I have shown that typical non-nativist explanations, though perhaps plausible, are incoherent.
It is precisely the point that human moral capacity appears in the form of reasoning
How, and for whom, does disgust influence moral judgment? In 4 experiments participants made moral judgments while experiencing extraneous feelings of disgust. Disgust was induced in Experiment 1 by exposure to a bad smell, in Experiment 2 by working in a disgusting room, in Experiment 3 by recalling a physically disgusting experience, and in Experiment 4 through a video induction. In each case, the results showed that disgust can increase the severity of moral judgments relative to controls. Experiment 4 found that disgust had a different effect on moral judgment than did sadness. In addition, Experiments 2-4 showed that the role of disgust in severity of moral judgments depends on participants’ sensitivity to their own bodily sensations. Taken together, these data indicate the importance - and specificity - of gut feelings in moral judgments.
Schnall et al (2008) Disgust as Embodied Moral Judgment. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. 34(8):1096-1109.Theories of moral judgment have long emphasized reasoning and conscious thought while downplaying the role of intuitive and contextual influences. However, recent research has demonstrated that incidental feelings of disgust can influence moral judgments and make them more severe. This study involved two experiments demonstrating that the reverse effect can occur when the notion of physical purity is made salient, thus making moral judgments less severe. After having the cognitive concept of cleanliness activated (Experiment 1) or after physically cleansing themselves after experiencing disgust (Experiment 2), participants found certain moral actions to be less wrong than did participants who had not been exposed to a cleanliness manipulation. The findings support the idea that moral judgment can be driven by intuitive processes, rather than deliberate reasoning. One of those intuitions appears to be physical purity, because it has a strong connection to moral purity.
Schnall et al. (2008) With a Clean Conscience : Cleanliness Reduces the Severity of Moral Judgments. Psychological Science 19(12):1219-1222Can sweet-tasting substances trigger kind, favorable judgments about other people? What about substances that are disgusting and bitter? Various studies have linked physical disgust to moral disgust, but despite the rich and sometimes striking findings these studies have yielded, no research has explored morality in conjunction with taste, which can vary greatly and may differentially affect cognition. The research reported here tested the effects of taste perception on moral judgments. After consuming a sweet beverage, a bitter beverage, or water, participants rated a variety of moral transgressions. Results showed that taste perception significantly affected moral judgments, such that physical disgust (induced via a bitter taste) elicited feelings of moral disgust. Further, this effect was more pronounced in participants with politically conservative views than in participants with politically liberal views. Taken together, these differential findings suggest that embodied gustatory experiences may affect moral processing more than previously thought.
Eskine et al. (2011) A Bad Taste in the Mouth : Gustatory Disgust Influences Moral Judgment. Psychological Science. 22: 295-299 You have just conceded that values are based on evolutionary success.
Not according to you; according to you "How many children Joe Blow has" is irrelevant. If an individual's survival and reproductive success is relevant, your argument has evolved, and one can judge the moral fitness of a society by its TFR.
the Golden Rule
Do unto others... Is that the rule that says treat others as yourself unless the pros outweigh the cons? Or is it the avoid harm except in those cases where it’s okay not to avoid harm, an empty statement. The anthropological record shows cultures can overrule no-harm norms more or less arbitrarily.
Values are not emotional attitudes.
Highly hypnotizable participants were given a posthypnotic suggestion to feel a flash of disgust whenever they read an arbitrary word. They were then asked to rate moral transgressions described in vignettes that either did or did not include the disgust-inducing word. Two studies show that moral judgments can be made more severe by the presence of a flash of disgust. These findings suggest that moral judgments may be grounded in affectively laden moral intuitions.
Wheatley & Haidt. (2005) Hypnotic disgust makes moral judgments more severe. Psychological Science.16(10):780-4.The evidence suggests they are.
we know that all other animals are instinctively averse to some behaviors, predisposed to others
Yes, some parts of our subjective experience are products of our biological makeup but I don't know how this helps your argument. You have already said that these responses have no inherent value.
Truth to Power wrote:Values are not emotional attitudes.
human moral capacity appears in the form of reasoning
People don’t generally engage in moral reasoning, but moral rationalisation: they begin with the conclusion, coughed up by an unconscious emotion, and then work backward to a plausible justification (Haidt).
"All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia" Orwell
E l/r -10 : L/A -7.64