In Darwin in the 21st Century (forthcoming)
Ever since Darwin people have worried about the sceptical implications of evolution. If our minds are products of evolution like those of other animals, why suppose that the beliefs they produce are true, rather than merely useful? In this chapter we apply this argument to beliefs in three different domains: morality, religion, and science. We identify replies to evolutionary scepticism that work in some domains but not in others. The simplest reply to evolutionary scepticism is that the truth of beliefs in a certain domain is, in fact, connected to evolutionary success, so that evolution can be expected to design systems that produce true beliefs in that domain. We call a connection between truth and evolutionary success a ‘Milvian bridge’, after the tradition which ascribes the triumph of Christianity at the battle of the Milvian bridge to the truth of Christianity. We argue that a Milvian bridge can be constructed for commonsense beliefs, and extended to scientific beliefs, but not to moral and religious beliefs. An alternative reply to evolutionary scepticism, which has been used defend moral beliefs, is to argue that their truth does not depend on their tracking some external state of affairs. We ask if this reply could be used to defend religious beliefs.
|Keywords||evolutionary epistemology philosophy of religion moral realism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
A Peircean Response to the Evolutionary Debunking of Moral Knowledge.Gary Slater - 2014 - Zygon 49 (3):593-611.
Similar books and articles
Taking the 'Error' Out of Ruse's Error Theory.James A. Ryan - 1997 - Biology and Philosophy 12 (3):385-397.
Commonsense Darwinism: Evolution, Morality, and the Human Condition.John Lemos - 2008 - Open Court.
What's Wrong with the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism?Geoff Childers - 2011 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (3):193-204.
Evolution, Naturalism, and the Worthwhile: A Critique of Richard Joyce's Evolutionary Debunking of Morality.Christopher Toner - 2011 - Metaphilosophy 42 (4):520-546.
Are Evolutionary/Cognitive Theories of Religion Relevant for Philosophy of Religion?Gregory R. Peterson - 2010 - Zygon 45 (3):545-557.
Evolutionary Approaches to Epistemic Justification.Helen de Cruz, Maarten Boudry, Johan de Smedt & Stefaan Blancke - 2011 - Dialectica 65 (4):517-535.
Morality and Mathematics: The Evolutionary Challenge.Justin Clarke-Doane - 2012 - Ethics 122 (2):313-340.
Added to index2010-04-19
Total downloads1,056 ( #625 of 2,169,652 )
Recent downloads (6 months)52 ( #4,268 of 2,169,652 )
How can I increase my downloads?