analyzing dynamic social elements, neuroscientific observation, evolutionary genetics, and historical circumstances. Philosophy cannot walk alone in these fields. The multidisciplinary approach means a trend of modern humanities, adopted by several analysts and scholars such as Paolo Mantovani,55 Margaret McFall-Ngai56, Carlo 54 ( source: Hollis, Martin (1994). The Philosophy of Social Science: An Introduction. Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-521-44780-5.) 55 Columbia University 56 Pacific Biosciences Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 54 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Rovelli57, Elliott Sober58, Ralph Adolphs59, and Thomas Pradeu60: The above examples are far from the only ones: in the life sciences, philosophical reflection has played an important role in issues as diverse as evolutionary altruism, debate over units of selection, the construction of a 'tree of life,' the predominance of microbes in the biosphere, the definition of the gene, and the critical examination of the concept of innateness. Likewise, in physics, fundamental questions such as the definition of time have been enriched by the work of philosophers. For example, the analysis of temporal irreversibility by Huw Price and closed temporal curves by David Lewis have helped dispel conceptual confusion in physics. Inspired by these examples and many others, we see philosophy and science as located on a continuum. Philosophy and science share the tools of logic, conceptual analysis, and rigorous argumentation.61 If somehow one could question our reasoning, as far as a metaphysical consistency should be present, irrespective 57 Professor of Physics, Aix-Marseille University 58 Professor of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin 59 California Institute of Technology 60 Senior Researcher (permanent), ImmunoConcEpT, CNRS, University of Bordeaux; IHPST 61 National Academy of Sciences of The United States of America PNAS March 5, 2019, 116 (10) 39483952; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900357116) Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 55 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 of the limits stated by the methodology we adopted, we claim that in specific contexts, we approach the concepts of the moral realism in its phenomenological, foundationalist, and cognitive versions. 2 – The Archetypal Nature of Moral Foundations. 2.2.1 – Introduction. All the traditional models related to the origins of morality and its transition to modern human societies are presently under discussion, as long as new evidence linked to their structure arises daily from new studies and researches. In his complex study "The Origins of Morality: An Evolutionary Account," Dennis L. Krebs62 examines morality in terms of primitive, largely unconscious, competing instincts and motives. Grounded in the concepts of evolution, the author discusses all other perspectives of the question: from the cognitivedevelopmental approach to social learning and the ethnographic views. Krebs offers a reinterpretation of the Piaget63-Kohlberg64 socio-moral model. He starts from his owns researches and follows the cognitive-structural developmental psychology. Krebs claims that moral reasoning is rooted 62 Krebs, Dennis L. 2011 Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press US$49.95 (hbk), 291 pp. ISBN 978-0199778232 63 Piaget, Jean - "Affective Unconscious and Cognitive Unconscious." In The Child and Reality" Translated by A. Rosin. New York: Grossman. 64 Kohlberg, Lawrence - "Stage and Sequence: The CognitiveDevelopmental Approach to Socialization." In* Handbook of Socialization. G. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 56 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 not in abstract principles but rather on concrete thoughts about real-life situations. Analyzing the psychological and neurological sources of primitive social behaviors, and the human prosocial behaviors, the author describes the evolution of this uniquely human process related to the origins of moral cognition. Christopher Boehm (b. 1931) 65 explored the possibility that morality could have affected the natural selection, as well as vice versa. Mechanisms of natural selection could be invoked to explain the individual human conscience. It is admissible the fact of being moral may have enabled prehistoric people to participate in the very process of natural selection, albeit this participation more probably has been indirect and unconscious. In this context, we claim that moral foundations emerged from the collective human experience as multiple behaviorally acquired information, being transmitted by the evolutionary process. Jonathan Birch, in his review of Michael Tomasello's66 "A Natural History of Human Morality," approached this idea very correctly: 65 Boehm, Christopher – Prehistoric Capital Punishment and Parallel Evolutionary Effects Minding Nature: Spring 2017, Volume 10, Number 2, in https://www.humansandnature.org/prehistoric-capital-punishment-andparallel-evolutionary-effects 66 Co-director of Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Co-director of the Wolfgang Kohler Primate Research Center, Honorary professor at University of Leipzig and at Manchester University's Department of Psychology, and Professor of Psychology at Duke University. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 57 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 This hypothesis implies a close relationship between the origin of morality and the origin of joint and collective intentionality, the focus of Tomasello's research for over twenty years, and the topic of his previous book, A Natural History of Human Thinking ([2014]). Tomasello makes a powerful case that these phenomena are indeed related. If this is correct, then a great deal of previous work on the evolution of morality has been subtly misguided. The focus should never have been on acts of altruism but acts of mutualistic cooperation. Moreover, the focus should never have been on explicitly linguistic expressions of moral judgment, hypothesized here to be an evolutionary latecomer, but rather on the way normative judgment, construed more broadly, enters into in the deeper, older cognitive structures implicit in feats of cooperation as apparently simple as two people carrying a log together." 67 Simplistically, evolution means a process related to biological changes, a consequence of the species' adaptive efforts, envisaging their survival. Evolution, however, is a much more complex fabric of causations and inter-related processes and effects, involving neuronbased continuous functions, and genetic elements. That is why evolution also plays a fundamental role in the transmission of human behavioral experiences, mostly those related to collective life. 67 Birch, Jonathan (2017 Book review: Michael Tomasello // a natural history of human morality. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Review of Books. ISSN 0007-0882). Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 58 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 The transmission of behaviorally acquired information by genetic structures and nervous system functions is one of the essential premises of this study and the ground for our conception of the origins of ethics and its aggregation to the collective unconscious in an archetypal structure. About this, we do argue that our reasoning is based on sound scientific assumptions, which we may aggregate to the philosophical method. The neurosciences have already demonstrated that this assertive is no longer a hypothetical proposition taken into account by some scientific theories, but that it is, in fact, the concrete and proven empirical reality. Don Marshall Gash68 and Andrew S. Dea69, offer a clear explanation of this assumption: It is widely recognized that human evolution has been driven by two systems of heredity: one DNA-based and the other based on the transmission of behaviorally acquired information via nervous system functions. The genetic system is ancient, going back to the appearance of life on Earth. It is responsible for the evolutionary processes described by Darwin. By comparison, the nervous system is relatively newly minted and in its highest form, responsible for ideation and mind-to-mind transmission of information. Here the informational capabilities and functions of the two systems are compared. While employing 68 Director/Test Facility Manager, GLP Neuroscience Service Center, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Anatomy and Neurobiology 69Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis IN Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 59 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 quite different mechanisms for encoding, storing, and transmission of information, both systems perform these generic hereditary functions. Three additional features of neuronbased heredity in humans are identified: the ability to transfer genetic information to other members of their population, not just progeny; a selection process for the information being transferred; and a profoundly shorter time span for creation and dissemination of survivalenhancing information in a population. The mechanisms underlying neuron-based heredity involve hippocampal neurogenesis and memory and learning processes modifying and creating new neural assemblages changing brain structure and functions.70 Canadian-American analytical and neurophilosopher Patricia S. Churchland71 (b.1943) explained the relation of the roots of human moral behaviors with some genetic specific elements. The author described morality as arising from the.interaction of genes, neural processes, and social experiences, and states that survival and reproduction are genetic capacities. Among all species, mammals have specific "genes to produce the chemical oxytocinand vasopressin, which prompts them to care for their young. In some mammals such as humans, the same 70Gash DM and Deane AS (2015) Neuron-based heredity and human evolution.Front. Neurosci.9:209. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2015.00209. 71 (a)UC President's Professor of Philosophy Emerita at the University of California, San Diego;(b) op.ref. Churchland, Patricia S. "Touching a Nerve: Our Brains, Our Selves" W. W. Norton & Company – 2014 ISBN-10: 0393349446 / ISBN-13: 978-0393349443 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 60 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 chemicals encourage animals to form long term relationships and to care for each other".72 This caring sustains the biological root of morality in Churchland's opinion for each other primal social behavior. Early humans lived in small groups of around 100 people, but the expansion of groups as the result of agriculture and the development of intellectual ideals expanded compassion, sympathy, and empathy beyond people's immediate group.73 Finally, the author states that moral norms arise from four interlocking brain processes: caring, recognition of other's psychological states, learning social practices, and problem-solving in a social context.74 Dennis L. Krebs75, as we considered before, explained these complex evolutionary processes highlighting the inquiries on the psychological and neurological sources of primitive prosocial behaviors, the evolution of uniquely human prosocial behaviors, and its contents and structures. Reviewing Krebs works, Peter Gray concludes: A psychodynamic perspective examines morality (and immorality) in terms of primitive, 72 The Origins Of Morality | Psychology Today. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hotthought/201311/the-origins-morality 73 The Origins of Morality | Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hotthought/201311/the-origins-morality 74 Paul Thagard, Ph.D.- "The Origins of Morality" in https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/hotthought/201311/the-origins-morality 75 Krebs , Dennis L. The origins of morality: an evolutionary account, 2011 Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press – ISBN 978-0199778232 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 61 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 largely unconscious, competing instincts and motives; a social-learning perspective examines it in terms of the individual's social experiences; a cognitive-developmental perspective examines it in terms of the child's development from more concrete to more abstract ways of thinking, and an ethnographic perspective examines it in terms of cultural norms. However, here, under the umbrella of evolution, Krebs can integrate, refine, and expand upon the insights of all of these perspectives. All of them have to do with the interaction of environmental experiences with the evolved human brain, which has built into it, certain biases and predilections. Krebs provides us here with a biological foundation for thinking about all aspects of morality.76 Following his functionalist approach, Krebs introduced a reinterpretation of the stages of cognitive development considered by Kohlberg77 and emphasized his conviction about the dependency of moral shifts to real living situations. All these evidence and assertions, recently brought by the social and natural sciences about the material origins of the moral foundations, constitute nowadays a generally accepted notion by the modern Western Philosophy 76 Peter Gray (2012) The origins of morality: an evolutionary account Dennis L. Krebs, 2011 Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press (hbk), 291 pp. ISBN 978-0199778232, Journal of Moral Education, 41:2, 264-266, DOI: 10.1080/03057240.2012.680715 77 Kohlberg, Lawrence - "Stage and Sequence: The CognitiveDevelopmental Approach to Socialization." In* Handbook of Socialization. G. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 62 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 theories, being they or not grounded on any metaphysical concept. Hence, the incontrovertible questions about when and how this could have begun, and by which means and processes it has been incorporated into the human evolutionary nature, pulls our study to the assumption of the existence of moral archetypes structuring, and their aggregation to the human genome and collective unconscious. 2.2 – Concept and Nature of Archetypes. Approaches to the idea of archetypes are as old as the philosophy itself, and this idea is the central pillar of this research, as we repeated since the beginning. Semantically, the Greek word "archetypos" is related to an idea of "first imprint," a concept contained in the complex Plato's Theory of Forms, in which the philosopher discusses the material world, composed of mutable objects, as well as the transcendent world, which is unchanging and made of forms. Under this theory, humans have an intrinsic ability to recognize the correct form of an abstract concept, as Adam Imitiaz explains in a simplified way: Plato took this idea even further. While agreeing that there were ideal forms of abstract concepts (liberty, equality, justice), there were also ideal forms of ordinary objects such as tables or beds. The objects we encounter in our day to day lives are simply imperfect and changeable versions of their perfect forms. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 63 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 These perfect forms are memories that we can recall from a previous time in our existence.78 Since Plato was reasoning about cognitive processes, he referred to these perfect forms as the first imprint of the abstract concepts: the archetypes, in other terms. These first imprints of abstract realities, such as liberty, and justice, are unchangeable and remain indefinitely independent of the individual experiences: they are transcendental to the material world and the ideal form of abstract concepts. The forms were the first understanding of archetypes in Philosophy. During the Enlightenment, John Locke brought a significant contribution do the epistemological discussion in that period, with his work An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. At that time, Locke's opponents criticized this essay in reason of its empiricist approach. However, precisely because of this empiricist grounding of Locke's thinking, the essay introduced the concept of "adequate ideas" and offered a vital reinterpretation of Plato's ideas on archetypes: Adequate ideas are such as perfectly represent their archetypes. Of our real ideas, some are adequate, and some are inadequate. Those I call adequate, which perfectly represent those archetypes which the mind supposes them 78 Imtiaz, Adam – Plato's Theory of Forms Apud "im print" in http://uwimprint.ca/article/platos-theory-of-forms/ retrieved Jul,24/2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 64 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 taken from: which it intends them to stand for, and to which it refers them. Inadequate ideas are such, which are but a partial or incomplete representation of those archetypes to which they are relative. Upon which account it is plain.79 Locke's proposal is not so clear as it could be like several critics said, but it is evident his assumption that behind and before any idea, there is an archetype, a primary form (in Plato's language) subordinating any idea's content. During all the Enlightenment, philosophers discussed these concepts predominantly from the epistemological angle. During the 19th. Century the conceptualization of archetypes progressively acquired the contours of a multidisciplinary subject, albeit the numerous studies about being isolate and product of different methodologies and purposes. In the first half of the 20th Century, the extensive work of the psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung (1975 – 1961), a former supporter of Sigmund Freud, offered an extraordinary advance to the understanding of the human mind and the diverse and complex cognitive and emotional processes related to their corresponding functions. Jung's theories start with the definition of the collective unconscious, an assumption submitted initially to all kinds of interpretations and questionings by philosophers and scientists of all tendencies. Jung, by himself, understood 79 Locke, John An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. 25th. Ed. London, 1824Print W. Dowall – BookII,Chapter XXI pg. 319. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 65 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 that the concept should be explained appropriately and did so, as follows: Probably none of my empirical concepts has met with so much misunderstanding as the idea of the collective unconscious. The collective unconscious is a part of the psyche that can be negatively distinguished from a personal unconscious by the fact that it does not, like the latter, owe its existence to personal experience and consequently is not a personal acquisition. While the personal unconscious is made up essentially of contents which have at one time been conscious but which have disappeared from consciousness through having been forgotten or repressed, the contents of the collective unconscious have never been in consciousness, and therefore have never been individually acquired, but owe their existence exclusively to heredity. Whereas the personal unconscious consists for the most of complexes, the content of the collective unconscious is made up essentially of archetypes.80 Therefore, in the Jungian theory, the content of the collective unconscious, unlike the individual unconscious, is limited to instincts and archetypes and is not relative to any individual experience. However, Jung's summarized explanation helps the understanding of the collective 80 Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 9, Part 1. 2nd ed. (1968), Princeton University Press ISBN 0691018332 – p99 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 66 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 unconscious' content, but does not enlighten the reasons because he denominated this structure as "collective." We should ask Jung about this: I have chosen the term "collective" because this part of the unconscious is not individual but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has contents and modes of behavior that are more or less the same everywhere and in all individuals. It is, in other words, identical in all men and thus constitutes a common psychic substrate of a suprapersonal nature that is present in every one of us.81 Thus, the collective qualification of the archetypes is related to the tenets of universality and perpetuity: two of the essential pillars of any reasoning related to morality. The fundamental claims of the Jungian Theory referring to the archetypes disseminate in philosophy, psychology, and human sciences as a gender, and even in the popular culture, causing many different interpretations and starting several controversies. For this reason, in any research, we will find different meanings and uses of the archetypal concepts, which may be reduced, expanded, or even conflictive when compared with Jung's ideas. In the face of this broad and deep horizon, we should define in this paper, which is the understanding of archetypes we adopt. We accept as coherent with the structure of this study the extended definition given by Adam Blatner: 81 (Ibidem) Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 67 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 They represent the inherited, intrinsic tendencies in cognition, imagery, and emotion in the human species. Archetypes are the extensions of the phenomenon of instinct, as complexified and expressed in human experience. In themselves formless and expressing the sociobiological dimension of neurophysiology, their manifestations may be found in themes in art, ritual, custom, imagery, dreams, philosophy, psychopathology, and every other human endeavor.82 The content of these elements, according to the Jungian Theory, finds its ground on the belief that nature enabled the human individual with "many things which he has never acquired but has inherited from his ancestors. He is not born as a tabula rasa; he is merely born unconscious. But he brings with him systems that are organized and ready to function in a specifically human way, and these he owes to millions of years of human development." (Carl Jung – op.cit. Volume 4). The ancient philosophical concepts on archetypes predominantly considered their contents and meanings as something unchangeable (a "pure form" as Plato thought about). Jung's works and his empirical concepts opened the horizon for a deeper study of the archetypes' stability and gave them certain flexibility, coherent with the evolutionary processes, as Charles D. Laughlin punctuates: The archetypes themselves may well have changed during our evolutionary past -there is 82 Blatner, Adam, M.D The Relevance of the Concept of Archetype https ://www.blatner.com/adam/level2/archetype.htm retrieved on May, 14 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 68 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 no way to know for sure (1953 [1943/45]:368) -but in their present form, they encode the recurrent experiences of human beings over countless millennia and across all cultural boundaries (1970 [1955/56]:390). In some instances, the archetypes encode recurrent experiential material from our pre-hominid animal past (1953 [1943/45]:96).83 For a good understanding of the theory, we should always have in mind that Jung makes clear that the term archetype does not refer to an inherited idea or abstract element, but rather to an inherited pattern of behavior. This assertion plays an important role in this work, in the extension that we understand any moral concept or content as a human behavioral phenomenon. In the present, neuroscientific studies support this proposition of the behavioral nature of the archetypes as George B. Hogenson indicates: "The discovery of mirror neurons by researchers at the University of Parma promises to alter our understanding of fundamental cognitive and affective states radically. This paper explores the relationship of mirror neurons to Jung's theory of archetypes and proposes that archetypes may be viewed as elementary action patterns." (Hogenson, George B – Archetypes as Action Patterns – The Journal of Analytical Psychology https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5922.2009.01783.x – retrieved Jul, 27 – 2019). Jung focused the subject as a very objective and observable element of the human mind and kept aside metaphysical reasoning in his arguments. "Whether this 83 Laughlin, Charles D. Archetypes, Neurognosis and the Quantum Sea – Art. Pg.3) Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 69 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 psychic structure and its elements, the archetypes, ever 'originated' at all is a metaphysical question and, therefore, unanswerable. (Carl Jung – op.cit. Volume 4).Despite avoiding any assumption related to the definition of the archetypal origins, Jung highlights that all the elements of a human individual's nature are primarily present and existing from birth. The individual experiences and their particular environment do not create these elements, but only bring them out. This behavioral nature of the archetypes, as sustained by Jung, approached his theories to other scientific and philosophical concepts and, if on the one hand, played an influential contribution to other sciences, on the other hand, absorbed several contributions from them. The evidence of these approaches is the reason why we assume that the study of archetypes only acquired the contours of a multidisciplinary subject because of Jung's works. The progressive enrichment of the Archetypes Theory following Jung's works in part is due to its multidisciplinary structure, as we can infer from Pearson's text: C.G. Jung left a great deal of ambiguity surrounding the ontological status of the archetypes and the collective unconscious. He did so because of the inadequacy of the science of his day. Modern developments in the neurosciences and physics - especially the new physics of the vacuum - allow us to develop Jung's understanding of the archetypes further. This paper analyzes the salient characteristics of Jung's concept of the archetype and uses modern biogenetic structural theory to integrate archetypal psychology and the neurosciences. The paper reviews some of the Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 70 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 evidence in favor of direct neurophysiologicalquantum coupling [the author's term] and suggests how neural processing and quantum events may interpenetrate.84 Mark Vernon also indicates the value of this multidisciplinary approach of the Jungian Theory: In fact, the possibility that Jungian archetypes might be commensurate with biology was implied by EO Wilson in his book Consilience. He raised the possibility that science might make them "more concrete and verifiable." Following Wilson's lead, the psychiatrist Anthony Stevens sees archetypes at work in ethology, the study of animal behavior in natural habitats. Animals have sets of stock behaviors, ethologists note, apparently activated by environmental stimuli.85 Taking into account this apparent universality of the idea of archetypes in Sciences and Philosophy in present days, we should accept the contributions of all studies and interpretations of the concept, which are compatible with 84 Pearson, Carol S., Arquetypes, Neurognosis and the Quantum Sea (art.) – Jornal of Scientific Exploration 1996 – in http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.456.710 retrieved on Jul. 26, 2019 85Vernon,Mark. Carl Jung: Do Archetypes exist? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/jun/20/ jung-archetypes--structurind-principles retrieved Jul, 26 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 71 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 the central pillars of our study, irrespective the fields of Science from where they arise. Among the several contributions brought by recent researches, two important approaches fortify our basic assumptions related to morality as a human behavioral and observable subject, resulting from archetypal foundations and carried for millennia of evolutionary processes aggregate to the species genome. The first one comes from the fundamental axioms of biogenetics structuralism, summarized in three radical notions that form its foundations: 1. The first is that consciousness is a property of the nervous system. 2. The second is that all of the neural structures that mediate consciousness develop during life from initial inherited structures (from archetypes, in other terms), and 3. The third is that all we can mean by "culture" refers either directly to neurophysiological processes, or indirectly to the artifacts and behaviors produced by those processes.86 The other prominent approach comes from the concepts of neurognosis, also emerging from the biogenetic structuralism. Neurognosis is a technical term used to refer to the initial organization of the experiencing and cognizing brain. The definition of this concept comes from Laughlin: 86 http://www.biogeneticstructuralism.com/tenets.htm, retrieved on Jul,27 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 72 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 All neurophysiological models comprising the cognized environment develop from nascent models which exist as the initial, genetically determined neural structures already producing the experience of the fetus and infant. We call these nascent models neurognostic structures, neurognostic models, or simply neurognosis (Laughlin 1991, Laughlin and d'Aquili 1974:83, Laughlin, McManus and d'Aquili 1990:44-75). When we wish to emphasize the neurognostic structures themselves, we tend to mention structures or models. The neurognostic structures correspond to Jung's archetypes. Remember that, although much attention was given to relatively dramatic archetypal imagery in his writings, Jung actually believed that there were as many archetypes as there are species-wide, typical perceptions (1968c [1936/37]:48). Jung's reference to the essential unknowability of the archetypes-in-themselves also applies to neurognostic structures in our formulation.87 2.3 – Transmissibility of Archetypes. When Jung formulated his Archetypes Theory in the first half of the 20rth Century, the Science then existing could not help him sufficiently. Nonetheless, in the present, we have sufficient and accredited scientific researches able to support the justification required for the validation of our claims. We will not demonstrate or review these scientific researches, 87 Laughlin, Charles D. (1996) "Archetypes, Neurognosis and the Quantum Sea."Journal of Scientific Exploration10(3):375-400. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 73 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 because this would overflow the purpose, structure, and methodology of this work. Moreover, the most important scientific grounds related to the archetypal transmissibility come from the neurosciences, which methodology is not extensive to Philosophy. We should, however, indicate and make explicit scientific researches grounding our argument, and quote their essential assumptions without changing their wording and structure, rather than merely mentioning them. The mechanisms for encoding, storing and transmission of genetic information (such as the archetypes), are described by Don M. Gash and Andrew S. Deane88 as a complex process primarily determining the genetic informational content at the time of the individual's conception: Nucleotide encodes genetic information sequences and chromosomal structure of an individual's genome. Transcription and translation of encoded information are dynamic molecular processes regulating cellular life: responding to stimuli, maintaining homeostasis, and regulating growth, development, and reproduction. There are various mechanisms for transmitting genetic information in single cells and multicellular organisms involving replication of the encoded information [...] Neuron-based informational content is accumulated and modified throughout life in the human nervous system. Information in the nervous system is encoded in the molecular and 88 Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 74 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 cellular properties of neurons, their neural networks, and their synaptic connections. [...] The mechanism for the transfer of neuronbased information from individual-to-individual in a population is via mind-to-mind. Mind-tomind transfer engages the brain and body as well as the mind..89 Attempting to decipher a so complex neural structured system, entirely unknown until some decades ago, is an immeasurable challenge for Science, and one of the fascinating mysteries related to the human phenomenon. This exhaustive road, despite the circumstance, conquered several advances, and each one of them propels the others. Very relevant features and mechanisms of the encoding, storing, and transmission of genetic information related to human behavior have been recently discovered, like the Kin Selection processes. Kin Selection is a significant study on evolutionary biology, initially proposed in 1963 by the British evolutionary biologist W.D. Hamilton, and offers an entirely new analytical perspective to the animal social behavior (mostly the mammals, as the Homo sapiens). In the present day, the Kin Selection Theory is one of the foundations of the modern study of social behavior, which comprises the roots of any moral tenet. 89 Gash, Don M. and Dean, Andrew S. -Neuron-based heredity and human evolution – apud Neurosci., 17 June 2015 https ://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2015.00209 – retrieved Jul,27-2019. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 75 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 The theory clarifies the very complex genetic evolutive foundations of essential social behaviors like altruism and reveals the original choices based on the cost-benefit in animal life in a group. Kin selection requires genetic relatedness between the donor and the recipient of the altruistic act, and for sure, the selection is the dominant explanation for the evolution of aid-giving behavior.90 Therefore, we may say that the Kin Selection Theory lays on the baby crib of the human behavioral morality, and unveils the fascinating beauty of the archetypes and their evolutionary process. Patten described the central ideas of the theory as follows: It is most accurately described as a form of group selection. Although mathematically, it is possible – and even sometimes heuristically invaluable – to make all fitness variation under kin selection property of genes or individuals, this obscures the true causal forces that bring about gene-frequency change under kin selection. Kin selection is a way of understanding allele frequency change as a consequence of the actions and interactions among individuals who share alleles by recent common descent – i.e., kin. As with group selection, it is a consequence of the properties of groups that cause allele frequency change. With the kin selection, though, the groups have this special genetic structure. Kin selection has 90 Michael D. Breed,Janice Moore, in Animal Behavior, 2012 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 76 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 been used to explain the evolution of cooperation and altruism in animal societies. The evolution of altruistic traits, which is opposed to groups but favored between groups, is facilitated by close kinship within groups. The within-group fitness losses that altruists suffer are partially offset by the fitness gains of kin who share the same genetic information. In this way, the genes that control behavior can recoup the fitness losses of the donors of altruistic actions. Hamilton specified a useful rule for altruistic acts such as these that determine whether such behaviors are evolutionarily favored: rb>c. That is, if the benefits (b) conferred on kin, weighted by the relatedness (r) of the donor to the recipient, is greater than the cost (c) conferred on the donor, then such an action is favored by natural selection.91 The kin selection central idea is known as the theory of 'inclusive fitness,' and has been formulated in a mathematical model called Hamilton's Equation: B/C>1/r this can be rearranged as rB>C The elements of cost (C) and benefit (B) and relatedness (r) in this equation have already been introduced. The cost (C) is the lost potential fitness of the donor. The benefit (B) is the added fitness for the recipient due to the acts of 91 M.M.Patten, in Reference Module in Life Sciences, 2017In https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-andmolecular-biology/kin-selection retrieved Jul, 28 -2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 77 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 the donor. The underlying message of this equation is that aid-giving behavior by the donor should be favored in the course of evolution if the donor-recipient relatedness (r) times the added benefit to the recipient is higher than the cost to the donor.92 More recently, Alan Grafen exposed several new mathematical models diversifying the results of Hamilton's researches and expanding their analytical boundaries.93.The result of all these approaches focuses on the same assertion: Cooperation and altruism-and indeed social behavior in general-are defined in evolutionary biology according to concepts of cost and benefit, in particular, according to costs and benefits to the fitness of interacting organisms. The fitness effects of behaviors are apparent and measurable through interactions between actors and recipients. Altruistic behavior, in particular, has been usefully defined as behavior in which an actor pays a cost to its direct, lifetime net fitness, and a recipient gains a benefit to its direct, lifetime net fitness.94 92 Michael D.Breed,Janice Moore op.cit 93 Grafen, Alan Detecting kin selection at work using inclusive fitness Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Mar 7; 274(1610): 713–719.Published online 2006 Dec 12.doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.0140 ---00PMCID:PMC2197210/ 94 West SA, Griffin AS, Gardner A. 2007Social semantics: altruism, cooperation, mutualism, strong reciprocity and group selection.J. Evol. Biol.20, 415432.(doi:10.1111/j.14209101.2006.01258.x)Crossref,PubMed,ISI,Google ScholarApud Woodford Note 18. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 78 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Peter Woodford summarizes many discussions involving the Kin Selection Theory, and mostly those provoked by an article published in the journal Nature by two mathematical biologists, Martin Nowak and Corina Tarnita. The article questioned the explanatory efficacy and value of William Hamilton's theory of 'inclusive fitness,' the reigning theoretical and mathematical basis of decades of empirical research into the evolution of social behavior-especially cooperative and altruistic behavior-across the living world.95 The author highlights the reaction of the scientific community, referring to that article: A number of highly critical responses followed one signed by 137 eminent theoreticians and empiricists in evolutionary biology [2]. The number of scientists rejecting the conclusions of Nowak, Tarnita, and Wilson was itself an indication of the nerve that it struck, and also of the continuing centrality of Hamilton's theory to the study of social evolution. (Woodford, op.cit) As far as the philosophical perspective is concerned, a very relevant conclusion came up from these discussions: the multidisciplinary nature of any discussion on human behavior, as we have stated along with this work: We quickly found that the questions raised, by their nature, cut across a variety of disciplines and areas of specialization within the biological sciences, but also in areas that draw on theoretical resources of the life sciences such as 95 Woodford, Peter Evaluating inclusive fitness – Royal Society Open Science -Published:26 June 2019https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190644 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 79 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 the emerging evolutionary social sciences, anthropology, and philosophy. This interdisciplinary scope is thanks in large part to increasing advancement in applying theories of social evolution across the living world from cells to humans, and to more pressing questions about the generality of evolutionary principles. For this reason, this collection features articles from researchers in mathematical biology, behavioual ecology, anthropology and medicine to the philosophy of science, and even ethical theory. (Woodford, op. cit) Systematically, science is searching for the demonstration of the key pieces of the puzzle representing the transmissibility of archetypes. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 80 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER VI THE BASIC TENETS OF MORALS IN PREHISTORY 1. Introduction. The only acceptable evidence to sustain our arguments, in the face of the methodology adopted in this study, are the material elements of human behavior, which could be scientifically taken into account, even though limited to correlated consequences of other material evidence, or sound hermeneutical assumptions. We should build the contexts in which such behavioral elements existed during the Paleolithic to verify if they express any kind of moral content and what tenets do they represent. We should understand as behavioral moral content, any evidence that the agents are consciously prosecuting the ability to serve complex and changing societal needs.96 The reasons for electing the Paleolithic Period as the stage for these contexts are explained in Chapter II. We will use three contexts: the human, the imaginary, and the divine, and they will be formatted from researches, analysis, opinions, and evidence brought by several authors. 96 Roland Zahn, Ricardo de Oliveira Souza, Jorge Moll -Neural Foundation of Morality https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-0970868.56026-7 retrieved Jul,29 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 81 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 2. The Human Context. To build up the human context in Paleolithic, we should start with a "scenario": a general description or the human atmosphere of the period. The American researcher Norman Pedersen97 gives us this scenario: In my research into Paleolithic societies, I have used a one-to-one correspondence of Ice Age humans with simple hunter-gatherer societies known to present anthropology. This is a very limited group. The criteria I used was that the societies have no agriculture, that they be nomadic/ semi-nomadic, and that they had no contact with civilization. Perhaps only the Polar Eskimos described by Peter Freuchen fit the criteria best. The Kalahari Ju/wasi (Elizabeth Thomas Marshall) also known as the !Kung and San Bushmen had minimal contact with agricultural societies. The Mbuti Pygmies of the Ituri Rain Forest (Collin M. Turnbull) had contact with neighboring agriculturists but remained separate. The only other group that I felt might meet the criteria were the Australian Aboriginals, but there is no sufficiently unbiased 97 The Seed of Civilization – The Origins of War, Marriage and Religion – 2017 – SóL-Earth Publishers – ISBN 978-1978169531; When Was the Name of God First Spoken: Correcting Misconceptions About Prehistory– December 13, 2014 ISBN10:1505457068 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 82 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 literature to study. All anthropological research has a modern bias, which must be considered. These four simple hunter-gatherer societies had social behaviors that were very different from all other human societies: no leaders, complete equality between individuals regardless of sex or age, no violent aggression, and no selfish behaviors. (In a private message from Pedersen to the author). Many other researchers endorse the one-to-one correspondence and similar models, and we may find an equivalent argumentation in Christopher Bohem works: We can project these specific patterns backwards in time by using a systematic "ethnographic analogy." This is still a developing aspect of prehistoric research, but my conservative version of it holds that if a behavior is found in all six of the regions where hunter-gatherers have been studied by anthropologists over the past several centuries, essentially the behavior can be projected back to include all behaviorally modern humans.98 We can find the most diverse and conflictive theories related to cultural models of the evolution of human behavior and its traits, from its early origins up to the present day. Most of them take somehow into consideration the relations or similarity between these prehistorical traits and modern human behavior. Such diversity makes the research somehow exhaustive and 98 Bohem, Christopher, Moral Origins:" The Evolution of Altruism, Shame and Virtue" (New York: Basic Books, 2012). See also C. Boehm, "The Moral Consequences of Social Selection," Behaviour 171 (2014): 167-83. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 83 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 inconsistent. Christopher S. Henshilwood and Curtis W. Marean99 consider that rather than focusing on the development of theory, many researchers have suggested behavioral traits that are thought to be modern and concentrated on the empirical record for the antiquity and distribution of those traits. The authors offer a descriptive table of references between some important behavioral traits and their corresponding representative studies, clarifying the systematic research on these correspondences. This first Picture, or cover to our context, focuses the most untouched possible scenario with their primary requisites: a hunter-gatherer society, absence of civilization, and the inexistence of an agricultural economy. We should contemplate this scenario with total immunity related to any modern bias or historical model. The first framework which this study should consider is the assertion that humans, since early Paleolithic, demonstrated using behavioral elements, and that their nature was enabled with the features of what anthropologists call the" CCC Triangle" model for social structure. The "CCC Triangle" is a unique combination of human traits: "Cognition," "Culture," and "Cooperation," and we will employ this model to analyze the prehistoric contexts. During the workshop "Origins of Human Uniqueness and Behavioral Modernity," staged by Arizona State University's 99 Christopher S. Henshilwood and Curtis W. Marean The Origin of Modern Human Behavior Critique of the Models and Their Test Implications – apud Current Anthropology Volume 44, Number 5, December 2003 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research – pg.628. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 84 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 in 2010, scholars in anthropology, primatology, cognitive Science, psychology, paleontology, archaeology, evolutionary biology, and genetics agreed on defining that human uniqueness is the "underlying capacity to produce complexity," understanding that behavioral modernity as "the expression" of those capacities.100 Cognition, the first of these traits, means a fundamental element to any moral behavior, and finds its most substantial content in the capacity of dealing with abstractions. The unquestionable evidence of the ability of the early Paleolithic humans to the use of symbols to represent abstract contents comes from the language. Only humans have language, which allows us to think about the rightness or wrongness of our behavior101. Alen situates the beginning of human language in the Middle Paleolithic and comments on the stages of such development: Human development in the Middle Paleolithic contributed to the emergence of speech and language, art, religion, and technical skill. Speech overtime went through the following development path: the first phase is characterized by general pantomime accompanied by additional stuttering; in the second stage paleolithic people started to communicate with precise gestures associated 100 Despain, David – "Early Humans Used Brain Power, Innovation and Teamwork to Dominate the Planet" in Scientific American – in https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-brain-powerorigins/ retrieved on Aug 03, 2019. 101 Boehm,Christopher -Minding Nature Journal: Spring 2017, Volume 10, Number 2in https://www.humansandnature.org/May2017 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 85 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 with corresponding voice symbols or words and at the end in the third phase pantomime and stuttering completely disappeared. People started to use systematic signs and words. At the beginning of the third stage appeared analytical thinking and concluding. Since that time, talking and thinking, recorded a constant rise.102 The phonetic symbols and semantic sounds and gestures reached their visual codification progressively, starting the construction of the written language. The earliest known evidence of visual expression of abstract ideas is dated of 60,000 BC and are engraved on eggshells103. Therefore, the early Paleolithic humans held the necessary conditions to deal with complex abstractions and to express them with the appropriate semantic symbology, making possible the interaction among individuals overflowing the simple, instinctive patterns and embedding their will, desires, sensitiveness, ideas, interpretations, and feelings. Besides the language and other semiotic elements, technology is a relevant indicator of humans' cognitive stages. Technology during the long Paleolithic Period evolved (i) referentially to the relations of humans with the environment and their needs to survival, and (ii) as a parallel of the biological evolution. The evolutionary process of this evidence of cognition, as significant and 102 Alen, S Language and Spiritual culture in Old stone age December 17, 2015 in https://www.shorthistory.org/prehistory/language-and-spiritualculture-in-old-stone-age/ retrieved Mar,112019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 86 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 revealing as the language, is classified according to its features and chronology by Joseph V.Ferraro103. The author points out that our knowledge about Paleolithic technology is just in the beginning and that the available elements are very few. However, what we have for the moment is strongly indicative of the contexts we are studying and, for sure, as Ferraro comments, we should consider this apparent weakness of scientific material as a promising stage: Rather than being utterly demoralizing, this actually makes for incredibly interesting and exciting times in Paleolithic studies. Important new discoveries are made every day; new analytical techniques provide windows to the past that were all but inconceivable even a few short years ago, and the widespread adoption of an increasingly rigorous scientific approach provides archaeologists with a sound methodological foundation upon which to fashion a cutting-edge 21st-century discipline. The 'golden age' of Paleolithic archaeology is just beginning.104 Thus, by several means, Science demonstrates that the behavior of the Paleolithic man, unlike any other animals, was not only construction of actions determined by instincts, but rather a complex and conscious original cognitive process in mind and brain structures. If in all other animals' behavior, we can only identify instinctive reactions to determined stimuli, in the case of early human evolution we must accept the existence of behavioral 103 Ferraro,J.V.(2012)A Primer on Paleolithic Technology.Nature Education Knowledge4(2):9 104 Ferraro, op.cit. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 87 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 patterns based on choices among different possibilities affected by interaction among individuals, many times divergent from the ordinarily expected instinctive behavioral forms. Pedro Blaz Gonzalez considers this assumption in his economics of beings concept: Regarding man in prehistory, the economics of being represents a time of pressing vital need, when the scope of values was narrower than it is today. This suggests that making choices that safeguarded the survival of individuals and their small clan was of crucial importance. It appears that the range of early man's choice-making was efficiently guided toward survival. Given the physical, emotional, and psychical demands of their living conditions, choicemaking for early man required conscious engagement with their limited field of possibilities.105 We called these behavioral patterns "archetypes," and here we state that they contained all the essential elements and qualities existing in any concept of morals, at any time. The second element of the "CCC Triangle" is "Culture," meaning a product of thinking and social learning facilitated by language, technology, creativity, and innovation.106 105 Gonzalez, Pedro Blaz /-The Economics of Being Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 11(1)/2014: 23–39 106 Despain, David – op.cit. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 88 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 One can identify a cultural context by the observation of the external features of a social group or structure: language, art, beliefs, internal interaction, and organization. Pedersen focused on these elements to delineate the cultural structure of humans in the Paleolithic: We approach sociological and anthropological studies with the belief that human nature is an absolute, that people are always people; that we have always had the same motivations and emotions. Unfortunately, that has been proven to be a false assumption. 20,000 years ago, human nature was very different from what we think of as human nature today. Violence and aggression, competition and ambition; vanity and greed are all part of Modern human nature. We excuse antisocial behaviors because they are inherent in our human race. But none of these traits existed among simple hunter-gatherer societies (and therefore among our prehistoric ancestors.) For 150,000 years, human nature was kinder and gentler, non-aggressive, and considerate. Our ancestors were intelligent, extremely competent, egalitarian, and selfless. That is the human nature of our Homo sapiens species before the advent of Civilization became necessary.107 Some specific structures are observable in the Paleolithic, starting with the social organization. 107 Pedersen, Norman https://pedersensprehistory.com/biasesabout-prehistory retrieved Mar, 18 – 2019. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 89 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Analyzing social organization in the Paleolithic is an arduous task for three main reasons: (i) the period is exceptionally long and covers different stages of human development and evolution; (ii) the scientific evidence is scarce and frequently incongruent; (iii) many types of research contain several biases, and their results cannot be entirely validated. A demonstration of this weakness of results in Paleolithic research is visible in some frequent incongruity. Evidence in archeological studies suggests that the Paleolithic social organization held a simple structure and a uniform pattern of social behavior. Unlike this assertive, researches on fossil and paleoenvironmental elements indicate complex social structures and a visible variability in social behavior. Steven Mithen evaluates the incongruity of such findings as follows: I will argue that the resolution of this paradox, and indeed an understanding of early prehistory in general, can only be gained by addressing the evolution of the mind, an argument that I have made at greater length elsewhere (Mithen 1996).108 Pedersen warns us about the inappropriate content of many available studies about the Paleolithic society: Scholars assume behaviors of Modern men to be universal throughout time, e.g., antagonistic, coercive, domineering, belligerent. 108 Mithen, Steven The Early Prehistory of Human Social Behaviour – Issues of Archeological IKnference and Cognitive Evolution – Proceedings of the British Academy – 88, pg.145/177 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 90 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Scholars use the motivations of Modern Man to explain hunter-gatherer societies. e.g., intimidation, peer pressure; ostracizing. These terms do not apply to nomadic hunter-gatherer societies. They are about Modern, Civilized men only. Scholars often fail to differentiate between nomadic / semi-nomadic hunter-gatherers and sedentary hunter-gatherers. There is a world of difference, which is why they have been categorized as simple and complex huntergatherers.109 The author goes further and recommends the banishment, in such studies, of the use of inappropriate concepts and language to define individual and societal behaviors, and indicates terms and concepts, which have no meaning for hunter-gatherers: Division of Labor, Male dominance over female, Status, Territory, Ownership, Gift reciprocity rules, Kinship definitions, Kinship as a social factor, Marriage as a political factor, Marriage to cousins avoided as a cultural absolute, Peer pressure, Aggression, coercion as social factors, and Crime. Therefore, as long as our concerns refer to moral contents aggregate to social behavior, we will concentrate our attention on the evolution of mind evidence, rather than on structural or organizational social features shown by the traditional archeology. We will take this way. Albeit, some of these features are widely known and are sufficient to ground our study on the behavioral elements arising from the Paleolithic social structure. 109 Pedersen. Norman – Predersen's Prehistory in https://pedersensprehistory.com/biases-about-prehistory - Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 91 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Three levels of social organization are recognized among human hunter-gatherers: the domestic unit, the community, and the band.110. In these three levels, we should look specifically for social, behavioral evidence. Wolfgang Haak111 achieved the demonstration of the domestic unit. He claimed to have worked out with his staff some family relationships in a remarkable series of burials uncovered in central Germany in 2005 and declared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "We have established the presence of the classic nuclear family in a prehistoric context." The researchers found that the children and the adult men grew up in the Eulau area, whereas the adult women came from at least 60 kilometers away an indication that nuclear families in this region were organized around local men who mated with outside women.112 The expression "classic nuclear family" for sure is a modern bias that we should not adopt. Anyhow, the demonstration of the existence of a defined and stable domestic core is relevant. Presently there are no means to decipher the several specific features of these cores, but their existence, by 110 Robert Layton,Sean O'Hara, Alan Bilsborough Antiquity and Social Functions of Multilevel Social Organization Among Human Hunter-Gatherers International Journal of Primatology Volume 33,I ssue5,pp 1215–1245DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-012-9634z Publisher NameSpringer US Print ISSN0164-0291 Online ISSN1573-8604 111 A geneticist at the Australian Centre for Ancient DNA in Adelaide. 112Balter, Michael Prehistoric Family Values Nov. 17, 2008 in https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2008/11/prehistoric-familyvalues – retrieved Dec.12 2018 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 92 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 itself, is enough to sustain the existence of indispensable and proper social behaviors among their members based on needs, motivations, and choices. The undoubted interaction of the cores constructs the primitive communities, which, in its turn, mean the practice of more complex social behaviors, based on the same elements. For the simple fact that this happened among agents endowed with sufficient cognitive capacity, all these processes meant diversified practices of individual and collective choices. In other terms, they contained moral tenets and behaviors. Besides this social organization, several other cultural elements are expressive as far as the psychological, emotional, and behavioral structures of the individuals are concerned. We may exemplify with the consciousness of life and death, the endless metaphysical human question, which appears with determinant cultural traces in the Paleolithic: Since the Middle Palaeolithic ca.120,000 BP, burials of children, young women, and men found at caves in Europe (France) and Asia (Palestine) suggest bonds of relationship and social behavior. These are the first indications of respect and faith to life after death and are mental expressions of Neanderthal man. The dead were also buried in caves, rock shelters, and ditches regardless of their sex. The burials are accompanied by burial offerings from the social group, such as tools, animal horns, and flowers. In many cases, the face or the body of the dead was adorned with ochre, "the gold" of the Paleolithic. Similar habits have come to light at numerous human burials of Homo sapiens Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 93 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 sapiens (modern man), which date to the Upper Paleolithic(35,000-11,000 BP).113 Countless pieces of evidence of this social behavior related to the dualism life-death are expressed in practices and rituals in the period. Only cognitive and moral beings are able to formulate, interpret, symbolize, and express this metaphysical dilemma. Under any circumstance, life and death are moral questions. Christopher Bohem enlightens the evidence of the consciousness of the value of life, one of the most significant moral tenets, in the Paleolithic societies: Prehistorically, killing group members was morally condemned, for the belief that "thou shalt not kill" long preceded the writing of the Bible. However, this ancient and universal condemnation was subject to important exceptions. Mercy killing was tolerated, as was infanticide as a form of birth control, while capital punishment was legitimate as a group strategy to cope with extreme, intolerable, and otherwise inescapable acts by social deviants. Such killings were the result of community intentions, and to work, they had to be strongly approved or at least be morally countenanced by the entire group.[...]This means that in our small and usually nomadic prehistoric hunting groups, for at least the past several thousand generations we have been acting as judgmental, self-protective moral communities-groups that can form a consensus 113 Paleolithic Society –in http://www.ime.gr/chronos/01/en/pl/society/index.html retrieved May, 24 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 94 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 and moralistically agree to take extreme measures whenever a social problem becomes bad enough.[...] With both capital punishment and altruism, patterns of sophisticated choice have been working consistently over evolutionary time to create these parallel effects in our genome. 114 Beyond the social organization, arts play an essential role in any cultural context and outline the human perception and cognition in a determined time-space situation. Despite the universality of the aesthetic sensation as Kant sustained, its' material content is strongly cultural-relative. The diversified Paleolithic art reveals many features of the individual and social life at those times, and grounds the modern notions on the aesthetic universality. The straight relations and reciprocal influence between arts and morals are widely known.115 Claims of artistic activity, in the form of diagonal etchings made with a sharks tooth, were made in 2014 relating to a 500,000-years-old fossil of a clam found in Java in the 1890s associated with Homo erectus. 116 114 Bohem, Christopher – Prehistoric Capital Punishment and Parallel Evolutionary Effects Minding Nature: Spring 2017, Volume 10, Number 2 115 Kieran, Matthew Art, Imagination, and the Cultivation of Morals(art) The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism Vol. 54, No. 4 (Autumn, 1996), pp. 337-351 116https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22429983.200-shellart-made-300000-years-before-humans-evolved.html Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 95 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 We can estimate the oldest known drawing by human hands to be 73,000 years old.117 Findings from Paleolithic archaeology sites suggest that prehistoric people used carving and piercing tools to make instruments and create music for communication and amusement. Archeologists have found Paleolithic flutes carved from bones in which lateral holes are pierced. The Divje Babe flute, carved from a cave bear, is thought to be at least 40,000 years old.118 The dance was an artistic manifestation, as well. Anthropologists refer to their practice as inspired in nature's movements (animals, wind, waves, and other elements) and used in ceremonies, rituals, and day-byday life expressing feelings, prayers, emotions, and happenings. The remains of Paleolithic art are very few, but its existence in those so remote times is a consistent demonstration of the ancient cognitive and human emotional skills. Ambrose(118) says, "Paleolithic art, as well as the art of other hunter-gatherer cultures throughout history, seems to prove that art exists across all human societies." The same way as in modern societies, Paleolithic art exposed a complex semiotic content involving the empiric experience, the environmental references and interpretations, the human interaction, and the projective imaginary. Mithen's researches arrived at this evidence: 117 St. Fleur, Nicholas (12 September 2018)."Oldest Known Drawing by Human Hands Discovered in South African Cave".The New York Times. Retrieved15 September2018. 118 Massey, Reginald, and Massey, Jamila. The Music of India Google Books Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 96 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 This art was part of modern human ecological adaptation to their environment. The art functioned to extend human memory, to hold concepts that are difficult for minds to grasp, and to instigate creative thinking about the solution of environmental and social problems.119 Donald considers such universality from the standpoint of its causation: There is no reason to think that visual art in the Upper Paleolithic came from a different creative source than it does today. The human brain is the biological constraint on, and the ultimate source of creativity. Culture provides the specific semantic fields that determine meaning. Thus, we cannot expect that the inspiration for Upper Paleolithic parietal art was somehow derived outside of the socialcognitive networks that have shaped its modern equivalents.120 The third and last element of the "CCC Triangle" is "Cooperation." 119 Mithen, Steven (2009) – "Thoughtful Foragers: A Study of Prehistoric Decision Making" Cambridge University Press; Reissue edition (March 12, 2009)ISBN-10: 052110288XISBN-13:9780521102889 120 Donald, M. (2009) 'The Roots of Art and Religion in Ancient Material Culture,' in Renfrew, C & Morley, apud Ambrose, Darren The Affectivity of Prehistoric Art (Part 2) in https://dcambrose.com/philosophy/the-affectivity-of-prehistoricart-part-2/ retrieved Apr.21, 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 97 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 To analyze this element, we have two ways: the affirmative and the contrary way, or the "inclusionexclusion" logic reasoning. Affirmatively (inclusion), a general finding dismisses specific evidence and studies: the Paleolithic man survived and evolved continuously for one hundred and fifty millennia, based on small and organized interactive groups. They exchanged resources as artifacts, technology, knowledge, experience, and beliefs, under the most aggressive and inhospitable environmental conditions of nomad life, needy of resources, and full of threats. Unquestionably, this epic route would not be possible without cooperation. It does not matter for our study to determine how cooperation happened and which detailed evidence do we have about these specific forms or proceedings. Cooperation in Paleolithic, from this affirmative angle, is just an obvious logical inference supported by the historical argument. From the negative side (exclusion), we should ask about the presence of the opposite of cooperation, to confirm (or deny) the conclusions of the positive way. The opposite of cooperation means competition, and here, once more, Pedersen can help us: The Polar Eskimos and the Kalahari Ju/wasi did not have competition. They assiduously avoided it. Our simple hunter-gatherer ancestors lived the same with perfect social equanimity for 150,000 years. We justify competition as building physical and mental skills, but our early ancestors simply Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 98 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 practiced a skill until it was sufficiently acquired:they did not need an opponent to beat.121 Pedersen's argument gets more reliable in the extension that he considers the war as the ultimate competition. Indeed, there is no research indicating the remains of armed conflicts or wars in the Paleolithic. Conclusively, the exclusive logical way confirms the inclusive one, and we may coherent and soundly affirm that the presence of cooperation is evidence of the Paleolithic societies. 3. The Context of the Imaginary and the Divine The imaginary is the realm of human free will. This assertion usually provokes a repugnance reaction or an angry grumble among radical determinists of any sect. We will not discuss these preformatted theoretical ideas that do not enlighten any discussion, and whose efforts to demonstrate that human knowledge and consciousness do not exist drive to the useless belief of sterility of the intelligence. We may learn from the neuroscientist Peter Ulrich Tse that what we said has scientific ground: We will see that outcomes that arise from internal operations in working memory, that afford imagination and deliberations about the future, can alter probabilities of future courses of 121 Pedersen, Norman – The Seed of Civilization – Sól-Earth Publishers ISBN 978 – 1978169531 – pg. 115 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 99 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 action. I will argue that evolution has instantiated these conditions necessary for Libertarian Free Will in our brains. Indeed, evolution has afforded us two kinds of Libertarian Free Will, one that we share with other animals, namely, the ability to weigh and select from among internally simulated options, and the other, unique to humans, namely, the capacity to imagine and then set about becoming of a new kind of chooser in the future.122 The presence and expression of the imaginary in a society is a cultural demonstration of the cognitive ability, social consciousness, aesthetic sensibility, free will, and creativity among their individuals. The imaginary is a material ingredient in the construction of moral behavior. The projection of current reality in an imaginary future and the perception of its consequences is a mechanism of intelligent choice and certainly is a moral mechanism. Without this projection, the moral behavior, which is a choosing exercise, would be a simple random occurrence. The presence of the imaginary and their several expressions are one of the relevant features of the Paleolithic societies. The semiotic structure of these expressions and the evolutionary ability to deal with symbols are visible elements since the early Paleolithic. Researches indicate that the evolution of arts during this period is visible in the visual arts, as well as ritual dances 122 Tse, Peter Ulrich in the course Libertarian Free will – Neuroscientific and Philosophical Evidence – at Dartmouth College. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 100 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 and other aesthetic expressions, and surpassed the representation of the known world. Art became conceptual when it reached the level of expression of abstractions, such as emotions and imaginary elements, and configured the practice of "art by the sake of art." Eduardo Palacio-Pérez and Aitor Ruiz Redondo focused the content of such expressions of the imaginary: In the course of research currently being carried out at Santimamine (Bizkaia, Spain) (Gonz'alez S'ainz & Idarraga 2010) and Altxerri (Gipuzkoa, Spain) a series of zoomorphic figures have been identified (four in total between the two sites) that represent creatures that do not exist in nature (Figure 1). They are examples of the socalled 'imaginary creatures,' unreal or fantastic beings that appear in Paleolithic art ensembles. Despite their rarity-fewer than 50 are known in Paleolithic parietal art-they have been the subject of debate and controversy since the first of them were discovered.123 In the same course, the human experience in those times brought the perception of the realm of Divine and, in the face of the comprehension of death, the collective and projective beliefs on a "post mortem" life. Here religion starts. Focusing this context, we can understand that both rituals and religion are different human behavior expressions of 123 Palacio-Pérez, Eduardo and Redondo, Aitor Ruiz Imaginary creatures in Palaeolithic art: prehistoric dreams or prehistorians' dreams? DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00050341Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2015 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 101 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 the same phenomenon: the assumption of the existence of the Divine and the forms of relation and communication with the deity. Credible and coherent evidence, brought by archeology and anthropology, indicates the existence of this metaphysical human feeling and perception since at least mid-Paleolithic Period. Religion aggregates the spiritual and psychological contents, systems, and semiotic elements defining the relation human-divinity. Rituals are stereotypical corporal and psychological behaviors expressing elements of religion. Hervey C. Peoples, Pavel Duda, and Frank W. Marlowe describe the characteristics of this process: We reconstruct ancestral character states using a time-calibrated supertree based on published phylogenetic trees and linguistic classification and then test for correlated evolution between the characters and the direction of cultural change. Results indicate that the oldest trait of religion, present in the most recent common ancestor of present-day hunter-gatherers, was animism, in agreement with long-standing beliefs about the fundamental role of this trait. Belief in an afterlife emerged, followed by shamanism and ancestor worship. Ancestor spirits or high gods who are active in human affairs were absent in early humans, suggesting a deep history for the egalitarian nature of hunter-gatherer societies.124 124People,Hervey C. , Duda, Pavel, and Marlowe, Frank W. "HunterGatherers and the Origins of Religion",HumNat Journal - 2016 Sep;27(3):261-82. doi: 10.1007/s12110-016-9260-0 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 102 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 The individual and collective imaginary, the ability to interpret nature as an expression of the divine, to represent it with semiotic elements and to overpass the unknown by the construction of myths, legends, and figurative abstractions were the ingredients of the imaginary/divine context. From this sophisticated human experience came the aesthetic sensibility, the metaphysical assumptions, and the religious beliefs. Continuously they evolved to specific moral and social behaviors incorporated into the collective unconscious. In Jungian terms, The primitive mentality does not invent myths; it experiences them. Myths are original revelations of the preconscious psyche, involuntary statements about unconscious psychic happenings, and anything but allegories of physical processes. Such allegories would be an idle amusement for an unscientific intellect. Myths, on the contrary, have a vital meaning. Not merely do they represent, they are the psychic life of the primitive tribe, which immediately falls to pieces and decays when it loses its mythological heritage, like a man who has lost his soul. A tribe's mythology is its living religion, "whose loss is always and everywhere, even among the civilized, a moral catastrophe. Nevertheless, religion is a vital link with psychic processes independent of and beyond consciousness in the dark hinterland of the psyche. Many of these unconscious processes may be indirectly occasioned by consciousness, but never by conscious choice. Others appear to arise spontaneously, that is to Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 103 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 say, from no discernible or demonstrable conscious cause.125 125 Jung, Carl Gustav – The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, cit. Vol. 4 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 104 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER VII RECOMPOSING A PREHISTORIC SYSTEM OF MORALS If we contemplate the three contexts of the Paleolithic societies which we explored (the Human, the Imaginary, and the Divine) indeed some question arise. The most important ones are: "What made these contexts possible?" "Which are the 'sine qua non' conditions of this process?" Among diverse and equally correct explanations, one becomes the center of our study: a moral behavior system was ever-present in human social evolution. Analyzing the structure of our "CCC Triangle" model, we can immediately understand that nothing contained in the evidence we collected would exist in the absence of moral behavior. Should we eliminate the existence of such a moral system in any phase of human evolution, the results would change dramatically. It is relatively simple to build several experimental social and anthropological models based on the absence of morals since the beginning of the Paleolithic. Indeed, none of them will conduct the same results demonstrated by Human History. We were looking for, since the beginning of this work, this ball. We could not see it, because the colored photo of the soccer match did not show it. However, we knew beforehand it was there because it is an indispensable element for a soccer match. Denying its presence would mean that what we saw in the photo could be a party, or Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 105 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 a theatrical play, or anything else rather than a soccer match. All this evidence brought by different sources is the foundation of our inferences, and going through the philosophical and scientific research, theories, and debates, we finally found the justification of our reasoning. From our three contexts, we may easily extract several moral tenets existing in the Paleolithic, represented and expressed through social behaviors, being possible to summarize them as follows: The notion of life and death. The perception of the value of human life and the need to preserve it. The necessity of the best relation between the individual and the social life to make survival possible. The need for cooperative behaviors and congregational efforts to this end. The definition of extreme situations where social survival prevails over individual existence (capital punishment, euthanasia, etc.). Altruism instead of egoism. Equality and absence of discrimination. Absence of any social domination. The value of free will and the importance of choices. Aggregation and exchange instead of competition and aggression. The significance of the domestic core and its stability. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 106 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 The responsibility for reproduction and care for the offspring, The expression of feelings, ideas, and emotions by social means like arts. The conscious dilemma about death and life after death. The perception of the Divine, the efforts to understand it, and acceptance of its nature. A non-destructive relation with the environment. Flexibility for adaptation. We mean for Paleolithic Moral System the social and behavioral model we can construct with all these tenets brought by the empirical observation of the human experience. In no way, we adopt any kind of deontological approach in these behaviors and understand them as internal propositional features of the societies involved, acquired by experience, and aggregate to the human genome as elements of the collective unconscious. They are the moral archetypes, the object of this paper. For this reason, we step aside from any attempt to interpret these archetypes as a moral code. Moral codes are meaningless to philosophical thinking. They are modern formal deontological linguistic expressions of the attempt to convert into objective social commandments some specific moral tenets, intentionally chosen according to the circumstances of a society in a particular time-space context. They are formal teleological semantic expressions. It is not possible, therefore, the emergence of a moral system from the study of a moral code. Moral systems shelter behaviors, Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 107 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 rather than textual declarations, and they may be compared with other systems. Moral codes cannot be compared to anything, except to themselves. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 108 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 CHAPTER VIII RELATIONS BETWEEN THE PALEOLITHIC MORAL SYSTEM AND MODERN SOCIETY The tenets contained in the Paleolithic moral system traveled for uncountable millennia engraved in the human genome, up to the present days. They have never changed, nor has our nature forgotten them. In many times and places, for multiple reasons, they have not been represented in social behavior as a moral system, or have not been adopted by social groups for some elapses of time. However, they remain there in its integrity, ever and ever. There is only one hypothetical possibility of elimination of the Paleolithic moral system from our collective unconscious: the construction of human society much more efficient as an evolutionary structure than the hunter-gatherer societies, based on entirely different moral behaviors, and able to be more successful than those, from all standpoints. This hypothetical society should be submitted to the natural dialectic processes of survival, evolution, and stability of humankind for many millennia, to substitute the content of our existing collective unconscious gradually. However, this would be a different world and a different species. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 109 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 For sure, any effective moral system is adaptable to cultural, technological, biological, and environmental changes. Adaptability is one of the crucial tenets we mentioned. For this reason, we have argued that our original moral foundations are somehow relative to timespace contexts. When structural changes in the social fabric happened with the first agricultural settlements and urban organizations, at the end of the upper Paleolithic and beginning of the Mesolithic period, one of the most important processes of human behavioral adaptation took place. Even under the influence of these extreme changes in the social model, the Paleolithic moral tenets persisted with flexibility and adaptability. Indeed, researches sustain the belief that the social models, resulting from the transformation of the hunter-gatherer society into the territorial life arising from the first settlements, did not necessarily contain any trace or mechanism of moral behavior disruption. The economic model of the early Mesolithic society was perfectly compatible with the evolutionary properties and moral foundations of our Paleolithic ancestors, as Vernon L. Smith explains: Prehistoric man developed institutions that conditioned his use of resources. Property rights evolved as an essential part of man's institutional environment as a result of the changing constraints of the natural and technological environment. These property rights could evolve in the absence of a centralized state because they depended on reciprocity, mutual dependence, and state-like forms of control achieved through broadened kinship ties, customs, and culture. While early Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 110 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 property rights were not always private or transferable, they did constrain individual and group behavior by limiting access to scarce resources. In this sense, the successful evolution of humankind is closely related to the customs and culture that shaped prehistoric property rights.126 When we turn our attention to modern society, so distant from the hunter-gatherer life in terms of chronology, technology, culture, and behavior, at first glance, we may believe that both are entirely different realities. This perception is as simplistic as false. On the one hand, the chronological difference of approximately 12,000 years is irrelevant in evolutionary and genetic terms, when compared with 150,000 years of behavioral stability of the Paleolithic. On the other hand, and as far as moral behavior is concerned, we can find in any period of modern human life the persistence of the same basic prehistoric moral tenets expressed as social behaviors or as "desiderata." We should ever consider social and cultural desiderata in any analysis of adaptive moral processes because they transport the same ethical content than behavior does. Behavior is an active practice; social and cultural desiderata are the persistent essence of the human cognition about behaving. The semiotic content and structure of our cultural desiderata are complex and 126 Smith, Vernon L.(1993) "Humankind in Prehistory: Economy, Ecology, and Institutions" in The Political Economy of Customs and Culture, edited by Terry L. Anderson and Randy T. Simmons, Copyright 1993 Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 111 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 aggregate to our collective unconscious the same way that the moral behavioral tenets are. Both are archetypal universal elements, and we can find in both of them the traces and roots of our archaic morality. Consequently, we admit that human morality is universal, that its content is composed of archetypes and expressed through behaviors and desiderata. The Attachment Theory considers the value of these semiotic contents in social adaptation, as Hinde exposes: Attachment theory is based in part on biological considerations concerned with the selective forces that probably acted in our environment of evolutionary adaptedness. This functional approach poses questions seldom addressed by developmentalists – for instance, why are humans so constructed that particular childhood experiences have particular outcomes? Today much behavior is directed towards goals other than the maximization of inclusive fitness. This fact poses a number of questions about the relations between biological and cultural desiderata and the methods for assessing attachment. Finally, the relations of biological and cultural desiderata to the individual desideratum of psychological well-being are considered.127 127 Hinde Robert A., Stevenson-Hinde Joan.(1990)"Attachment: Biological, Cultural and Individual Desiderata"Human Development 1990;33:62–72 (DOI:10.1159/000276503)Karger. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 112 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Thus, we argue that the day by day of moral behaviors in modern society, aggregating elements of many different time-space situations, does not change its prehistoric foundations and is limited to necessary adaptations of the society experiencing new technologies, new scientific knowledge, many religious, economic and political evolutional influences, cultural acquisitions and losses. These changes are superficial and generally related to limited and circumstantial features of moral behavior. We could not identify in our researches any adaptive and stable moral behavior introduced by modern humans, which could be able to change or eliminate any of the tenets we listed above. However, we should take into account that modern society, with its continuous and progressive complexity, frequently deviates behaviorally to counter evolutionary situations through the adoption of practices and concepts contravening our original moral tenets. These contraventions are not adaptive changes nor the relative cultural evolution of the moral system. They are just contraventions, behaviors offending the foundations of human morality, a counter evolutionary context of a pathological social state. Many times in many places, modern humans attempt to impose egoism, violence, competition, domination, discrimination, possession, war, cruelty, and despair. They even attempt to model an unfeasible and gammy society. All these attempts, meaning counter evolutionary behaviors, prevail for a very short historical period, after which course the foundations of human morality outcrop from our collective unconscious, where they live for uncountable millennia. Indeed, in a generalized context, we observed that these deflections do not have the capacitance to become Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 113 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 aggregate by the collective unconscious, just because they correspond to social behaviors in the benefit of certain groups in the detriment of others, rather than an evolutionary element to be incorporated to the human genome. In many cases, the social process defeats with cultural instruments some of these deflections. This reaction is the primary content of what we call "counter cultures," meaning them the social response against a dominant culture sheltering counter evolutionary moral practices. In some other cases, the reaction could be more complicated than counter-cultural actions, but they are equally inevitable because the evolutionary process is determinant. Very curiously, in the popular culture some changes made in the modern moral systems are taken into account as an evolutionary event, a developmental episode or a substantial modernization of the social behavior when, in fact, they are just the restoration of a primitive moral tenet after the failure of systematic attempts to offend or denying it. I offer two contemporary contexts: slavery and sexuality. When the modern world abolished the last traces of slavery in North and South America, the fact was celebrated as a significant social advance, welcome modernity arriving from the last stages of human evolution. This interpretation is entirely wrong. Slavery was unknown by the Paleolithic societies and obviously contravened the structure of the Paleolithic moral system engraved in our genes, which was based on equality and collaboration. Slavery was introduced by the modern man and corresponded to the denial of several ancestral moral Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 114 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 behaviors. This practice failed in its purposes and became the opposite of modernity and evolution, up to the point where its banishment became a condition to the continuity of the human social experience. This banishment did not represent the advances of modern humans, but the return to our original moral system after many disasters caused by its infringement. The same applies to the "sexual revolution" of the 60s', the feminist movements since the beginning of the 20th Century, and the LGTBI movements and conquers. The results of these movements considered the "evolution of the new moral" are, in fact, the "return to the ancient moral system" from 150,000 years ago, because sexuality and gender options were not properly a problem in Paleolithic society. These themes became a modern moral problem because of modern discrimination and oppression, mostly arriving from contemporary religious, political, and economic actions. These movements against sexual behavioral discrimination succeeded in a very short elapse of time just because discrimination and oppression are not a part of our genome as moral behaviors, being its abolishment acceptable by society as a whole. All severe denial or offense to our original moral system introduced by the modern humans had for result, violence, pain, misery, hate, inequality, ugliness, and death. These offenses were the opposite of evolution, and for these reasons, did not succeed as a behavioral model and never have been accepted as a cultural identity. Therefore, we claim that the behavioral and socialeconomic problems of modern civilization are a dialectic confrontation between counter evolutionary models and the human genetic moral foundations. If the theorists of the "Game Theory" (as the brilliant John Maynard Smith) Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 115 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 are right, and if the theory is somehow applicable to moral processes of decision, for sure, the modern players are doing the wrong play. The immediate pay-off of some individuals and groups could be advantageous in a short time, but the table on which they play the game is under severe risk. In this context, Philosophy should play a relevant role for a better understanding of human social nature and behavior. Unfortunately, we cannot say that this is true. All the Social and Political Philosophy, from ancient Greece to the present days, is just a collection of conflictive, superficial, and useless essays on the severe problems arising from the deviations of our genetic moral system. Philosophy thinking faces these severe problems passively, understanding them as a contextual circumstance of the modern human, which should be accepted as reality and somehow justified and organized. Alongside its history, Political Philosophy and its theorists, in one or other ways: (i) justified or ignored slavery and misery, (ii) justified inequality, stimulated unlimited competition and possession, (iii) supposed imaginary social contracts supporting and regulating exclusion, domination, and injustice, (iv) justified or silently assisted the stupidity of war, violence and domination, genocide, torture and human submission for religious, political and economic reasons, (v) Accepted and stimulated colonialism in the benefit of dominant societies, (vii) proposed that the value of human existence could be calculated by an equation of the relations cost-benefit, (viii) proposed violent conflicts of classes and a totalitarian state, eliminating liberty and free will, to deal with inequality, (ix) disseminated the belief that a magic and invisible hand would take care of sculpting social justice, Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 116 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 (x) turned its attention away from the extreme misery and human suffering. Western Social and Political Philosophy has always been passive and sterile spectators of the human tragedy and did not yet understand, clearly and simply, the essence of all universal thinking: the meaning of humanity and the intrinsic cosmologic value of life. There is no Philosophy without Cosmology. Without cosmological foundations, "Philosophy is dead." 128 In this confrontation between evolution, egoism, and blindness, for sure, evolution will prevail, even though this could mean the extinction of our species, once evolution is a cosmologic process, rather than a human phenomenon, and will prosecute with or without humans. On the other hand, the Homo sapiens will not survive without biological and social adaptation to the evolutionary process. We want to close this work repeating the same quotation used on the first page: "Evolution is a process that involves blind variation and selective retention."129 128 Hawking, Stephen, and Mlodinow, Leonard (2012)"The Grand Design". Bantam; Reprint edition – p5 129 T.D. Campbell "Variation and Selective Retention in Socio-cultural Evolution," in H.R. Barringer, B.I. Blanksten, and R.W. Mack, eds., Social Change in Developing AreasNew York: Schenkman, 1965. – 32. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 117 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES (In alphabetical order) Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 118 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 A Abdullah Sliti (2014) "Islamic Ethics: Divine Command Theory in Arabo-Islamic Thought, Islam and Christian– Muslim Relations," 25:1, 132-134, DOI: 10.1080/09596410.2013.842089 Adams, Robert M. (1987)." The Virtue of Faith and Other Essays in Philosophical Theology". New York: Oxford University Press. Adams, Robert M. (1999). "Finite and Infinite Goods." New York: Oxford University Press. Airoboman, Felix Ayemere – (2017) "A Critical Reflection on Divine Command Theory of Morality."Ewanlen. A Journal of Philosophical Inquiry https://www.academia.edu/36768829/3. Al-Attar, Mariam. (2010)." Islamic Ethics: Divine Command Theory in Arabo-Islamic Thought". Routledge; 1 edition.ISBN-10: 0415555191 Alen, S – (2015) "Language and Spiritual culture in Old stone age" – inhttps://www.shorthistory.org/prehistory/language-andspiritual-culture-in-old-stone-age/ retrieved Mar,112019 Alston, William P. (1989). Epistemic Justification: Essays in the Theory of Knowledge. Cornell University Press. Armstrong, David (1973). Belief, Truth, and Knowledge. CUP Archive, 1973-p ISBN0521097371, 9780521097376 Austin, Michael W. "Divine Command Theory" -in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 119 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 https://www.iep.utm.edu/divine-c/#H7retrieved Aug.18, 2018 B Balter, Michael (2008) - "Prehistoric Family Values" in https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2008/11/prehistoricfamily-values – retrieved Dec.12 2018 Bentham, Jeremy (1948) – "An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation" – New York, Hafner Publishing Co. 1948 Chapter 1 Of the Principle of Utility. Birch, Jonathan (2017) Book review: Michael Tomasello // "A natural history of human morality." British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Review of Books. ISSN 0007-0882. Blatner, Adam, M.D –(2019) "The Relevance of the Concept of Arqchetype" https ://www.blatner.com/adam/level2/archetype.htm retrieved on May, 14 - Boehm, Christopher ( 2017)– "Prehistoric Capital Punishment and Parallel Evolutionary Effects" Minding Nature: Spring, Volume 10, Number 2, in https://www.humansandnature.org/prehistoric-capitalpunishment-and-parallel-evolutionary-effects - retrieved mar,11 2019 Bohem, Christopher(2012) "Moral Origins: The Evolution of Altruism, Shame, and Virtue" -New York: Basic Books. Boehm, Christopher (2014) "The Moral Consequences of Social Selection," Behaviour (JO)171 (2014): 167-83. 10.1163/1568539X-00003143 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 120 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Bohem, Christopher (2017)– "Prehistoric Capital Punishment and Parallel Evolutionary Effects "Minding Nature: Spring 2017, Volume 10, Number 2 BonJour, Laurence (1985). The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Boyd, Richard (1988). In G. Sayre-McCord (ed.), Essays on Moral Realism. Cornell University Press. pp. 181-228 (1988) Breed, Michael D., and Moore, Janice (2011) "Animal Behavior" Academic Press; 1 edition ISBN-10: 012372581X ISBN-13: 978-0123725813 Brink David O, - "Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics" – Cambridge Studies in Philosophy – Cambridge University Press –ISBN 0 52135937. Buchanan A, R Powell – (2015). "The limits of evolutionary explanations of morality and their implications for moral progress." Ethics. Burkart J. M., Hrdy S. B., Schaik C. P. V. (2009). "Cooperative breeding and human cognitive evolution." Evol. Anthropol. 18, 175–18610.1002/evan.20222 (doi:10.1002/evan.20222) Brune, M., and Brunecohrs, U. (2006). "Theory Of Mind- Evolution, Ontogeny, Brain Mechanisms, And Psychopathology." Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30:437-455. C Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 121 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Cahn, Steven, M. (2012) Exploring Philosophy: An Introduction Anthology. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press Campbell, T.D. (1965) "Variation and Selective Retention in socio-cultural Evolution," apud H.R. Barringer, B.I. Blanksten, and R.W. Mack, eds., Social Change in Developing AreasNew York: Schenkman. Changeux, J.P. (1985) Neuronal Man: The Biology of Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chisholm, Roderick (1966). Theory of Knowledge, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Churchland, Patricia S. (2014)"Touching a Nerve: Our Brains, Our Selves" W. W. Norton & Company –ISBN-10: 0393349446 / ISBN-13: 978-0393349443 Clarke, R. ( 2003) "Incompatibilism." In: CLARKE, R. Libertarian Accounts of Free Will. Oxford University Press, p. 3-14. Clark J. D. (2001). "Variability in primary and secondary technologies of the Later Acheulian in Africa." In A very remote period indeed: papers on the Palaeolithic presented to Derek Roe (eds Miliken S., Cook J., editors. ), pp. 1–18 Oakville, CT: Oxbow Books Clottes, Jean, and David Lewis-Williams.(1998) "The Shamans of Prehistory: Trance and Magic in the Painted Caves." New York: Harry Abrams Cohen, L. J. (1986): The Dialogue of Reason: An Analysis of Analytical Philosophy, Oxford: Clarendon Press Collingwood, R.G. (2014) "An Essay on Philosophical Method" Martino Fine Books Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 122 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Conkle, D. O. (2000) "The Path of American Religious Liberty: From the Original Theology to Formal Neutrality and an Uncertain Future." Indiana Law Journal, vol. 75, no. 1. Crowe, M. B., (1977) "The Changing Profile of the Natural Law," The Hague: Nijhoff. D Delagnes, A., Roche H. (2005). "Late Pliocene hominid knapping skills: the case of Lokalalei 2C, West Turkana, Kenya". J. Hum. Evol. 48, 435– 47210.1016/j.jhevol.2004.12.005 (doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.12.005) Danaher, J. SOPHIA (2017). "In Defence of the Epistemological Objection to Divine Command Theory"First Online19 October 2017 – DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-017-0622-9 Darwall, Stephen (2006). "The Second-Person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability," Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Darwin, Charles (1871). "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex," London-John Murray Despain, David – "Early Humans Used Brain Power, Innovation and Teamwork to Dominate the Planet" in Scientific American – in https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/humansbrain-power-origins/ retrieved on Aug 03, 2019. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 123 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Donagan, Alan. (1977). "The Theory of Morality." Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Donald, M. (2009) 'The Roots of Art and Religion in Ancient Material Culture,' in Renfrew, C & Morley, apud Ambrose, Darren – "The Affectivity of Prehistoric Art (Part 2)" in https://dcambrose.com/philosophy/the-affectivity-ofprehistoric-art-part-2/ retrieved Apr.21, 2019 Dyson, L., Stephen & M. Gero, Joan & Conkey, Margaret. (1992)." Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory". Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 23. 309. 10.2307/205279. E "Ethics According To Immanuel Kant Ethics Sage." (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.ethicssage.com/2017/05/ethics-accordingto-immanuel-kant.html.Jun, 16-2019 F Fagan, Brian M – (1998) "From Black Land to Fifth Sun: The Science of Sacred Sites" –ISBN 0-20195991-7 –. Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003)." The Nature of Human Altruism". Nature 425:785-791. Ferraro, J. V. (2012) "A Primer on Paleolithic Technology." Nature Education Knowledge 4(2):9 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 124 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Finer, S. E. (1999) "The History of Government: The Intermediate Ages," Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Francisco J. Ayala (2010) -"In the Light of Evolution: Volume IV: The Human Condition." National Academy of Sciences (US); Avise JC, Ayala FJ, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US);.In https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK210003/ ). G Galadari, Abdulla. (2011). Science vs. Religion: The Debate Ends. In https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228175424_Sc ience_vs_Religion_The_Debate_Endsretrieved Apr,6, 201 Gash, DM, and Deane, AS (2015) "Neuron-based heredity and human evolution." Neurosci. 9:209. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2015.00209. Gilkeson, John S. (2010) - "Anthropologists and the Rediscovery of America,1886–1965" – Cambridge University Press Online ISBN: 9780511779558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511779558 Goldenberg, N.R. (1989). "Archetypal theory and the separation of mind and body." In J. Plaskow & C.P. Christ (eds.)," Weaving the visions: New patterns in feminist spirituality." New York: Harper & Row. Gonzalez, Pedro Blaz (2014)-"The Economics of Being" Cultura . International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 11(1)/2014: 23–39 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 125 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Grafen, Alan – (2007) "Detecting kin selection at work using inclusive fitness" Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Mar 7; 274(1610): 713–719. Published online 2006 Dec 12. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.0140 ----00PMCID: PMC2197210/ Gray, Peter (2012) "The origins of morality: an evolutionary account" Dennis L. Krebs, 2011 Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press US$49.95 (HBK), 291 pp. ISBN 9780199778232, Journal of Moral Education, 41:2, 264-266, DOI: 10.1080/03057240.2012.680715 H Hare, John. (1997). "The Moral Gap: Kantian Ethics, Human Limits, and God's Assistance." New York: Oxford University Press. Hare, John. (2000). "Naturalism and Morality." In Naturalism: A Critical Analysis. Edited by William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland. New York: Routledge: 189-212. "Hare's Preference Utilitarianism: An Overview And Critique," http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S 0101-317320130002000 -Retrieved June 30, 2019. Harman, Gilbert and Thomson, Judith Jarvis (1996) – "Moral Relativism and Moral Objectivity" WB; 1 edition ISBN-10: 0631192115/ ISBN-13: 978-0631192114 pp. 3-5. 3 Hawking, Stephen, and Mlodinow, Leonard (2012)" The Grand Design" Bantam; Reprint edition. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 126 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Henshilwood, Christopher S. and Marean, Curtis W. (2003)- "The Origin of Modern Human Behavior Critique of the Models and Their Test Implications" –in Current Anthropology Volume 44, Number 5, December 2003 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research – pg.628. Hinde Robert A., Stevenson-Hinde Joan.(1990) "Attachment: Biological, Cultural and Individual Desiderata"Human Development 1990;33:62–72 (DOI:10.1159/000276503)Karger. Hollis, Martin (1994). "The Philosophy of Social Science: An Introduction."Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-521-44780-5.) Hoffman, M, E Yoeli, CD (2016) "Game theory and morality. The evolution of morality, Springer". Navarrete. "How Is The Divine Command Theory Related To Ethics And," apud https://www.compellingtruth.org/divinecommand-theory.html (accessed June 30, 2019) H.R. Barringer, B.I. Blanksten, and R.W. Mack (1965) – "Social Change in Developing Areas"New York: Schenkman Hume, David –( 1958 ) "A Treatise of Human Nature"A. D. Lindsay - Philosophical Quarterly 8 (33):379-380. I Imtiaz, Adam(2015) – "Plato's Theory of Forms" Apud "im print" in http://uwimprint.ca/article/platos-theory-offorms/ retrieved Jul,24/2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 127 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 J Jordan, J. (2006). "Does Skeptical Theism Lead to Moral Skepticism?" Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 72 (2), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.19331592.2006.tb00567.x Joyce, R. (2001). "The Myth of Morality." Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jung, Carl G. (1952). "Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle"-. Collected Works (Vol. 8). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Jung, Carl G., (1933) "Modern Man in Search of a Soul "Harcourt , Brace & World, -ISBN 0156612062, 9780156612067 Jung, Carl G.,(1968) "Man and His Symbols"Dell Publishing Co., Inc. Jung, C.G. (1939). "Archetypes of the collective unconscious." In, The Integration of the Personality (Collected Works, V.9, New York: Farrar & Rinehart. Jung, Carl G.(2014) "The Relations Between the Ego and the Unconscious"Princeton University Press; 2nd ed. K Kant, Immanuel. (1993). "Critique of Practical Reason." Third Edition. Translated by Lewis White Beck. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 128 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 "Kant's Moral Philosophy" (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kantmoral/ Krebs, Dennis L. (2011)- "The Origins of Morality: An Evolutionary Account," Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press 291 pp. ISBN 978-0199778232 Kohlberg, Lawrence -(1969) "Stage and Sequence: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Socialization." In Handbook of Socialization. G. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally. L Laplane, Lucie Mantovani, Paolo Padreu, Thomas and others (2019)- "Why science needs philosophy" Proceedings of the National Academy of Science http://www.pnas.org/content/116/10/3948. Lashley, K. (1951). "The problem of serial order in behavior. In Cerebral mechanisms in behavior" (ed. Jeffress L. A., editor. ), pp. 112–136 New York, NY: John Wiley Laughlin, Charles D. and Eugene G. D'Aquili (1974) "Biogenetic Structuralism"-New York: Columbia University Press, ISBN 0231038178 Laughlin, Charles D., John McManus, and Eugene G. d'Aquili (1990)" Brain, Symbol, and Experience: Toward a Neurophenomenology of Consciousness." New Science Library, 1990 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 129 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Laughlin, Charles D. (1996) "Archetypes, Neurognosis, and the Quantum Sea." Journal of Scientific Exploration,(1996) – 375400 Layton, Robert / O'Hara, Sean/ Bilsborough, Alan - "Antiquity and Social Functions of Multilevel Social Organization Among Human Hunter-Gatherers "International Journal of Primatology Volume 33, Issue 5, pp 1215–1245DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-012-9634-z Publisher NameSpringer US Print ISSN0164-0291 Online ISSN1573-8604 Lewis-Williams, David J. (2002) "The Mind in the Cave: Consciousness and the Origin of Art." London: Thames & Hudson Locke, John (1824)-" An Essay Concerning Human Understanding." 25th. Ed. London, 1824Print W. Dowall – BookII, Chapter XXI, pg. 319. Locke, John. (1988). "Essays on the Law of Nature," W. von Leyden (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. M MacIntyre. Alasdair C.(1999)- "Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues." Open Court PublishingISBN 081269452X, 978081269452 Mackie, J. L. (1978). "Can there be a rights-based moral theory?" Midwest Studies in Philosophy 3 (1):350-359.125 Markie, Peter, "Rationalism vs. Empiricism," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 130 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Massey, Reginald, and Massey, Jamila (1993)." The Music of India" Kahn & Averill Publishers; Revised edition Matthew, Kieran (1996) – "Art, Imagination, and the Cultivation of Morals" (art) The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism Vol. 54, No. 4 pp. 337-351 McKeever, Matthew – The Beauty of Analytic Philosophy. https://mipmckeever.weebly.com/things-ive-written.html retrieved Apr. 8, 2019. McKenna, Brittany in "Natural Law Theory: Definition, Ethics & Examples "https://study.com/academy/lesson/natural-law-theorydefinition-ethics-examples.html#transcriptHeader- retrieved Mar, 6 – 2019 Mesoudi A., O'Brien M. J. (2008). "The learning and transmission of hierarchical cultural recipes." Biol. Theory 3, 63–7210.1162/biot.2008.3.1.63 (doi:10.1162/biot.2008.3.1.63) 17. Pelegrin, J., 1990. Prehistoric lithic technology: some aspects of research. Archaeol. Rev. Cambridge 9, 116–125 Mesoudi A., Whiten A. (2004.) "The hierarchical transformation of event knowledge in human cultural transmission." J. Cogn. Cult. 4, 1– 2410.1163/156853704323074732 (doi:10.1163/156853704323074732) Metzner, R. (1986). "Opening to inner light: The transformation of human nature and consciousness." Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher. Miller G. A., Pribram K. H., Galanter E. (1960). "Plans and the structure of behavior." New York, NY: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 131 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Mithen, Steven - "The Early Prehistory of Human Social Behaviour" – Issues of Archeological IKnference and Cognitive Evolution – Proceedings of the British Academy – 88, pg.145/177 Mithen, S. (1999). "Imitation and cultural change: a view from the Stone Age, with specific reference to the manufacture of handaxes." In Mammalian social learning: comparative and ecological perspectives (eds Box H. O., Gibson K. R., editors. ), pp. 389–413 Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Mithen, Steven. (1999) – "The Prehistory of the Mind: The Cognitive Origins of Art, Religion and Science" Thames & Hudson; 1st edition. Modell, A. H. (2003). "Imagination and the Meaningful Brain." Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press "Morality The Euthyphro Dilemma" (2019) Islam Stack Exchange. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/46742/theeuthyphro-dilemmaMay, 82019 N Nozick, R., (1974), "Anarchy, State and Utopia," New York: Basic Books. O Otsuka, M., (2006), "Saving Lives, Moral Theories and the Claims of Individuals," Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 132 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Owen, R. (1857). "On the characters, principles of division and primary groups of the class Mammalia." J. Proc. Linn. Soc. 2, 1–37 P Palacio-Pérez, Eduardo and Redondo, Aitor Ruiz (2015)- "Imaginary creatures in Palaeolithic art: prehistoric dreams or prehistorians' dreams?"DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00050341Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2015 Parfit, D., (1987), "Reasons and Persons," Oxford: Clarendon Press. Patten, M.M. (2017) "Kin Selection" in Reference Module in Life Sciences https ://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistrygenetics-and-molecular-biology/kin-selection retrieved Jul, 28 -2019 Piaget, J. (1971). "Biology and knowledge: An essay on the relations between organic regulations and cognitive processes." Oxford, England: U. Chicago Press. Piaget, Jean – ( 1973) "Affective Unconscious and Cognitive Unconscious In The Child and Reality" Translated by A. Rosin. Oxford, England: Grossman. Pearson, Carol S (1996)., "Archetypes, Neurognosis, and the Quantum Sea" (art.) – Jornal of Scientific Exploration 1996 – in http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1. 1.456.710 – retrieved on Jul. 26, 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 133 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Pedersen, Norman (2017) "The Seed of Civilization – The Origins of War, Marriage and Religion" –– SóL-Earth Publishers – ISBN 978-1978169531; Pedersen, Norman (2014) "When Was the Name of God First Spoken: Correcting Misconceptions About Prehistory" –SóL-Earth Publishers ISBN-10: 1505457068 Pedersen, Norman –"Biases about Prehistory" https://pedersensprehistory.com/biases-about-prehistory retrieved Mar, 18 – 2019. People, Hervey C., Duda, Pavel, and Marlowe, Frank W. (201600 "Hunter-Gatherers and the Origins of Religion," Hum Nat Journal - Sep;27(3):261-82. doi: 10.1007/s12110016-9260-0 Plato. (1981). "Five Dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo." Translated by G. M. A. Grube. Indianapolis, Ind.: Hackett Publishing Company. Powell A., Shennan S., Thomas M. G. (2009). "Late Pleistocene demography and the appearance of modern human behavior." Science 324, 1298– 130110.1126/science.1170165 (doi:10.1126/science.1170165) Q Quinn, Philip. (1992). "The Primacy of God's Will in Christian Ethics." Philosophical Perspectives 6: 493-513. Quinn, Philip L. (1978.). "Divine Commands and Moral Requirements." Oxford: Clarendon Press Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 134 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 R Rayner, Sam (2005) "Too Strong for Principle: An Examination of the Theory and Philosophical Implications of Evolutionary Ethics," Macalester Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 15 : Iss. 1 , Article 6. https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/philo/vol15/iss1/ 6Rizzolatti , G. (2008). "Mirrors in the Brain: How Our Minds Share Actions," Emotions.Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press Roche, H. (2005)." From simple flaking to shaping: stone knapping evolution among early hominins. In Stone knapping: the necessary conditions for a unique hominin behavior" (eds Roux V., Bril B., editors. ), pp. 35–48 Cambridge, MA: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research Russell, Bertrand (1914)- "Our Knowledge of the External World as a Field for Scientific Method in Philosophy." – London: Allen & Unwin Russell, Bertrand (1954)"Human Society in Ethics and Politics." London Allen & Unwin Russell, Bertrand (1968) - "The Art of Philosophizing and Other Essays." – New York Philosophical Library Russel, Bertrand (1912) - "Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description" Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 11: 108–128., The Problems of Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 135 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 S Sagi, Avi, and Statman, Daniel –" Divine Command Morality and Jewish Tradition" in The Journal of Religious Ethics Vol. 23, No. 1 (Spring, 1995), pp. 39-67 Stevens, A. (1982). "Archetypes: A Natural History of Self." Anthony Stevens. William Morrow & Co., New York, 1982. Sandel. Michael (2016)– "The Moral Foundations of Politics" – Yale University Press – ISBN 978-0-300-18545-4 Shapiro, Ian (2012) – "The Moral Foundations of Politics" - Yale University Press; Reprint 2012 Schwartz, Barry and Sharpe Kenneth (2011) - "Practical Wisdom: The Right Way to Do the Right Thing" Riverhead Books; Ed: Reprint (2011 ISBN-10: 1594485437ISBN-13: 9781594485435. Shin Kim Hanuk (2016)–" Moral Realism" – International Encyclopedia of Philosophy in https://www.iep.utm.edu/moralrea/ retrieved on July 05 2019 Shultz S, Nelson E, Dunbar RI.(2012) "Hominin cognitive evolution: identifying patterns and processes in the fossil and archaeological record." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2012;367(1599):2130–40. pmid:22734056 Smith, Vernon L.(1993) "Humankind in Prehistory: Economy, Ecology, and Institutions" in The Political Economy of Customs and Culture, edited by Terry L. Anderson and Randy T. Simmons, Copyright 1993 Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 136 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Sober, Elliott & Sloan, David Wilson (1998) "Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior" Harvard University Press Sosa, E. and Tooley, M. (1993) "Causation" Oxford University Press. Stout D. (2005). "The social and cultural context of stoneknapping skill acquisition. In Stone knapping: the necessary conditions for a uniquely hominin behavior" (eds Roux V., Bril B., editors. ), pp. 331–340 Cambridge, MA: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research Striker, Gisela (1986). "Origins of the Concept of Natural Law." Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy, 2: 79-94. Stump, Eleonore, and Norman Kretzmann. (1985). "Absolute Simplicity." Faith and Philosophy 2: 353-382 T Tennie C., Call J., Tomasello M. (2009). "Ratcheting up the ratchet: on the evolution of cumulative culture." Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 2405–241510.1098/rstb.2009.0052 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0052) [PMC free article Thagard, Paul – (2019) "The Origins Of Morality" Psychology Today. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hotthought/201311/the-origins-morality on May,12 2019 Thagard, Paul. (2012) – "Eleven Dogmas of Analytic Philosophy" – in Psychology Today - Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 137 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hotthought/201212/eleven-dogmas-analytic-philosophy Thompson, Michael (1995). "The Representation of Life," in Rosalind Hursthouse, Gavin Lawrence, and Warren Quinn (eds.), Virtues and Reasons, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 247-296. Tomasello, Michael – "A Natural History of Human Morality." Apud https://mipmckeever.weebly.com/things-ive-written.html Retrieved June 30, 2019. Tomasello, M.(1999). "The cultural origins of human cognition." Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Tse, Peter Ulrich (2015) – "The Neural Basis of Free Will: Criterial Causation" The MIT Press-ISBN 10: 0262528312 V Vernon, Mark. (2011) "Carl Jung: Do Archetypes exist? "https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/20 11/jun/20/jung-archetypes--structurind-principles retrieved Jul, 26 2019 Voyatsis, Mary E. (1998). "From Athena to Zeus: An A-Z Guide to the Origins of Greek Goddesses," in Lucy Goodison and Christine Morris, eds. Ancient Goddesses. Madison, W: University of Wisconsin. 132-147. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 138 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 W Wainwright, William (1998)–" Philosophy of Religion" - Cengage Learning; 2 edition (August 4, 1998) p.101 Wallace A. R. (1870). "Contributions to the theory of natural selection, a series of essays." London, UK: Macmillan Walls, Neal H., Jr. (1992). "The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth." Atlanta, GA: Scholars. Wenegrat, B. (1990). The divine archetype. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books/ D.C. Heath & Co. West SA, Griffin AS, Gardner A. (2007) "Social semantics: altruism, cooperation, mutualism, strong reciprocity, and group selection." J. Evol. Biol. 20, 415432.(doi:10.1111/j.14209101.2006.01258.x) Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarApud Woodford Note 18. Westenholz, Joan (1998). "Goddesses of the ancient Near East 3000-lOOO BC," in Lucy Goodison and Christine Morris, eds. Ancient Goddesses. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 62-82 "What Is Utilitarianism? Definition And Meaning." Retrieved June 30, 2019.http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/utilita rianism.html Whitehouse , R. D. (1992). "Underground religion: cult and culture in prehistoric Italy." London: Accordia Research Centre, University of London. Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 139 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Whiten A., Horner V., Marshall-Pescini S.(2003.) "Cultural panthropology." Evol. Anthropol. 12, 92– 10510.1002/evan.10107 (doi:10.1002/evan.10107) Whiten A., van Schaik C. (2006). "The evolution of animal 'cultures' and social intelligence." Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 362, 603–62010.1098/rstb.2006.1998 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1998) [PMC free article] Wilson, Edward Osborne" The Creation: A Meeting of Science and Religion" – Norton ISBN 978-0-393-06217-5 Wilson, Edward Osborne. – (1975) – "Sociobiology: The New Synthesis" Journal of the History of Biology 33 (3):577584. Woodford, Peter (2019)- "Evaluating inclusive fitness"– Royal Society Open Science -Published:26 June 2019https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190644 Y Yinger, J. Milton(1960) "Contraculture and Subculture" by, American Sociological Review, Vol. 25, No. 5 -Oct. 1960pg . 625-635 Z Zahn, Roland/ Souza, Ricardo de Oliveira/ Moll, Jorge – "Neural Foundation of Morality" https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.56026-7 retrieved Jul,29 2019 Moral Archetypes: Ehics in Prehistory 140 ISBN-13: 978-1698168296. 2019 Zolla, E. (1981). "Archetypes: The persistence of unifying patterns." New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.