Comment by femiagbabiaka

21 days ago

From the abstract this is a very interesting paper. I’ll spend this afternoon digging in. But I see a problem already: reality trumps academic exercise or humanity’s aggregated, self-description of its morality.

“Morality-as-cooperation draws on the theory of non-zero-sum games to identify distinct problems of cooperation and their solutions, and it predicts that specific forms of cooperative behavior—including helping kin, helping your group, reciprocating, being brave, deferring to superiors, dividing disputed resources, and respecting prior possession—will be considered morally good wherever they arise, in all cultures.”

Who is kin? Who are one’s superiors? What is prior possession? These are all questions of ideology and power. The only universal code all humanity agrees on is might makes right.

Everyone loves helping kin except when helping kin on the public dime. Morals are funny that way.

> The only universal code all humanity agrees on is might makes right.

This is a cynical and unjustifiable claim.

Obviously some people disagree. In fact in my experience people almost universally agrees might does not make right.

  • Cynical? Maybe, I think you're right on that point. Unjustifiable? Look at the current and historical state of humanity and our global institutions.

Isn't 'kin' an easy one here ? Genetic closeness first and foremost.

  • To deconstruct/interrogate your statement: What does "genetic closeness" mean? Humans are all "genetically close." So then maybe you mean "phenotypical closeness"? But then of course people who are "phenotypically close" kill and oppress each other in droves all the time. Or maybe you mean family? I live in probably the most atomized society in the world, familial bonds are extremely thin here in the U.S. -- it's 100% expected that you'll leave family forever as a coming of age as early as possible.