Types and features of morality

 

Introduction

If we accept the definition of morality as achieving normative goals jointly, then I propose that these features of morality follow from that definition, that are confirmed by other authors (Dill and Darwall, 2014; Tomasello, 2016, 2020; Baumard, André, and Sperber, 2013).  Following this definition, it turns out that morality has a collaborative structure whose content nevertheless varies according to the overall normative goal(s).  So, we can have different kinds of morality, with a standard spectrum of features that may be dialled up or down.  

We can see that the structure of morality, and its normativity, are shaped by the mutual risk inherent in relying on imperfect people to achieve joint goals in a world of contingent chance. We need morality in order to keep partners, and ourselves, in line. Normativity begins with the pressure to achieve goals.

 

Interdependence shapes and directs normativity.  

 

Features of morality (sources of normativity)

Joint goal

Instrumental normativity = pressure to achieve goals

That for which we may be held accountable by others

Mutual risk and strategic trust

Joint commitment to normative standards and goals

Promoting, enforcing good behaviour according to norms

Discouraging, preventing bad behaviour according to norms

Partners

Partner choice by reputation and cooperative identity

Partner control

Roles and their ideal normative standards

Duty: sense of responsibility to (respected and valued) other partners to uphold ideal normative standards

A set of moral norms (general role ideals that apply to any collaboration alike, with this goal and method)

A set of moral values (policies for achieving moral goals)

A set of moral virtues (ideal performance of norms)

A set of moral vices (sub-standard performance of norms: to be avoided)

Intrapersonal, interpersonal and cultural levels

 

Types of morality (with goals; way of achieving them)

Cooperative (to thrive and survive; cooperation)

Parental (reproducing; parental care)

Familial (reproducing; cooperation with respect to inclusive fitness)

Pair-bonded (reproducing; pair-bonding)

Patriarchal (reproducing (men's); control and coercion of women)

Professional (any goal; professional standards)

Medical (health goals; practising medicine)

Financial regulation bodies (goal of selling financial products fairly; regulation of parties involved)

Religious (serving God; religious practice)  

 

Some examples of moralities

 

Cooperative

In cooperative morality, we cooperate to thrive, survive and reproduce (i.e., breed cooperatively).  This may be in a large group requiring laws and social norms, or in a small group governing itself through personal interaction and reputation.  Partners may be chosen based on their track record of skill, diligence, faithfulness, honesty etc.  Partners are controlled by other partners in the direction of the main (sub-)goal.  Each partner aims to play a role to ideal normative standards.  Moral principles are those normative standards that apply to any collaboration-to-live, alike.  Social norms are a group-wide system of social control: ideal ways to be cooperative in otherwise competitive situations (Tomasello, 2016).  

 

Patriarchal

Patriarchal morality, the oppression of women by society and its control of their sexuality, originates in great ape males’ desires to dominate and control females for reproductive purposes.  Therefore its ultimate goal is reproduction, at men’s convenience.  Its norms, of male superiority and entitlement, and female inferiority and chastity, are enforced as sexism, and punished by misogyny when women “misbehave” (Manne, 2018).  The alternative to patriarchy, on both interpersonal and cultural levels, is egalitarianism (by society towards men and women), autonomy (of women), and of men making themselves into ideal mates in the hope of attracting females, rather than control and coercion.  

In patriarchal morality the role of partner choice is questionable and perhaps depends on how much control each reproductive partner can exert over choosing for themselves.  For example, in bonobos, female solidarity and power are relatively strong against patriarchal control (Smuts, 1995).  In chimpanzees, females do not mate exclusively through coercion and control, but also from free choice (de Waal, 1982/2007).  In gorillas and other polygynous species such as the distantly-related baboons, there is extreme male-male competition and male control over females (Smuts, 1995).  

Patriarchal collaboration is one-sided: men have the power given to them by society and culture, and by their greater physical strength, while women have the choice of either resisting patriarchy through feminism, or going along with it as victims.    

 

Religious

Religion is an organisation - a collaboration.  It collaborates towards the joint goal of serving God.  It has roles (lay person, pastor, vicar, priest, nun, monk, etc.), ideal ways to be religious, and ideal ways to behave (moral and ethical principles).  Importantly, it provides ways to promote good behaviour and punish bad behaviour.  It involves partner choice - only the verifiably faithful may be trusted (Norenzayen, 2013).  Partner control (attempting to turn a poorly performing partner into a good one (Tomasello, 2016)) comes both from the other faithful and from God.  As a believer, I am held accountable by, and feel responsible to, God and the other faithful.  Religion is practised on intra-personal, interpersonal, and cultural levels.  

 

Financial regulatory body

A body that oversees the financial services industry is arguably collaborating between itself, the general public, and the industry.  The goal is fair treatment of the public in dealing with financial services companies: to this end, promoting good behaviour and discouraging bad behaviour.  It holds the industry accountable on behalf of the public.  Partner choice is involved as some companies may prove to be untrustworthy and therefore not worth employing.  Financial regulation has both a societal aspect (the system of norms and the human and other apparatus sustaining them) and an interpersonal one: the individual care given to individual members of the public.  

 

References

Baumard, N; André, J; and Sperber, D - "A Mutualistic Approach to Morality: The Evolution of Fairness by Partner Choice". Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(1), 59-78; 2013

Curry, Oliver Scott - "Morality as Cooperation: A Problem-Centred Approach" in "The Evolution of Morality" (pp.27-51); Springer International Publishing; 2016

Dill, Brendan and Stephen Darwall - "Moral Psychology as Accountability"; in Justin D'Arms and Daniel Jacobsen (eds.): Moral Psychology and Human Agency: Philosophical Essays on the Science of Ethics (pp. 40-83), Oxford University Press 2014

Fiske, Alan - "Structures of Social Life: the four elementary forms of human relations"; Free Press, New York 1991

Haidt, Jonathan; Jesse Graham; and Brian A Nosek - "Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations": Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 96, No. 5, 1029-1046, 2009

Haidt, Jonathan - "The Righteous Mind – why good people are divided by politics and religion"; Penguin Books, London 2013

Manne, Kate - "Down Girl – The Logic of Misogyny"; Oxford University Press, 2018

Norenzayan, Ara - "Big Gods – how religion transformed cooperation and conflict"; Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, 2013

Smith, Kyle D; Seyda Türk Smith; John Chambers Christopher - "What Defines the Good Person? Cross-Cultural Comparisons of Experts’ Models With Lay Prototypes": Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, May 2007

Smuts, Barbara - "The Evolutionary Origins of Patriarchy": Human Nature, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1-32, 1995

Spikins, Penny - "How Compassion Made Us Human - the evolutionary origins of tenderness, trust and morality"; Pen and Sword Archaeology, Barnsley, South Yorkshire 2015

Tomasello, Michael - "A Natural History of Human Morality"; Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA 2016

Tomasello, Michael - "The moral psychology of obligation"; Behavioral and Brain Sciences 43, e56: 1-58; 2020

de Waal, Frans B M - "Chimpanzee Politics – power and sex among apes"; The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore MD 1982/2007