Are humans the only beings capable of morality? What might be a workable definition of morality, anyway?
Dale Peterson, author of The Moral Lives of Animals, posits that we consider morality an organ, similar to the way a nose can be defined as enabling the sense of smell. Thus, he writes, “The function of morality, or the moral organ, is to negotiate the inherent conflict between self and others.”
Peterson discusses the perceptions of primatologist Susan Perry, who spent 15 years researching white-faced capuchin monkeys in Costa Rica. (No relation to this blogger.) She describes how most tourists and locals think they know all there is to know after five minutes of watching the monkeys, but there’s so much more going on in this complex primate world.
From inside that unknown world, here are a few surprising facts to ponder:
And finally, Peterson expands on the view that as females gain the vote and take part in making the rules, those rules tend to give way to the significance of attachments. When men and women have equal power, he speculates, such a human society “may be, on the whole, somewhat less dogmatic in judgment and somewhat more empathetic in action” than what we’re familiar with.
psychologytoday.com
Tags: animals, Bonobos, Dale Peterson, elephants, human, people, rats, Surprising Facts, The Moral Lives of Animals
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Nice information shared. Very interesting facts about animals.