Nowadays, the studying of ethics has different faces. One can explore it through several prisms: either descriptive or normative, either metaethics or evolutionary one, etc.
Frankly speaking, although each of these directions explores the same issues, the angles of view are rather different ones. What is more, many prominent scientists and researchers have devoted their professional efforts to prove the priority of certain positions.
In this paper the position of Dutch primatologist and ethologist Frans de Waal will be thoroughly considered. To begin with, de Waal belongs to the researchers, the results of whose work are not the fruits of solely theoretical considerations. Instead, Frans de Waal has a rich empirical evidence, with which he proves his position, which in some way continues Darwin’s observations.
Indeed, there is no need to retell de Wall’s biography, since this information is freely available. Instead, it is more relevant for the goal of this paper to concentrate on those pages of his life, which are in direct link with some explorations in the field of evolutionary ethics.
Namely, his well-known books are written on the ground of observations, made during real-life researches, conducted with animals, closest to the human beings (according to Darwin’s theory), taken both in captivity and in wild. Having spent thousands of hours in face-to-face encounters with many nonhumans (e.g. during the landmark study of the chimpanzee colony at the Arnhem Zoo in the Netherlands, etc.). de Waal has a lived awareness of and respect for their individuality in all its concreteness, which allowed him to get beyond mere inadvertent anthropocentrism of the majority of the common people (Hawkins 1).
As regards the most disputed part of his work, de Waal has investigated the extent to which aspects of morality are recognizable in other animals and has concluded that there is much that people and non-humans have in common, including whatever we (humans) claim as uniquely ours (Hawkins 4).
At first glance, such conclusions may sound strange, since the gap between animals’ habits and moral traits, practiced by humans, seems to be to irreconcilable. Nevertheless, Frans de Waal has reasonably and clearly stated that in fact, what we call now “moral principles” is the continuation of certain trends, improving social life.
Such conclusions of de Waal are not extremely revolutionary for science and philosophy, instead, they improve and compound the positions of so-called evolutionary ethics. For instance, “Descent of Man” by Charles Darwin and his “On the Origin of Species” explained moral sense in an evolutionary context as well – firstly, considering social instincts as the first roots for human morality, and secondly, referring to the development of intellectual faculties, conscience and ability to reflect on past actions (Schroeder n. p.).
Therefore, Frans de Waal’s conclusions significantly enrich the thoughts of great Charles Darwin, making them more relevant to the contemporary epoch, and contributing to the further development of evolutionary ethics.
What is of utmost importance, evolutionary ethics bridges the gap between philosophy and the natural sciences, arguing that it was the natural selection that has instilled human beings with a moral sense, therefore, morality allegedly arises automatically during the evolution process, and not as the result of some divine will or the application of human rational skills (Schroeder n. p.).
As Frans de Waal has pointed out, “Human morality may indeed be an extension of general primate patterns of social integration, and of the adjustment required of each member in order to fit in” (2). No doubt, this statement reiterates the position of other supporters of evolutionary ethics as regards the biological origin of ethics, which gradually develops in human beings.
In addition, what cannot be omitted, is the fact that Frans de Waal has a rich experience of observing real life of many primates. The observed characteristics of their day-to-day life processes, daily behavior, allowed de Waal to consider them as manifestations of empathy, altruism, etc., which proves the abovementioned position one more time.
Another eloquent statement of Frans de Waal, which reveals his deductions on biological nature of moral and ethical behavior is the following: “Biologists take the back door to the same building that social scientists and philosophers, with their fondness for high-flung notions, enter through the front door” (4).
Such witty statement reveals that human’s arrogance and anthropo-centeredness cannot resist to the facts, which reveal the similarity of process, continuing the evolutionary theory to the ethical position as well.
Works Cited
De Waal Frans. Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals. Harvard University Press: 1996.
Hawkins, Ronnie. “Ethics and Evolutionary Continuity: Comments on De Waal, Lyons, Moran, and Kraemer”. Between the Species, issue 2, 2002, pp. 1-11.
Schroeder, Doris. Evolutionary Ethics. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from: http://www.iep.utm.edu/evol-eth/.
