Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorSachs, Benjamin Alan
dc.date.accessioned2013-03-21T17:01:01Z
dc.date.available2013-03-21T17:01:01Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.citationSachs , B A 2010 , ' Morality, adapted ' , Perspectives in Biology and Medicine , vol. 53 , no. 4 , pp. 624-629 . https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2010.0013en
dc.identifier.issn1529-8795
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 29949783
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: d8209dac-4f0d-4049-a9ab-4119624e28ee
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-2307-7620/work/69029287
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/3415
dc.description.abstractOver the last few decades, scientists have been busy debunking the myth that nonhuman animals relate to each other in a primarily competitive, aggressive way. What they have found is that many species of animal, including many of those most closely related to humans, display a remarkable range of cooperative, "prosocial" behavior. In fact, it appears that some animal societies adhere to a moral code. What is preventing us, then, from saying that the members of these societies are moral beings? Nothing important, according to a recent book. Probing further into this question, I suggest that in fact quite a lot is at risk in making this move. To integrate nonhuman animals fully into the moral domain, we may have to adapt our conception of morality in some very troublesome ways.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofPerspectives in Biology and Medicineen
dc.rightsCopyright (c) 2010 The Johns Hopkins University Press. This article first appeared in Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 53(4) pp.624-629en
dc.subjectBJ Ethicsen
dc.subject.lccBJen
dc.titleMorality, adapteden
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPublisher PDFen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Philosophyen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2010.0013
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record