Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Objectivity

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_534-1

Synonyms

Definition

Objectivity – the quality of existing independently of a subject’s beliefs or desires. Not dependent for its properties on any person’s subjective experience. Typically discoverable by publicly available and evaluable means.

Introduction

For purposes of this entry, a domain of facts is objective if those facts both (a) exist and (b) are mind-independent, meaning they do not depend for their existence on any human beliefs, attitudes, or desires (though for simplification, this article will only refer to beliefs in what follows). Accordingly, moral facts are objective just insofar as they both exist and are mind-independent. Here, the focus will be on how evolutionary considerations bear on the objectivity of morality. This article will not consider other ways in which evolutionary considerations bear on other moral phenomena, including how they might have shaped core moral emotions such as compassion or shame or widespread...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Berker, S. (2014). Does evolutionary psychology show that normativity is mind-dependent? In J. D’Arms & D. Jacobson (Eds.), Moral psychology and human agency: Philosophical essays on the science of ethics (p. 215). Corby: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brosnan, K. (2011). Do the evolutionary origins of our moral beliefs undermine moral knowledge? Biology and Philosophy, 26(1), 51–64.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9235-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Copp, D. (2008). Darwinian skepticism about moral realism. Philosophical Issues, 18(1), 186–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2005). Neurocognitive adaptations designed for social exchange. In The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 584–627). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. de Lazari-Radek, K., & Singer, P. (2012). The objectivity of ethics and the unity of practical reason. Ethics, 123(1), 9–31.  https://doi.org/10.1086/667837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Enoch, D. (2010). The epistemological challenge to metanormative realism: How best to understand it, and how to cope with it. Philosophical Studies, 148(3), 413–438.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-009-9333-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Enoch, D. 2011. Taking Morality Seriously. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. FitzPatrick, W. J. (2014). Debunking evolutionary debunking of ethical realism. Philosophical Studies, 172(4), 883–904.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-014-0295-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gill, M. B. (2009). Indeterminacy and variability in meta-ethics. Philosophical Studies, 145(2), 215–234. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huemer, M. (2005). Ethical intuitionism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Joyce, R. (2006). The evolution of morality. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Joyce, R. (2016). Evolution, truth-tracking, and moral skepticism. In Essays in moral skepticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kahane, G. (2011). Evolutionary debunking arguments. Noûs, 45(1), 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Machery, E., & Mallon, R. (2010). Evolution of morality. In The moral psychology handbook (p. 3). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Miller, G. F. (2007). Sexual selection for moral virtues. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 82(2), 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Millhouse, T., Bush, L. S., & Moss, D. (2016). The containment problem and the evolutionary debunking of morality. In T. K. Shackelford & R. D. Hansen (Eds.), The evolution of morality, Evolutionary psychology (pp. 113–135). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nesse, R. M. (2009). Runaway social selection for displays of partner value and altruism. In The moral brain (pp. 211–231). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nichols, S. (2014). Process debunking and ethics. Ethics, 124(4), 727–749. JSTOR.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sarkissian, H. (2016). Aspects of folk morality: Objectivism and relativism. In W. Buckwalter & J. Sytsma (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to experimental philosophy. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Shafer-Landau, R. (2012). Evolutionary debunking, moral realism and moral knowledge. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 7(i), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shafer-Landau, R. (2003). Moral realism: A defence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Skarsaune, K. O. (2011). Darwin and moral realism: Survival of the iffiest. Philosophical Studies, 152(2), 229–243.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-009-9473-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith, M. (1994). The moral problem (1st ed.). Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  24. Sommers, T., & Rosenberg, A. (2003). Darwin’s nihilistic idea: Evolution and the meaninglessness of life. Biology and Philosophy, 18(5), 653–668. Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Street, S. (2006). A darwinian dilemma for realist theories of value. Philosophical Studies, 127(1), 109–166.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-1726-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Street, S. (2008). Reply to Copp: Naturalism, normativity, and the varieties of realism worth worrying about. Philosophical Issues, 18(1), 207–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention, Cambridge studies in social and emotional development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Vavova, K. (2014). Debunking evolutionary debunking. In Oxford studies in metaethics (Vol. 9, pp. 76–101). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. White, R. (2010). You believe that just because… 1. Philosophical Perspectives, 24(1), 573–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wielenberg, E. J. (2010). On the evolutionary debunking of morality. Ethics, 120(3), 441–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wong, D. B. (2014). Integrating philosophy with anthropology in an approach to morality. Anthropological Theory, 14(3), 336–355. Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CUNY Graduate CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Baruch CollegeCUNYNew YorkUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Lisa L. M. Welling
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyOakland UniversityRochesterUSA