Primate Morality, Part 1

In a recent article I read in the New York Times, “Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior”, a biologist takes a closer look at primate behavior and presents facts that he feels support human evolution from primates. The author discusses the findings primatologist Frans de Waal and opens the article providing us with several of his unbiased observances; primates, who cannot swim, have drowned in attempts to save other primates. Monkeys who have been given the chance to receive food by pulling on a chain that will in turn give another monkey an electric shock choose to go hungry for days (Wade). Biologists then take this information and present the claim that these as well as other behaviors are “precursors of human morality”. They are claiming that morality grew out of behavioral rules that have been shaped by evolution.

The ideas and concepts that de Waal presents do seem to make sense initially, but does this make them fact, are we now supposed to accept that we have evolved from primates? The issue of morality is Alan Garfinkel in his book Forms of Explanation talks about different contrast spaces and how within those different contrast spaces individuals look at things differently. This article discusses the concept of primate morality, an issue that causes conflict for many people because of the ideas and facts it presents. A devoutly religious person could never take this article as fact because there is no mention of God, and according to religious people, God is a necessary factor in discussing the existence of man. Within a religious contrast space the idea that man evolved from primates is not possible because man was created first and then animals. The opposite goes for someone who believes in evolution, it is not in their evolutionary mindset to believe in creationism because they put stock in the facts that scientist discover and point towards man evolving from primate. Neither argument has enough facts or concrete evidence to wholeheartedly defeat the other argument which is why it will continue until one side or the other is able to provide a more solid foundation. People in different contrast spaces automatically look at things differently than someone else. The question, “How was man created?” can be taken many different ways depending on simple things such as the emphasis of a certain word or in the context of which it was asked. A creationist could focus on the word ‘man’ and say that it was man who was created first and not primates, they could also argue that the word ‘created’ was used and not evolved. However, an evolutionist would look at the question from an evolutionary perspective that man was created from primate. Or they could just refute the question and say “No, man was not created, he evolved”. In this article the concept of primate morality is used as an example to support evolution and de Waal’s contrast space that primates making moral decisions somehow prove that humans evolved from them.

Bibliography-

Wade, Nicholas. Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior. New York Times, March 20, 2007. Section F, p. 3. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20611FE3C540C738EDDAA0894DF404482