Political Philosophy 1

Why science does not effectively address the philosophical questions inherent in evolutionary

theory and morality?

Research Paper

Name

Institution

Date
Political Philosophy 2

Introduction

About four decades ago, E.O Wilson suggested a view of the subject of ethics from a

biological point of view, rather than the traditional philosophical point of view1. However, many

political philosophers largely disagreed with the argument put forward by E.O Wilson. Despite

unpopularity of Wilson’s argument, his ideas are evident in popular scientific expositions. The

reason for inclusion of Wilson’s ideas on the subject of ethics is based on the popular view that

political philosophy and philosophy have failed to resolve the problem of morality.

Consequently, scientists are increasingly trying to offer a solution to the puzzle of ethics and

morality by trying to explain human behavior and morality from a biological point of view in an

intellectually satisfying way their ideas gain popularity in recent years. While many political

philosophers agree that evolutionary biology has critical points to offer in explaining the subject

of morality, many will still agree that there is a general misunderstanding on the extent to which

biology can explain the intricacies of morality and ethics2. The concept of morality is viewed

differently by both political philosophers and scientists. This is largely due to the fact that both

groups raise different sets of questions thus alluding to different meanings and invoking different

arguments on the subject of ethics and morality. This paper is aimed at linking evolutionary

ethics to libertarian philosophy as a way of way of answering the question of morality and

provide clarity on the confusion created by evolutionary biologists. The paper first establishes

the essential distinctions and examines the particular claims, and provides explanation for the

moral beliefs used by scientists to attempt to answer the philosophical questions on morality and

1
FitzPatrick, William J. (2014) "Evolutionary Theory and Morality: Why the Science Doesn't
Settle the Philosophical Questions," Philosophic Exchange: Vol. 44 : No. 1 , Article 2.
2
FitzPatrick, William J. (2014)
Political Philosophy 3

ethics. The points raised against evolutionary scientists attempt to solve the question of morality

is mainly grounded on the fact that these scientists rely on skeptical and subjective concept of

morality. Consequently, the research attempts to explain why libertarian philosophers consider

this approach as both poor and misguided.

Evolutionary biologists view of morality

In order to understand how scientist views morality, it is important to recognize the

essential role played by the process of natural selection in shaping the social behavior and

physiological structures of organisms and humans. Consequently, the influence of social

Darwinism is apparently present when observing the social behavior of apes as well as human

beings. The argument is that social selection pressures have played an important role in

adaptation of humans and apes during the process of evolution. As a result, the concepts of

emotion, cognition and behavior have be re-examined and the aspect of morality be viewed from

the perspective of evolutionary biology. Evolutionary ethics consider several traits such as

judgments and feelings and establish whether they are inherited in order to link them to the

evolutionary process of natural selection3. The philosophical questions include why human

beings have the capacity to judge morally? Why human beings experience emotions such as

guilt, resentment, jealousy, parental love and sympathy? Further, why do human beings despite

the cultural differences condemn behaviors such as cheating, incest and unfairness? Additionally,

3
Clarke-Doane, J. (2012). Morality and mathematics: The evolutionary
challenge. Ethics, 122(2), 313-340.