Dissertation, Washington University in St. Louis (2014)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
I argue that the evolutionary history of anger has substantive implications for normative ethics. In the process, I develop an evolutionary account of anger and its influence on action. First, I consider a prominent argument by Peter Singer and Joshua Greene. They conclude that evolutionary explanations of human cooperation debunk – or undercut the evidential value of – the moral intuitions supporting duty ethics (as opposed to utilitarian or consequentialist ethics). With this argument they aim to defend consequentialist theories. However, their argument also threatens to debunk intuitions that support consequentialist theories. I give a novel argument that overcomes this difficulty. Specifically, I offer an evolutionary story about anger that can explain retributive, duty-oriented intuitions concerning punishment. This explanation debunks these intuitions (and not others) by showing that they were selected for their biological consequences rather than their accuracy (concerning duties to punish). I develop this explanation by raising and resolving three additional problems. First, prominent evolutionary explanations of retributive motives fail because they appeal to models that apply only to organisms with strategic insight. To mitigate this problem, I explain the existence of a retributive-like motive in rodents by appealing to an economic model of resource competition, which applies to organisms without strategic insight. Second, I show that human anger was shaped by resource competition of this kind. To do so, I develop evidential criteria to determine when psychological systems in different species share common evolutionary origins. I deploy these criteria to argue that human anger and the retributive motive in rodents derive from the same ancestral trait. Finally, the continuity of anger across human and nonhuman animals stands in tension with the idea that anger causes purposive behavior like retribution or retaliation. I argue that differences between the angry behaviors of human and nonhuman animals are differences in degree and not in kind. In the end, this evolutionary story both explains and undermines retributive intuitions, but not in the straightforward way that Singer and Greene suppose.
|
Keywords | Anger Punishment Retribution Evolutionary debunking Evolutionary psychology Cognitive homology Evolutionary game theory Animal Cognition Theoretical terms Comparative psychology |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Evolution of Retribution: Intuitions Undermined.Isaac Wiegman - 2017 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 98 (2):490-510.
Payback Without Bookkeeping: The Origins of Revenge and Retaliation.Isaac Wiegman - 2019 - Philosophical Psychology 32 (7):1100-1128.
Does Evolutionary Psychology Show That Normativity Is Mind-Dependent?Selim Berker - 2014 - In Justin D'Arms & Daniel Jacobson (eds.), Moral Psychology and Human Agency: Philosophical Essays on the Science of Ethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 215-252.
The Containment Problem and the Evolutionary Debunking of Morality.Tyler Millhouse, Lance S. Bush & David Moss - 2016 - Evolution of Morality.
Angry Rats and Scaredy Cats: Lessons From Competing Cognitive Homologies.Isaac Wiegman - 2016 - Biological Theory 11 (4):224-240.
The Structure and Significance of Evolutionary Explanations in Philosophy.Bence Nanay - 2004 - In H. Carel & D. Gamez (eds.), What Philosophy is. Ccontinuum.
Evolutionary Debunking Arguments in Ethics.Andreas Lech Mogensen - 2014 - Dissertation, University of Oxford
Evolutionary Psychology: A View From Evolutionary Biology.Elisabeth A. Lloyd & Marcus Feldman - 2002 - Psychological Inquiry 13 (2).
Evolutionary Psychology and the Selectionist Model of Neural Development: A Combined Approach.Bence Nanay - 2002 - Evolution and Cognition 8:200-206.
Punishment and the Strategic Structure of Moral Systems.Chandra Sekhar Sripada - 2005 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (4):767–789.
The Artful Mind: A Critical Review of the Evolutionary Psychological Study of Art.Eveline Seghers - 2015 - British Journal of Aesthetics 55 (2):225-248.
Evolutionary Psychology is Not the Only Productive Evolutionary Approach to Understanding Consumer Behavior.Stephen M. Downes - 2013 - Journal of Consumer Psychology 23 (3):400-403.
Sex Differences in Aggression: What Does Evolutionary Theory Predict?Elizabeth Cashdan - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):273-274.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2019-05-16
Total views
446 ( #21,775 of 2,519,272 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
58 ( #13,900 of 2,519,272 )
2019-05-16
Total views
446 ( #21,775 of 2,519,272 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
58 ( #13,900 of 2,519,272 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads