Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adaptation, Exaptation, By-Products, and Spandrels in Evolutionary Explanations of Morality

  • Published:
Biological Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ayala F (2010) The difference of being human: Morality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(2): 9015–9022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson P (1991) The Development and Integration of Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd R, Richerson P (2005) The Origin and Evolution of Cultures. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C ([1871] 2004) The Descent of Man. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick W (2008) Morality and evolutionary biology. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/morality-biology/

  • Frank R (1988) Passions Within Reason. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould S, Lewontin R (1979) The spandrels of San Marco. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 205(1161): 581–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould S, Vrba E (1982) Exaptation: A missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology 8(1): 4–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths P (2002) What is innateness? The Monist 85(1): 70–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths P, Machery E, Linquist S (2009) The vernacular concept of innateness. Mind and Language 24(5): 605–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser M (2006) Moral Minds. New York: Ecco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce R (2000) Darwinian ethics and error. Biology and Philosophy 15: 713–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce R (2006) The Evolution of Morality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker S, Kalow W, Kalant H, Gould S (1997) Evolutionary psychology: An exchange. New York Review of Books 4: 55–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prinz J (2007a) The Emotional Construction of Morals. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prinz J (2007b) Can moral obligations be empirically discovered? Midwest Studies in Philosophy 31(1): 271–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prinz J (2008a) Acquired moral truths. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 77(1): 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prinz J (2008b) Is morality innate? In: Moral Psychology, Vol. 1 (Sinnott-Armstrong W, ed), 367–406. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prinz J (2009) Against moral nativism. In: Stich and His Critics (Bishop M, Murphy D, eds), 167–189. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruse M (1998) Taking Darwin Seriously. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Street S (2006) A Darwinian dilemma for realist theories ofvalue. Philosophical Studies 127: 109–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO ([1975] 2000) Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Australian National University, Acton, Australia

    Benjamin James Fraser

Authors
  1. Benjamin James Fraser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin James Fraser.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fraser, B.J. Adaptation, Exaptation, By-Products, and Spandrels in Evolutionary Explanations of Morality. Biol Theory 5, 223–227 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_a_00052

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_a_00052

Keywords

Search

Navigation