Moral Psychologie stützt sich derzeit vor allem auf Jonathan Haidts Moral Foundations Theorie, laut der wir unsere Moral nach 5 Werten ausrichten, Care und Fairness, sowie Purity, Ingroup und Authority. Problem dabei ist, dass Haidt diese Werte nach Studienergebnissen auswählte, sie keiner theoretischen Grundlage entsprechen und nicht vollständig sind.
Ein neues Paper von Oliver Scott Curry baut auf Haidts Theorie auf, baut aber eine Grundlage in Nonzerosum-Games der Spieltheorie ein und landet bei sieben neuen „Moral Foundations“, einer neuen Mess-Grundlage für die Moralpsychologie und einer Theorie der „Moral als Kooperation“ mit folgenden Geltungsbereichen für Moral:
1: the allocation of resources to kin (Hamilton, 1963)
2: coordination to mutual advantage (Lewis, 1969)
3: social exchange (Trivers, 1971);
4: displays of hawkish traits (conflict resolution through contests)
5: displays of dove-ish traits (conflict resolution through contests; Maynard Smith & Price, 1973)
6: division (Skyrms, 1996)
Hier der Twitter-Thread von Oliver Scott Curry, da das Paper: Mapping Morality with a Compass: Testing the theory of ‘morality as cooperation’ with a new questionnaire, dort im Open Science Framework.
The present paper has two goals. First, we use nonzerosum game theory to provide the rigorous, systematic foundation that the cooperative approach to morality has previously lacked. We show how this rich, principled explanatory framework – which we call ‘Morality-as-Cooperation’ (MAC; Curry, 2016, Curry et al., 2019) – incorporates more types of cooperation, and thus explains more types of morality, than previous approaches. The current version of the theory incorporates seven well-established types of cooperation: (1) the allocation of resources to kin (Hamilton, 1963); (2) coordination to mutual advantage (Lewis, 1969); (3) social exchange (Trivers, 1971); and conflict resolution through contests featuring displays of (4) hawkish and (5) dove-ish traits (Maynard Smith & Price, 1973); (6) division (Skyrms, 1996); and (7) possession (Gintis, 2007).
Second, we test MAC’s prediction that each of these types of cooperation will be considered morally relevant, and each will give rise to a distinct moral domain, by developing a new self-report measure of moral values – with facets dedicated to (1) family values, (2) group loyalty, (3) reciprocity, (4) bravery, (5) respect, (6) fairness and (7) property rights – and examine its psychometric properties.
Oliver Scott Curry: Seven Moral Rules Found All Around the World
For 50 million years humans and their ancestors have lived in social groups. During this time natural selection equipped them with a range of adaptations for realizing the enormous benefits of cooperation that social life affords. More recently, humans have built on these benevolent biological foundations with cultural innovations – norms, rules, institutions – that further bolster cooperation. Together, these biological and cultural mechanisms provide the motivation for social, cooperative and altruistic behavior; and they provide the criteria by which we evaluate the behavior of others. And, according to the theory of ‘morality as cooperation’, it is precisely this collection of cooperative traits that constitute human morality.
What’s more, the theory leads us to expect that, because there are many types of cooperation, there will be many types of morality. Kin selection explains why we feel a special duty of care for our families, and why we abhor incest. Mutualism explains why we form groups and coalitions (there is strength and safety in numbers), and hence why we value unity, solidarity, and loyalty. Social exchange explains why we trust others, reciprocate favors, feel guilt and gratitude, make amends, and forgive. And conflict resolution explains: why we engage in costly displays of prowess such as bravery and generosity; why we defer to our superiors; why we divide disputed resources fairly; and why we recognize prior possession.
And, as predicted by the theory, these seven moral rules – love your family, help your group, return favors, be brave, defer to authority, be fair, and respect others’ property – appear to be universal across cultures. My colleagues and I analyzed ethnographic accounts of ethics from 60 societies (comprising over 600,000 words from over 600 sources)2. We found that these seven cooperative behaviors were always considered morally good. We found examples of most of these morals in most societies. Crucially, there were no counter-examples – no societies in which any of these behaviors were considered morally bad. And we observed these morals with equal frequency across continents; they were not the exclusive preserve of ‘the West’ or any other region.