The Seven Moral Rules across "all" human societies

[beenherebeforeagain]

anthropologists finds that, looked at in terms of cooperation, morality boils down to these basic rules

Seven moral rules found all around the world: Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies

Summary: What is morality? And to what extent does it vary around the world? The theory of 'morality-as-cooperation' argues that morality consists of a collection of biological and cultural solutions to the problems of cooperation recurrent in human social life. These solutions or cooperative behaviors are plausible candidates for universal moral rules, and that morality-as-cooperation could provide the unified theory of morality that anthropology has hitherto lacked.

So, what do you think? Can morality boil down to basic social relationships and evolution? Are @Sunstone and @Revoltingest good examples of why we shouldn't cooperate?

 

[Revoltingest]

anthropologists finds that, looked at in terms of cooperation, morality boils down to these basic rules

Seven moral rules found all around the world: Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies

Summary: What is morality? And to what extent does it vary around the world? The theory of 'morality-as-cooperation' argues that morality consists of a collection of biological and cultural solutions to the problems of cooperation recurrent in human social life. These solutions or cooperative behaviors are plausible candidates for universal moral rules, and that morality-as-cooperation could provide the unified theory of morality that anthropology has hitherto lacked.

That basis for morality seems obvious to me.

 

[Heyo]

I see morality more as a philosophical question than a scientific one. What the scientists measured is more social behaviour than morality. Their 7 rules would still hold true if they included other primates in the study.
What the study has shown is that the basis of morality is cooperation or social integrity. We suspected that for a long time but now we know with higher certainty and precision.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Like Heyo says, not just among humans but other animals too.

 

[joe1776]

The anthropologists at the University of Oxford are dummies because the making of all moral rules is a dumb thing to do for four reasons:

1. General rules, which allow for exceptions, are of no use because moral guidance is needed in specific cases which might be exceptions.

2. Absolute rules never apply in moral situations because any act, including those listed by the anthropologists, can be morally right or wrong in moral dilemmas. For example, helping your family sounds like a good thing to do unless your name is Hatfield and your family's mission in life is to kill McCoys.

3. Moral rules are unnecessary. Conscience (moral intuition) is the only moral authority we have. It will give minds, unbiased on a specific case, an immediate judgment once it has all the relevant facts.

4. Conscience is probably a universal cross-cultural moral guide. Research, aimed at verifying that idea is underway:

Over the past twenty years, there has been growing evidence for a universally shared moral faculty based on findings in evolutionary biology, cognitive psychology, anthropology, economics, linguistics, and neurobiology.

Edge: THE MORAL SENSE TEST

 

[Spirit of Light]

anthropologists finds that, looked at in terms of cooperation, morality boils down to these basic rules

Seven moral rules found all around the world: Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies

Summary: What is morality? And to what extent does it vary around the world? The theory of 'morality-as-cooperation' argues that morality consists of a collection of biological and cultural solutions to the problems of cooperation recurrent in human social life. These solutions or cooperative behaviors are plausible candidates for universal moral rules, and that morality-as-cooperation could provide the unified theory of morality that anthropology has hitherto lacked.

So, what do you think? Can morality boil down to basic social relationships and evolution? Are @Sunstone and @Revoltingest good examples of why we shouldn't cooperate?

Morality is the ability to see right from wrong, action, words, and thoughts.
If you know/understand what is right even it feels better to do wrong sometimes and you can stick to doing the right action that means your morality is higher then one who chooses to follow the feeling of good (ego)

 

[oldbadger]

anthropologists finds that, looked at in terms of cooperation, morality boils down to these basic rules

Seven moral rules found all around the world: Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies

Summary: What is morality? And to what extent does it vary around the world? The theory of 'morality-as-cooperation' argues that morality consists of a collection of biological and cultural solutions to the problems of cooperation recurrent in human social life. These solutions or cooperative behaviors are plausible candidates for universal moral rules, and that morality-as-cooperation could provide the unified theory of morality that anthropology has hitherto lacked.

So, what do you think? Can morality boil down to basic social relationships and evolution? Are @Sunstone and @Revoltingest good examples of why we shouldn't cooperate?

What junk.
Co-operation is just that..... co-operation.
But many kinds of social-co-operation have been utterly despicable.
One example of many...... German citizen co-operating with the Gestapo circa 1944.

 

[oldbadger]

That basis for morality seems obvious to me.

What? Saving old bits of engines?
What the hell is 'morality'?

 

[oldbadger]

I see morality more as a philosophical question than a scientific one. What the scientists measured is more social behaviour than morality. Their 7 rules would still hold true if they included other primates in the study.
What the study has shown is that the basis of morality is cooperation or social integrity. We suspected that for a long time but now we know with higher certainty and precision.

That doesn't work consistently.
Many animals separate away through social dysfunction... nature demands that some species do not co-operate.

The very word 'morality' is an impost, imo.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Although I can see how such values might be seen as being so useful in many societies, I think many of our problems stem from one particular one - defer to superiors - when it might be obvious in small groups - skills, leadership, ability to survive, etc. - but these days tends to be a little more difficult, especially where it is down to power or wealth so often - but then many of us rarely see them as superiors of course but rather as leeches.

 

[ChristineM]

anthropologists finds that, looked at in terms of cooperation, morality boils down to these basic rules

Seven moral rules found all around the world: Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies

Summary: What is morality? And to what extent does it vary around the world? The theory of 'morality-as-cooperation' argues that morality consists of a collection of biological and cultural solutions to the problems of cooperation recurrent in human social life. These solutions or cooperative behaviors are plausible candidates for universal moral rules, and that morality-as-cooperation could provide the unified theory of morality that anthropology has hitherto lacked.

So, what do you think? Can morality boil down to basic social relationships and evolution? Are @Sunstone and @Revoltingest good examples of why we shouldn't cooperate?

Morality can be broken down into just one idea... Is it right for the situation.

 

[joe1776]

I see morality more as a philosophical question than a scientific one. What the scientists measured is more social behaviour than morality. Their 7 rules would still hold true if they included other primates in the study.
What the study has shown is that the basis of morality is cooperation or social integrity. We suspected that for a long time but now we know with higher certainty and precision.

Cooperation can be in an unworthy cause (The Nazis cooperated in WW2 to oppress other people) or it can be in a worthy cause (the Allies cooperated to stop the Nazis). So, cooperation itself is amoral.

 

[Revoltingest]

What? Saving old bits of engines?
What the hell is 'morality'?

Interesting that you bring that up.
Tis often said of old engines that "we are only caretakers".
We preserve history for future generations.

 

[joe1776]

Morality can be broken down into just one idea... Is it right for the situation.

Yes, but the tricky question is: How do we discern what is the right thing to do in a specific situation?

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, but the tricky question is: How do we discern what is the right thing to do in a specific situation?

Now that is tricky and variable, much depends on where you were raised, local mores etc

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

What junk.
Co-operation is just that..... co-operation.
But many kinds of social-co-operation have been utterly despicable.
One example of many...... German citizen co-operating with the Gestapo circa 1944.

this gets at something I was thinking in reading about this...the tests involved seem to test ideal behavior in an ideal context, separate from the actual network of social cooperation...how do people act in actual social situations where it involves not only themselves, but actual family, friends, enemies, competitors and so on.

The actual context affects how people will actually make those choices...the outcomes do not have to be beneficial to everyone, or even anyone, and might still be following the seven rules...

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

there usually seems to be three approaches to morality and ethics: being virtuous, following the rules, or weighing the consequences. This particular study seems to be trying to figure out a universal set of rules, without much concern about what the societies studied think of as virtues, or how they calculate the consequences of the decisions

The devil, as it always seems to me, is in the devil of the details of how people approach actual real-world situation...how society constructs and constrains the possibilities for moral decisions...

 

[oldbadger]

Interesting that you bring that up.
Tis often said of old engines that "we are only caretakers".
We preserve history for future generations.

True.
And that holds for old and ancient boats, buildings, aircraft, vehicles, clocks etc etc, in fact you could call it 'history'.

Somehow we only have one flying Lancaster bomber left, and a couple of grounded ones. Be we don't have any Sterlings, Halifaxes, etc etc What we consider to be junk today will be craved for in later years.

But there are much better descriptions of those who give their life interest to saving and collecting our history than 'moral'. One determined (and famous) collector of beautiful old cars used to hold sex parties on his estate, catering to the varied tastes of many celebrities and stars. A late neighbour of mine, a one time rent boy in Soho, used to be paid to attend them.

Hey! You don't........ possibly........ do you?

 

[Revoltingest]

Hey! You don't........ possibly........ do you?

Antique engine festivities are far less libertine.
At the one yesterday....
- We discussed cookies & donuts, who bought what from whom, & how to safely haul machinery.
- We helped each other load & secure machinery.
- Paid for our winnings.
- Enjoyed warm (30F or so) dry sunny weather.

 

[oldbadger]

Antique engine festivities are far less libertine.
At the one yesterday....
- We discussed cookies & donuts, who bought what from whom, & how to safely haul machinery.
- We helped each other load & secure machinery.
- Paid for our winnings.
- Enjoyed warm (30F or so) dry sunny weather.

Enjoying warm sunny weather when the UK is cold and wet is totally immoral.
I have to put a pet-warmer in my rucksack, keeping my other mittens warm.