|
Title: Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series)
Purchase
Item
Manufacturer: Princeton University Press
List Price: $22.95
Our Price: $14.23
|
|
| Customer Reviews: |
| Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series) by Princeton University Press Wonderful read; very well written. | This book was lent to me by a friend, and after reading I felt it necessary to purchase my own copy. I would have never made this choice, this text is completely outside my normal reading genres, but I'm very glad I did. Frans de Waal provides and extremely well written thesis on his views of morality in humans, his views are then analyzed by others, and closes with his response. I haven't read his other text Good Natured, but intend to do so.
It is important to note that I am in no way highly educated in the fields of primatology, anthropology, or philosophy; my background is in math and computer science; so I came to this book with a certain ignorance. | | Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series) by Princeton University Press A well argued but incomplete study | Frans de Waal draws on his own and others' considerable research into primate behavior in arguing that human beings come endowed by nature with strong moral equipment. He argues more carefully in this book whose audience is more academic, than in others of his books, but he revisits many of the same themes, such as compassion and perspective-taking, and tells many of the same stories.
It is not clear to me that many of the philosophical respondents really understood de Waal, or cared to engage his thesis. Many of the respondents seem to be grinding their own axes using de Waal's screed as a stone.
However in my judgment de Waal doesn't make a convincing case for the relation of human behaviors under modern conditions to ancestral behaviors under ancestral conditions. There are clearly analogies, and his 'principle of evolutionary parsimony' suggests that the analogies are really homologies. In my opinion the conditions of human life in the modern world are so different from that of apes that human morality most likely depends on mental processes that don't occur among apes, or are irrelevant to them. | | Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series) by Princeton University Press Plausible | This is a very short book. The main essay has just about over 50 pages. The rest is introduction, some responses, and a closing statement.
Who says that important books need to be long? Possibly it is not all that important, but the main idea is new to me, therefore I am glad that I picked it up, after a recommendation in Der Spiegel.
Let me also say, I don't find the main hypothesis really compelling, in the sense of thoroughly thought through and explained. But I think it is plausible, and as I had been used to think in different directions and categories, this is a new paradigm for me.
Simply put, FdW challenges the conventional view that morality is part of civilization, that morality is a 'veneer' over our animal core, which is generally assumed to be selfish and immoral. He rejects the view that mankind developed as individuals and then became socialites, requiring rules for co-existence. Rather, homo evolved as a social animal and started his career on Earth with a set of rules for social life. I.o.w., the whole question how a human society without a creator can have morality, is superfluous, baseless, a waste of energy.
On the way to this hypothesis, FdW gets into arguments with the 'selfish gene' theory and with the Dawkins direction of neo-Darwinism. My suspicion is, that this conflict is as useless as a goitre (as we say in German). I don't think that Dawkins really meant the gene to be literally 'selfish', hence let's drop this linguistic bickering. (However I am too lazy to look it up in Dawkins.)
Only 4 stars, not because it is not important, but because it remains below its potential. The discussion part is not always to the point.
I am tempted to give an extra star for the foto of Georgia admiring her own reflection in the camera lens. But maybe an Oscar is more appropriate? | | Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series) by Princeton University Press Welcome new perspectives on moral theorizing | This book is an interesting confrontation between primate research and professional moral philosophers. The aim is to discuss De Waal's attack on `veneer theory', the idea that moral behaviour is not really grounded in our nature but just a thin cultural overlay, but the discussion quickly becomes way more general.
In fact, we quickly see familiar dividing lines appear. Some, like Korsgaard, see morality as based on reason alone, and therefore purely human. Others, like De Waal, see it as primarily based on inborn capacities like empathy, and maintain that we share a lot of our morality with primates.
The truth is probably somewhere in between. Actually almost all the contributors confirm this in some way, but this is obscured by the fact that the authors do not seem to be able to agree on the meaning on the word`morality'.
Semantic confusion and untenable extremes: Nothing new in the world of discussions of morality then? What does make this book interesting, is that this time the discussions are informed by empirical evolutionary research, which means that even the philosophers have to keep their feet on the ground. Apart from the ape-stories being interesting to read, the result is a welcome new perspective on existing moral theories. | | Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series) by Princeton University Press Critically Important Research | | Teleologically oriented theologians and pompous philosophers need to read this book. New empirical research offers dramatic insights as to the how's and why's of the bilogoical origins of human values and morality. The more this book is read and digested, the faster the phony televangelists will disappear from popular and uninformed culture. | | Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (The University Center for Human Values Series) by Princeton University Press Product Description | "It's the animal in us," we often hear when we've been bad. But why not when we're good? Primates and Philosophers tackles this question by exploring the biological foundations of one of humanity's most valued traits: morality. In this provocative book, primatologist Frans de Waal argues that modern-day evolutionary biology takes far too dim a view of the natural world, emphasizing our "selfish" genes. Science has thus exacerbated our reciprocal habits of blaming nature when we act badly and labeling the good things we do as "humane." Seeking the origin of human morality not in evolution but in human culture, science insists that we are moral by choice, not by nature. Citing remarkable evidence based on his extensive research of primate behavior, de Waal attacks "Veneer Theory," which posits morality as a thin overlay on an otherwise nasty nature. He explains how we evolved from a long line of animals that care for the weak and build cooperation with reciprocal transactions. Drawing on both Darwin and recent scientific advances, de Waal demonstrates a strong continuity between human and animal behavior. In the process, he also probes issues such as anthropomorphism and human responsibilities toward animals. Based on the Tanner Lectures de Waal delivered at Princeton University's Center for Human Values in 2004, Primates and Philosophers includes responses by the philosophers Peter Singer, Christine M. Korsgaard, and Philip Kitcher and the science writer Robert Wright. They press de Waal to clarify the differences between humans and other animals, yielding a lively debate that will fascinate all those who wonder about the origins and reach of human goodness. |
No item elements found in rss feed.
|
