5 found
  1. The Biology of Moral Systems.Richard D. Alexander - 1987 - Aldine de Gruyter.
    Despite wide acceptance that the attributes of living creatures have appeared through a cumulative evolutionary process guided chiefly by natural selection, many human activities have seemed analytically inaccessible through such an approach. Prominent evolutionary biologists, for example, have described morality as contrary to the direction of biological evolution, and moral philosophers rarely regard evolution as relevant to their discussions. -/- The Biology of Moral Systems adopts the position that moral questions arise out of conflicts of interest, and that moral systems (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   441 citations  
  2.  39
    A biological interpretation of moral systems.Richard D. Alexander - 1985 - Zygon 20 (1):3-20.
    . Moral systems are described as systems of indirect reciprocity, existing because of histories of conflicts of interest and arising as outcomes of the complexity of social interactions in groups of long‐lived individuals with varying conflicts and confluences of interest and indefinitely iterated social interactions. Although morality is commonly defined as involving justice for all people, or consistency in the social treatment of all humans, it may have arisen for immoral reasons, as a force leading to cohesiveness within human groups (...)
    Direct download  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   44 citations  
  3. A Biology of Moral Systems.Richard D. Alexander - 1990 - Behavior and Philosophy 18 (2):89-96.
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  4.  28
    Biological considerations in the analysis of morality.Richard D. Alexander - 1993 - In Matthew Nitecki & Doris Nitecki (eds.), Evolutionary Ethics. Suny Press. pp. 163--196.
    Direct download  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  5.  30
    Evolution, Human Behavior, and Determinism.Richard D. Alexander - 1976 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976:3 - 21.