Philosophy without Darwinism
“is doomed to failure”
“is doomed to failure”
Darwin and Beyond’s first Philosophy speaker says that most deductions about ethics from Darwinism are false, but that Darwin’s theories are essential to a clear understanding of ethical thought.
Tuesday January 6th. It was a cold winter’s night, and slightly chilly in the Elwin room, but a good sized audience soon warmed things up as BRLSI Philosophy Group Convenor Dr Don Cameron gave the first philosophy lecture in the Darwin and Beyond programme, entitled Ethics after Darwin - The Idea of Natural Selection Led to Confusion.
In the 150 years since the publication of On The Origin of Species, Dr Cameron said, there have been many ethical and philosophical ideas derived from Darwinism, with almost all of them mistaken and many quite eccentric. Their common error has been to break Hume's Law (you cannot get an "ought" from an "is") , by deriving a conclusion about value or ethics from a premise that is purely descriptive of facts - in this case the process of natural selection. Among those getting it wrong about Evolution and our choices of the “right” behaviour have been Marx, Hitler, the Eugenics movement and even that otherwise master of clarity, Richard Dawkins.
Despite this, Darwin's Theory has great importance for philosophy. In Dr Cameron’s view our moral sentiments have originated by natural selection as a mechanism for transmitting our genes to future generations, and nothing more. This is an intensely disappointing conclusion to some people, but no less true for that. Some imagine that evolution would make us violent and selfish, but that is too simplistic; our most ethical feelings are equally the product of natural selection acting upon us as a social animal.
What conclusions can be drawn? Dr Cameron offered no concrete answer, but then it would hardly have been a philosophical question if he had. The individual may speculate whether to follow gut instincts (as most of us do), or to "correct" decisions to maximise gene reproduction, or just to be a nihilist who says there is no purpose in anything. From the pure fact of Darwin's Theory, no answer can be given to these questions, although the choices are greatly clarified by the knowledge that the ethical principles which we think we create for ourselves are simply the product of our genes.
The lecture was followed by a typically lively Philosophy Group question and answer session, with members of the audience keen to offer their own views on the issues that had been raised. The question of whether Evolution is, in fact, “fact” was, unsurprisingly, aired, as was Darwin’s view of Marx (and vice-versa), and the general issue of how free our free will actually is.
• This subject is explored in more detail, particularly in relation to cultural evolution, in Don Cameron's book The Purpose of Life (ISBN 0 9540291 0 0). For more Philosophy lectures in the Darwin and Beyond series, see our Philosophy page. For details of the BRLSI’s Philosophy Group, click here.
Tuesday January 6th. It was a cold winter’s night, and slightly chilly in the Elwin room, but a good sized audience soon warmed things up as BRLSI Philosophy Group Convenor Dr Don Cameron gave the first philosophy lecture in the Darwin and Beyond programme, entitled Ethics after Darwin -
In the 150 years since the publication of On The Origin of Species, Dr Cameron said, there have been many ethical and philosophical ideas derived from Darwinism, with almost all of them mistaken and many quite eccentric. Their common error has been to break Hume's Law (you cannot get an "ought" from an "is") , by deriving a conclusion about value or ethics from a premise that is purely descriptive of facts -
Despite this, Darwin's Theory has great importance for philosophy. In Dr Cameron’s view our moral sentiments have originated by natural selection as a mechanism for transmitting our genes to future generations, and nothing more. This is an intensely disappointing conclusion to some people, but no less true for that. Some imagine that evolution would make us violent and selfish, but that is too simplistic; our most ethical feelings are equally the product of natural selection acting upon us as a social animal.
What conclusions can be drawn? Dr Cameron offered no concrete answer, but then it would hardly have been a philosophical question if he had. The individual may speculate whether to follow gut instincts (as most of us do), or to "correct" decisions to maximise gene reproduction, or just to be a nihilist who says there is no purpose in anything. From the pure fact of Darwin's Theory, no answer can be given to these questions, although the choices are greatly clarified by the knowledge that the ethical principles which we think we create for ourselves are simply the product of our genes.
The lecture was followed by a typically lively Philosophy Group question and answer session, with members of the audience keen to offer their own views on the issues that had been raised. The question of whether Evolution is, in fact, “fact” was, unsurprisingly, aired, as was Darwin’s view of Marx (and vice-
• This subject is explored in more detail, particularly in relation to cultural evolution, in Don Cameron's book The Purpose of Life (ISBN 0 9540291 0 0). For more Philosophy lectures in the Darwin and Beyond series, see our Philosophy page. For details of the BRLSI’s Philosophy Group, click here.
© Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution 2008 • Contact Us
BRLSI Philosophy Group Convenor Dr Don Cameron: the genetic origin of our moral sentiments is an intense disappointment to some, but no less true for that.
LECTURE REPORT - ETHICS AFTER DARWIN
