Emotions are the foundation of Morality

Philosopher David Hume (1711 - 1776) shows in his 1751 book An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals that Morality is based on Emotions, though you have to read all the way to Appendix I before you get to that argument.

Mark Twain later makes the same argument in his essay What is Man? (Mark Twain was a smart guy!)

Emotions are an efficient way of thinking, giving us the answer of what to do without requiring a lot of time and thought. Emotions don't tell us why we ought to do what they urge us to do, they just urge us to do it.

Evolutionary Psychology gives us the following:

  1. A community of people who help each other will survive and flourish better than one which does not. Hence we evolved emotions which incline us to be altruistic: Sympathy; Compassion; Empathy. We are rewarded with a good feeling when we help someone.
  2. We also evolved emotions which incline us to praise others who act altruistically. Praising emotions—gratitude, and an emotion that may be called elevation, moral awe, or being moved—prompt one to reward altruists.
  3. However, cheaters might take advantage of our altruism. So we evolved emotions to detect and deal with cheaters. Contempt; Anger; Disgust. When we feel we have been wronged we get angry, mad, upset. We may seek retribution, restitution, or revenge.
  4. And we evolved emotions which prevent us from becoming cheaters ourselves. The self-conscious emotions of guilt, shame, and embarrassment, prompt one to avoid cheating or to repair its effects.

In summary we possess:
  1. Emotions which incline us to be altruistic: Sympathy; Compassion; Empathy.
  2. Emotions which reward others for being altruistic: Praise, gratitude, and an emotion that may be called elevation, moral awe, or being moved.
  3. Emotions which detect and deal with cheaters: Anger; Contempt; Disgust; Mad; Upset.
  4. Emotions which prevent us from being cheaters ourselves: Guilt; Shame; Embarrassment.
    (Psychopaths lack this fourth set of emotions. Thus they may be very nice people, who feel sympathy, compassion, and empathy towards others, and feel contempt, anger, and disgust when others cheat, but feel no self-conscious emotions such as guilt, shame, and embarrassment, to prevent them from committing heinous acts.)

The above only applies to people in our "In" group — our metaphorical "family". Starting with our own family, the “In” group circle may expand to relatives, friends, neighbors,... possibly up to "our nation as a family" metaphor, and possibly beyond. Who is included in the "In" group can vary and lead to political differences. We are quite capable of within-group amity and between-group enmity.

Quotes from Steven Pinker The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature (Year: 2002):

"The emotions of sympathy, gratitude, guilt, and anger allow people to benefit from cooperation without being exploited by liars and cheats."

"We have an emotional repertoire - sympathy, trust, guilt, anger, self-esteem - that impels us to seek new cooperators, maintain relationships with them, and safeguard the relationships against possible exploitation."

"The emotions undergird a desire for justice: the implacable need for retribution, the burning feeling that an evil act knocks the universe out of balance and can be canceled only by a commensurate punishment. People who are emotionally driven to retaliate against those who cross them, even at a cost to themselves, are more credible adversaries and less likely to be exploited. Many judicial theorists argue that criminal law is simply a controlled implementation of the human desire for retribution, designed to keep it from escalating into cycles of vendetta."
—Quotes from Steven Pinker The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature (Year: 2002):

(See David Hume Appendix 1 of his An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (1751)



No emotions in science and math

I'm into science and physics and math. Science and Math are totally devoid of emotions. We're not supposed to introduce emotions into science and math. We're supposed to be objective. We don't prove a math theorem by saying it feels right. Emotions were always something we set aside when dealing with math an science. And I've always put my faith in science and math to explain the world in a rational coherent way.

But suddenly I discover emotions are exactly what I need to study to understand a whole slew of things about our world that I always beforehand turned to science and math to explain. It's quite a surprise.

It is rather unsettling for me to realize I'm full of emotions which are not of my own choosing. I can only hope that evolution did a good job of providing me with the emotions that will help me survive. I think of animals that never went to school to develop their rational thought and don't have language to help them exchange ideas. They must rely entirely on their emotions to guide them through a successful life.

Two concepts of Morality

Morality is Empathy vs. Morality is Obedience

In my studies I've discovered quite to my surprise that there are two completely different concepts of Morality. One is "Morality is Empathy;" we care about what hurts others. This is the Liberal view. The other is "Morality is Obedience;" to a set of rules, such as a list of sins you're not supposed to do. This is the Conservative view.

For more on this dichotomy I recommend the book Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think by George Lakoff (1996, 2nd edition 2002). It's not an easy read, but it's quite an eye-opener.

(This will lead us into the study of Red vs. Blue, under construction.)

Back to RELIGIOUS STUDIES index

Back to Deley's Homepage