The Evolution of Morality Part 1: Care and Fairness

Morality has been the subject of academic scholarship for many years. Moral values are not, as I originally imagined, a set of known values about which the whole world agrees.

Springing from Piaget's observations of the stages of cognitive development in children, Lawrence Kohlberg (1927 - 1987) developed a related theory of moral development which has been foundational to this subject's ongoing study.

If morality is developmental, then no wonder humans struggle to agree on what our moral values "should be." Depending on all sorts of cultural and experiential factors, individuals will prioritize certain values over others. An individual will hold fast to the values that "feel right" until and unless the rhetoric around them and how they understand their experiences change sufficiently. 

One of the most prominent theories today posits 5 foundations of morality.

These foundations can be most succinctly summed up here: https://moralfoundations.org/

You can find an in-depth exploration within the book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided By Politics and Religion

Here are those 5 foundations of morality:

1) Care (aka "do no harm")

2) Fairness

3) Loyalty 

4) Authority 

5) Sanctity (aka purity over impurity)

How we understand these values matters, because how we prioritize them affects so much: what we expect from others, what offends or disgusts us, which political and religious leaders appeal to us, what foundational values we imagine should underlie how we govern/are governed, and so much more. 

One final thing to know before I start discussing these foundations:

As a rule "Conservatives" generally weight all five values equally, while "Liberals" generally weight Care and Fairness above the other three.

The following discussion contains my distillation of how I arrived at my "liberal" moral foundations. It is reflective, personal, and designed to add to the discussion. It is not "what everyone should think so if you disagree you are wrong," nor is it prescriptive or authoritative. I do believe it is valuable as part of the discussion.

CARE and FAIRNESS 

Care and Fairness encapsulate all the other values in my mind. They are a summation of the Golden Rule which is found in some form in all world religions. If one genuinely cares about others in equal weight to oneself, one wants equal care and fairness for them as well as oneself. One does not tend to look at others as a threat, but rather, as one's neighbor; therefore one does not tend to dehumanize groups by calling them "criminals" or "immigrants" or "from shit-hole countries." 

Under the Golden Rule, one tends to see the other in oneself and feel compassion for the hardships that the other has endured (and often continues to endure). One isn't as likely to scapegoat a marginalized group or to lay all the world's problems at their feet as some seem to. Laying society's ills at the feet of "the homosexuals" or "those transgender freaks" or "those teenagers having sex" is seen as incredibly ignorant. Instead, problems are seen as societal and innate to the human condition. Battles can be fought within oneself reducing the impulses to hate, scapegoat, or marginalize others. 

The Care and Fairness foundations often show up as activism for social justice causes around the world. They may show up as someone refusing to shop with businesses that exploit their workers just to bring "deals" to their customers. (Personally, I find the idea that some poor worker was exploited just so I could save a few bucks abhorrent. Who am I to deserve to save a little more money at the expense of some nameless, faceless worker in an impoverished country?)

The way liberals and conservatives hold "fairness" can look quite different. I have been on the receiving end of a lot of injustice, which makes me want to stop all injustice everywhere. If someone else is suffering from bullying or marginalization, I believe we all suffer. "We all suffer until nobody suffers," so to speak. 

But among some conservatives, the fairness argument seems to sound more like, "I want to be protected from cheaters" as though they themselves never cheat. There doesn't seem to be any sense of their own cheating ways---their entitlements, their desire for special status, or the ways their own team might cut corners. "Cheaters are some group "out there" and never themselves or their own team members.

In my mind, for genuine fairness to exist, everyone must be rigorously aware of their own impulses to cheat. We are all natural-born cheaters, be we liberals or conservatives, anarchists, or anything else. Until that universal human tendency is recognized, cheaters are always "them" "out there" different from "us" "in here." Therefore, if fortune favors our side, we tend to believe we deserved it. If fortune favors our opponents, we are likely to cry, "unfair!" 

This is a universal human trait. We ALL must stay alert to this tendency within ourselves and our group.

Next post: The Evolution of Morality Part 2: Loyalty, Authority, Sanctity - coming soon

Thank you for reading!

Do We Choose Fear or Love As Our Starting Point?

As the new warmth slowly relaxes and opens the soil, the buds, the hearts, and the faces around me, I am reflecting on two basic approaches to life: fear-based, and love-based.

Right away I can hear the fearful voices clamouring for why the fear-based approach is the needed, necessary, and only way to stay safe in life---the only way to protect ourselves from "other,"  "bad" people, so we can survive.

I want to give a nice, juicy, sedative-laden fly to that protective lizard-part of my brain, and put it back in its cage with a, "thank you for wanting to protect me." ("But shut-up. You're not helping").


It has long been known that anxiety and fear reduce our ability to think rationally and calmly.  To the extent that fear and anxiety are running in our beings, we regress to more primitive coping mechanisms.  We become younger, smaller, dumber, and more impulsive.  This is a deeply built-in evolutionary mechanism that is there to insure our physical survival.  It is literally our "lizard-brain" stepping up to keep us alive.

But so many situations today that may trigger our lizard brain are not about physical survival.  Something we love may feel threatened, but rarely is it a matter of life or death.

We MUST become more self-aware, so we can stay consciously present and non-reactive when something feels threatened, so that we can make (more ) rational choices.  We MUST cultivate an attitude of love, so that our hearts can remain open.

This lizard-brain perspective currently seems to have a strong emotional lobby group on the planet just now, especially in north America.  Just look at the NRA and their message of what is needed, and how emotional it is.  Just at a glance, would you say their insistence on guns and MORE guns is fear-based, or love-based?  Would you say their perspective makes the planet a better, kinder, more reasonable place; or a more segregated, fortress mentality, fearful place?

And which planet do I want to live on?  Which one do you want to live on?

For those who admire and follow Jesus, with his choice to stand and be crucified in his message for love, rather than going to war, where do we imagine Jesus would stand?  What message might he stand behind?

(Can you IMAGINE the United States turning the other cheek after 911 rather than going straight to war?  No.  I can't either.  But I can wish the possibility was even on the table.)

Have the good guys won yet?  Is war solving the problem?  When will we learn from Jesus' and Ghandi's (and Obi-wan Kenobi's, etc. etc.) examples?  Perhaps death of the body is not the worst thing?  Perhaps being personally attacked is not the worst thing?

As I try and try to understand the fearful rhetoric and divisive language, the shouting and blaming and stonewalling in the US AND the Canadian governments, I wonder what is at play in the world just now.  WHY are we so afraid?  And what can I do to make a difference toward DE-escalating the anxiety?


 In spiritual evolutionary theory, we must progress from a black/white, good/evil, linear and hierarchical (fear-based) model to an inclusive, cooperative, growth and healing (love-based) model --- so as to enter into greater wisdom, enlightenment, perspective and the ability to love wisely.  This is a progression, and the black/white model cannot imagine or fathom the inclusive model any more than a caterpillar can imagine being a butterfly.  It also feels threatened by the inclusive model.  It cannot imagine how the inclusive model will include it too.  But it will.  With love.

In any case I am choosing to stand for peace for one more day.  I am willing to be crucified (gossip, blame, hatred, contempt, character assassination) for one more day --- alongside so many other wise and loving souls.  

We are not alone in our stand for love.

We will never stop standing for love.

love always wins.
Rev Alison