Society (culture and religion) does influence our sense of ethics but that is just the surface, the roots of morality run much deeper. The thing is, there are numerous different societies, each with its unique beliefs and ways, yet humans everywhere share a basic moral code. Therefore, according to new research, morality is an ancient instinct in humans, so much so that hints of it have even been found in some other social animals too.
So despite the wide variety of human cultures around the world, this new study identifies seven “universal moral rules” that exist in virtually every society. It is being hailed as “the largest and most comprehensive cross-cultural survey of morals ever conducted,” according to a news release about the findings from the University of Oxford. The study was published in the journal Current Anthropology.
Oliver Scott Curry, senior researcher at Oxford’s Institute for Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology, and lead author of the study said in a statement:
“‘The debate between moral universalists and moral relativists has raged for centuries, but now we have some answers. People everywhere face a similar set of social problems, and use a similar set of moral rules to solve them. As predicted, these seven moral rules appear to be universal across cultures. Everyone everywhere shares a common moral code. All agree that cooperating, promoting the common good, is the right thing to do.”
The Study
- They explored a database called the Human Relations Area Files, which includes thousands of ethnographies “from simple hunter-gatherer bands to kingdoms and modern states.”
- They examined ethnographic views of morality from a stratified random sample of 60 societies around the planet, comprising more than 600,000 words from more than 600 sources.
Results
- They found that seven forms of cooperative behavior “are always seen as morally good,” with not a single society viewing any of them as morally bad.
- The morals seem to exist with equal frequency across continents. In other words, they are “not the exclusive preserve of ‘the West’ or any other region.”
- Although all societies seemed to agree on the seven basic moral rules, they varied in how they prioritized or ranked them. For example, the researchers write:
“In some societies, family appeared to trump group; in other societies it was the other way around. In some societies there was an overwhelming obligation to seek revenge; in other societies this was trumped by the desire to maintain group solidarity.”
The Seven Guidelines
These are what the authors call the “plausible candidates for universal moral rules”:
- Help your family.
- Help your group.
- Return favors.
- Be brave.
- Defer to superiors.
- Divide resources fairly.
- Respect others’ property.
Morality As Cooperation
Their theory is based on the idea of morality as cooperation. Meaning, morality evolved in social animals because it unifies and bolsters their groups, discouraging individuals from behaving selfishly at the expense of the greater good. Seeing as there are many types of cooperation, this theory suggests we’ve adapted by developing many types of morality.
Examples of this include:
- How we may be willing to risk our own lives to protect close relatives, for example, due to the evolutionary benefits of kin selection.
- How we value unity, solidarity, and loyalty because there are strength and safety in numbers, compelling us to form groups and coalitions.
- Social exchange can explain why we build trust and return favors, as well as our patterns of guilt, gratitude, atonement, and forgiveness.
- The need for conflict resolution may drive us to make “hawkish displays of dominance” (bravery) and respond with “dovish displays of submission” (deference to superiors) and to honor fair division of resources and property rights.
Moral Uncertainty
There are no specifications as to what particular sins to avoid. These 7 basic morals are broad principles, intended to illuminate our shared values but not necessarily offer a definitive code of human ethics. For example, hitting someone without permission “is not a foundational moral violation,” they write. “Instead, the moral valence of harm will vary according to the cooperative context: uncooperative harm (battery) will be considered morally bad, but cooperative harm (punishment, self-defense) will be considered morally good, and competitive harm in zero-sum contexts (some aspects of mate competition and intergroup conflict) will be considered morally neutral — ‘all’s fair in love and war.'”
Curry and his colleagues admit that it remains to be seen whether morality as cooperation “can explain all moral phenomena,” and that sexual morality, in particular, is still poorly understood. They also acknowledge that “morals sometimes go wrong,” but say those cases could just reflect “the inevitable limitations and by-products of cooperative strategies.”
Conclusion
The authors say that there is still a lot that is not clearly understood or defined about morality. We still have much to learn and more research will be needed to test this and other theories about our ethical instincts. For now, Curry says they hope there’s at least one clear moral to this story:
“We hope that this research helps to promote mutual understanding between people of different cultures, an appreciation of what we have in common, and how and why we differ.”
