道德认知的演变

L. Cosmides, R. A. Guzmán, J. Tooby
{"title":"道德认知的演变","authors":"L. Cosmides, R. A. Guzmán, J. Tooby","doi":"10.4324/9781315719696-10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Author(s): Cosmides, Leda; Guzman, Ricardo Andres; Tooby, John | Editor(s): Zimmerman, Aaron; Jones, Karen; Timmons, Mark | Abstract: Natural selection produces cognitive systems that are well designed for solving ancestral adaptive problems. For a group-living species like our own, this principle implies that interacting with others will be regulated by sophisticated cognitive systems. Here we explain how evolutionary game theory is used to identify ancestral problems of social interaction and what counted as adaptive solutions to these problems during our evolutionary past. We start with a detailed examination of selection pressures that shape mechanisms for interacting with kin; these specify an envelope of conditions in which selection favors (i) acting with beneficence toward kin and (ii) avoiding sexual contact with kin. By combining these analyses with knowledge of how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived, evolutionary psychologists were able to develop and test hypotheses about the computational design of systems regulating interaction with kin. These cognitive adaptations produce intuitions about how we ought to treat kin and how kin ought to treat us—moral intuitions about duties of beneficence and sexual prohibitions. We then consider selection for cooperation with unrelated individuals and how this differs from interactions with kin. Topics include the evolution of cooperation by partner control (punishment) versus partner choice; collective action; and the role of luck versus effort in sharing. Research guided by these theories suggests that selection has produced adaptations that generate different moral inferences in each of these domains. Capturing this moral diversity may require normative theories that embrace moral pluralism—brands of ethical intuitionism, moral sentimentalism, or virtue ethics.","PeriodicalId":338404,"journal":{"name":"The Routledge Handbook of Moral Epistemology","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Evolution of Moral Cognition\",\"authors\":\"L. Cosmides, R. A. Guzmán, J. Tooby\",\"doi\":\"10.4324/9781315719696-10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Author(s): Cosmides, Leda; Guzman, Ricardo Andres; Tooby, John | Editor(s): Zimmerman, Aaron; Jones, Karen; Timmons, Mark | Abstract: Natural selection produces cognitive systems that are well designed for solving ancestral adaptive problems. For a group-living species like our own, this principle implies that interacting with others will be regulated by sophisticated cognitive systems. Here we explain how evolutionary game theory is used to identify ancestral problems of social interaction and what counted as adaptive solutions to these problems during our evolutionary past. We start with a detailed examination of selection pressures that shape mechanisms for interacting with kin; these specify an envelope of conditions in which selection favors (i) acting with beneficence toward kin and (ii) avoiding sexual contact with kin. By combining these analyses with knowledge of how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived, evolutionary psychologists were able to develop and test hypotheses about the computational design of systems regulating interaction with kin. These cognitive adaptations produce intuitions about how we ought to treat kin and how kin ought to treat us—moral intuitions about duties of beneficence and sexual prohibitions. We then consider selection for cooperation with unrelated individuals and how this differs from interactions with kin. Topics include the evolution of cooperation by partner control (punishment) versus partner choice; collective action; and the role of luck versus effort in sharing. Research guided by these theories suggests that selection has produced adaptations that generate different moral inferences in each of these domains. Capturing this moral diversity may require normative theories that embrace moral pluralism—brands of ethical intuitionism, moral sentimentalism, or virtue ethics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":338404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Routledge Handbook of Moral Epistemology\",\"volume\":\"93 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Routledge Handbook of Moral Epistemology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315719696-10\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Routledge Handbook of Moral Epistemology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315719696-10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

作者:Cosmides, Leda;里卡多·安德烈斯·古兹曼;约翰·图比|编辑(s):齐默尔曼,亚伦;琼斯,凯伦;摘要:自然选择产生的认知系统是为解决祖先的适应性问题而精心设计的。对于像我们这样群居的物种来说,这一原则意味着与他人的互动将受到复杂的认知系统的调节。在这里,我们解释了进化博弈论如何被用来识别社会互动的祖先问题,以及在我们的进化历史中,什么被认为是这些问题的适应性解决方案。我们首先详细研究了形成与亲属互动机制的选择压力;这些规定了一系列条件,在这些条件下,选择有利于(i)对亲属行善,(ii)避免与亲属发生性接触。通过将这些分析与我们的狩猎采集祖先的生活方式相结合,进化心理学家能够发展和测试关于调节与亲属互动的系统的计算设计的假设。这些认知适应产生了关于我们应该如何对待亲属以及亲属应该如何对待我们的直觉——关于行善义务和性禁忌的道德直觉。然后,我们考虑与不相关个体合作的选择,以及这与与亲属互动的区别。主题包括伙伴控制(惩罚)与伙伴选择的合作演变;集体行动;以及运气和努力在分享中的作用。这些理论指导下的研究表明,选择产生了适应,在这些领域产生了不同的道德推论。捕捉这种道德多样性可能需要包含道德多元主义的规范理论——道德直觉主义、道德感伤主义或美德伦理的品牌。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Evolution of Moral Cognition
Author(s): Cosmides, Leda; Guzman, Ricardo Andres; Tooby, John | Editor(s): Zimmerman, Aaron; Jones, Karen; Timmons, Mark | Abstract: Natural selection produces cognitive systems that are well designed for solving ancestral adaptive problems. For a group-living species like our own, this principle implies that interacting with others will be regulated by sophisticated cognitive systems. Here we explain how evolutionary game theory is used to identify ancestral problems of social interaction and what counted as adaptive solutions to these problems during our evolutionary past. We start with a detailed examination of selection pressures that shape mechanisms for interacting with kin; these specify an envelope of conditions in which selection favors (i) acting with beneficence toward kin and (ii) avoiding sexual contact with kin. By combining these analyses with knowledge of how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived, evolutionary psychologists were able to develop and test hypotheses about the computational design of systems regulating interaction with kin. These cognitive adaptations produce intuitions about how we ought to treat kin and how kin ought to treat us—moral intuitions about duties of beneficence and sexual prohibitions. We then consider selection for cooperation with unrelated individuals and how this differs from interactions with kin. Topics include the evolution of cooperation by partner control (punishment) versus partner choice; collective action; and the role of luck versus effort in sharing. Research guided by these theories suggests that selection has produced adaptations that generate different moral inferences in each of these domains. Capturing this moral diversity may require normative theories that embrace moral pluralism—brands of ethical intuitionism, moral sentimentalism, or virtue ethics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信