Moral Approach: Waal And Goodall

Despite a lack of scientific academic education, Jane Goodall’s work on the chimpanzees made revolutionary breakthrough in the field of understanding chimpanzee behavior. It was all made possible by her firm belief on her unconventional methods which academics in the field eyed with cynicism and felt was pointless. Such pessimistic outlook on her efforts from established academics did not blight her morale; instead she carried on with her methods of analyzing the chimpanzee population with full enthusiasm and self belief.

In the Article “The 2% Difference” by Robert Sapolsky explains that scientists have decoded the chimpanzee genome to discover 98 percent of human DNA is similar. In Sapolsky article he goes on to explain the two percent difference humans and chimpanzee. A few of his discovered was that “Chimps excel at climbing trees, but we beat them hands down at balance-beam routine; they are covered in hair, while we have only the occasional guy with really hair shoulders” (Angeloni pp.40 2016). Physically we look different and can do different physical activities then chimpanzee. Sapolsky continues by saying how we have differences in social behavior. It is known

1. The social structure and behavior of chimps in their communities or troops suggest many questions. What research questions might Dr. Hahn and her associates ask?

“In their natural homes in the wild, chimpanzees humans’ closest living genetic relatives”, who are more like us than they’re like gorillas are never separated from their families and troops . “Profoundly social beings, they spend every day together exploring, crafting and using tools to solve problems, foraging, playing, grooming each other, and making soft nests for sleeping each night” . They care deeply for their families and forge lifelong friendships . Chimpanzee mothers are loving and protective, nursing their infants and sharing their nests with them for four to six years . They have excellent memories and share cultural traditions with their children and peers . They empathize with one another and console their friends when they’re upset . They help others, even at a personal cost to themselves . When one of another

Primates share many human-like factors, and over time, studies are able to now show that non-human primates have become even more like humans in terms of culture and lifestyle. Primates are intelligent, which allows parents of mammals to teach their young, and the young learn much like humans do. From detailed studies of ape behavior, it is concluded that apes, like humans, use tools and patterns to adapt from what they learn in social groups, rather than it being biological. Primates have been found to laugh, support each other, learn how to medicate themselves and others when in need, have family traditions, show off, grieve, and the list goes on. Learning such things, whether it be human or ape, varies from culture to culture, through social

Chimpanzees (Figure 1) are the closest living relatives to us, and they share 99 percent of our DNA (1). Chimpanzees have distinct group territoriality. Male chimpanzees “patrol” near the boundary between the two ranges, at that time they move very carefully and quietly, and they can cease to listen and observe the range of their neighbors. Patrolling individuals are likely to face cruel and violent

When thinking about morality, it is necessary to consider how aspects from both nature and nurture, along with free will, may form ones moral beliefs and dictate ones moral actions. To understand how moral beliefs as well as actions formulate and operate within individuals and societies, it is imperative that a general definition of morality is laid out. Morality, then, can be defined as ones principles regarding what is right and wrong, good or bad. Although an individual may hold moral beliefs, it is not always the case that moral actions follow. Therefore, in this essay I aim to provide an explanation that clarifies the two and in doing so I also hope to further the notion that one’s moral framework is a product of all three factors; nature, nurture, and free will. The first part of this essay will flush out what exactly morality it and how it manifests similarly across individuals and differently across individuals. Contrariwise, I will then explain how morality manifests similarly across societies and differently across societies. Alongside presenting the information in this order, I will trace morality back to primordial times to showcase how morality has evolved and developed since then, not only from a nature-based standpoint, but also from a

Within this essay, we will study more in depth the behavioral as well as physical traits of two primates at a zoo from their interaction with their peers to their place in the group. This observation would enable us to further understand the possible existing correlation between humans and primates. First, I studied a female chimpanzee with her baby, and then, a dominant male gorilla, in San Francisco Zoo at about noon, on May 23, 2015, for an hour each. Even though they share some similarities such as having a large brain, living for a long time, and being bored in their enclosure, they are still different; when gorillas are the largest, chimpanzees are the smartest. In fact, chimps use tools to catch food, they would not be able to reach

Human morality is a product of evolution by heritable variation and natural selection. It is fully part of the natural world but is none the worse for that – on the contrary. In the last sentence of On the Origin of Species, Darwin states that “there is grandeur in this view of life… on which endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.” The beautiful and wonderful forms include true moral agents who respond to real moral facts and who form a natural moral community. Their existence contributes to the grandeur of Darwin’s evolutionary view of life.

Personally, I am sympathetic to Paul Taylor’s idea that people should respect for every living organism. From his book “Respect for Nature”, he proposes a definition of environmental ethics called Biocentric Individualism. It basically means that humans are not superior to any living organisms. Humans are a part of nature, so humans should have moral relations and connections with every living organism in the world. Thus, human’s obligations, actions and responsibilities should be often determined with respect to those relations and connections. Moreover, he suggests that every organism has intrinsic value such as unique biological functions or natural goals. To maintain a good natural system, organisms have to contribute and function together. Hence, all organisms should have equal inherent worth.

Research by Yamamoto, Humle and Tanaka in 2009 concluded that chimpanzees show altruism only when prompted or pressured rather than voluntarily [5]. This particular empirical research challenges the evidence proposed by prior researchers and tests the limits of chimpanzee’s altruistic nature. Using colour-coded tokens, one of which allowed for a partner to share the reward with the test subject and one of which gave the test subject all of the reward, several chimps were tested as to their response. Results showed a tendency for the chimpanzee to take the prosocial option in situations both with and without peer pressure. Abnormally results showed that pressure or harassment from partners reduced the chimpanzee’s inclination to take the prosocial option. Although these results challenge prior research [5] they are limited as they are not conclusive and raise questions of their own to reach a complete understanding. These research results are significant in challenging an already established understanding of chimpanzee’s altruistic traits and acts as a good contrast to other references. This resource stands out as it does not make conclusive statements out of abnormal results but rather opens up a reader’s opinion and presents issues further

Morality is defined as a system or code that we humans use to differentiate between right and wrong. This system could be derived from a number of factors: religion, culture, and upbringing. It is difficult enough to determine what an individual's morals are, but going further to determine how we came to possess those morals is even more ambitious. Still, regardless of its difficulty, this subject consumes many philosophers and psychologists. One such moral psychologists, Jonathan Haidt, is theorizing the possibility of evolution causing ones morality. Haidt is a moral psychologist at the Universtiy of Virgina further believes that complex social structures such as religion and politics as well as our need for social structures affect

The concept of morality plays an important role in human society. Through the discovery of what, exactly, determines that which is “good” and that which is “bad”, humans develop mechanisms that determine how they respond to or judge any given situation. What remains a mystery, however, is what, exactly, is the basis of morals. It is commonly believed that morals are learned through lived experiences, as well as, from those who act as each person’s individual caretaker(s). Even though these factors do play a significant role in determining morality, these factors alone neither create nor determine a person’s moral compass. In Paul Bloom’s work, Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil, we are introduced to the idea that morality, while partly learned, is something that is ingrained in humans from birth. Through multiple studies, performed both by Bloom as well as other psychologists, it is revealed that not only are babies able to perceive what is right and what is wrong, but also, from birth, babies are instilled with the innate knowledge of empathizing, valuing fairness and status, and valuing those who look similar versus those who look different. In spite of previous ideas, Bloom proves that babies are smarter than previously thought, while simultaneously recognizing the shortcomings of this “elementary” form of morality. Bloom’s finding prove to be revolutionary, in that they allow for the examination of different social structures, their shortcomings, and what

Also, recent news has reported that chimpanzees (Choi, 2007) and toddlers (China Daily, 2006) have shown true altruistic behaviour.

Frans de Waal begins his argument by first stating the question as to whether or not a human’s moral actions originated from the psychological and behavioral nature of our evolutionary ancestors. He concludes this thought by saying that our moral actions do, in fact, originate from the psychological and behavioral nature of our evolutionary ancestors. De Waal further argues that the foundations of human morals are found in the primates of today. They are composed of actions and emotions whose evolutionary role assists us in our social organization and unity. In the beginning pages of his book, De Waal