Ethics and Sociobiology

Zygon 19 (2):141-158 (1984)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Sociobiologists make large claims for their subject. Knowing about the genetic underpinnings of human society will, they claim, enable us to understand all of human behavior and even to solve the ancient philosophical questions of how we ought to live. This essay assesses the significance of sociobiology for ethics. It argues that sociobiologists have misunderstood the relevance of facts to values and that their larger ambitions for their subject are bound to remain unfulfilled. Nevertheless, philosophers are wrong to ignore sociobiology. To give a genetic account of the existence of a widely held value does not justify that value, but it does say something of relevance to the ethical issues. The problem is to work out just what difference such an explanation makes.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,891

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-10-21

Downloads
8 (#1,334,194)

6 months
6 (#701,126)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

The Selfish Gene. [REVIEW]Gunther S. Stent & Richard Dawkins - 1977 - Hastings Center Report 7 (6):33.
Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature.Mary Midgley - 1980 - Philosophy 55 (212):270-273.
The origin and development of the moral ideas.Edward Westermarck - 1909 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 68:100-106.
On Human Nature. [REVIEW]James M. Gustafson & Edward O. Wilson - 1979 - Hastings Center Report 9 (1):44.

Add more references