Abstract
The attempts to make moral and evolution compatible have assimilated moral capacity either with complex self-control in favour of one’s own goals or with spontaneous altruism. Those attempts face an easy problem, since those two senses of moral are adaptively advantageous resources. But let us focus on the decisions made in favour of another person which the subject, when making them, feels are contrary to his own goals: Could a base for this capacity arise in evolution, however poor and weak? I propose that such base, while it is not an adaptive advantage but quite the opposite, arises from the convergence between two abilities which in their respective origins were adaptively very advantageous: the advanced mode of ‘theory-of-mind’ (ToM) and inner speech.
Publisher
Facultad de Teologia San Isidoro de Sevilla
Reference77 articles.
1. APPERLY, Ian A. – BUTTERFILL, Stephen A., “Do Humans Have Two Systems to Track Beliefs and Belief-Like States?”, Psychological Review 116 (2009) 953-970: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016923.
2. AYALA, Francisco, “The Difference of Being Human: Ethical behavior as an evolutionary by-product”, in H. ROLSTON (ed.), Biology, Ethics, and the Origins of Life, Jones & Bartlett, 1995, 113-136.
3. BARRESI, John – MOORE, Chris, “Intentional Relations and Social Understanding”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (1996) 107-122: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00041790.
4. BAUMARD, Nicolas – ANDRÉ, Jean-Baptiste – SPERBER, Dan, “A Mutualistic Approach to Morality. The Evolution of Fairness by Partner Choice”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (2013) 59-78: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11002202.
5. BAUMEISTER, Roy – BRATSLAVSKY, Ellen – MURAVEN, Mark – TICE, Dianne, “Ego Depletion: Is the Active Self a Limited Resource?”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (1998) 1252-1265.