Evolutionary Morality: The Evolution Of Will

As rational, free beings, we each perform actions toward ourselves and society. We also interpret these actions as moral, immoral, and neutral. Since we are rational beings, it would seem that these assessments of morality would also be rationally based, even if that rational base was unclear. The basis of these judgements are all set within an objective standard of morality which deems a particular act as positive, negative, or neutral. Evolutionary Morality, as we will come to define it, is a basis founded upon a concept of societal evolution where if the action allows the increased improvement (or lessened worsening) of the individual or society, the act is morally good. Among others, here are three primary types of morality held by individuals:

(P2) Evolution of Nature does not have a will. (P3) Evolution of Will does require will. (C) Evolution of Will is the basis of an evolutionary, individualistic morality. This principle only fits in regards to an individual’s actions toward himself. With actions, in regards to others, one must relate the species’ ability to survive and species’ quality of survival (and respective aims). It requires no further argument to explain why an individual must act in a certain way in relation to society: improvement is a good in itself, and thus should be strived for attaining. However, there exists a further compelling force for the individual to aid society, which directly relates to the original argument. If an individual belongs to a certain society, he stands to have a better quality of living if he works toward doing actions which would improve society. In essence, the aspect of acting towards society with actions which improve it relate to how the own individual can improve. With this, there is a similar argument as before: (P1) Evolution aims toward improvement. (P2) Improvement of any kind is a

The first is based on the idea that any judgement of another culture would mean a “transcultural standard of comparison” exists (Rachels 18). The second is based on that few accept that “society’s code is perfect” – based upon cultural relativism, no one could deem the slavery in the United States’ 1700’s as immoral. The third is found in that, as Rachels details: “progress means replacing a way of doing things with a better way,” but if something was deemed good by society, one cannot deem it evil by the standards of a current culture, meaning one culture is no better than the other (Rachels 18). However, each of these issues, when Cultural Relativism is planted within Evolutionary Morality, are