Nature Has Enough Diversity To Fit Almost Any Ethical Taste

What motivates people when they makes choices? Developmental psychologist Jerome Kagan believes the majority of our daily decisions are issued in the service of gaining or maintaining a feeling of virtue. In this Kagan is refuting the “Pleasure Principle,” the idea that when a person consciously selects one act over another, he does so to attain a conscious feeling of pleasure. Those who adhere to this concept believe that sensory pleasure is the basis of all morality, that is, a child experiences a reduction in fear and thus an increasing sensory pleasure when he conforms to adult demands. Over time, obeying family and community standards becomes a habit, a moral.

Darwin believed that CONSCIENCE or ETHICS in humans was a product of the social behavior of animals. But WHICH ethics of humans? Kagan writes:
“Anyone with a modest knowledge of animal behavior and only minimal inferential skill can find examples of animal behavior to support almost any ethical message desired. Those who wish to sanctify the institution of marriage can point to the pair bonding of gibbons; those who think infidelity is more natural can point to chimpanzees. If you believe that people are naturally sociable, point to baboons; if you think they are solitary, point to orangutans. If you believe sex should replace fighting, point to rhesus monkeys; if you prefer the father to be the primary caretaker, point to titi monkeys. If you believe that surrogate care is closer to nature, point to lionesses. If you are certain that men should dominate harems of beautiful women, point to elephant seals; if you believe women should be in positions of dominance, point to elephants. Nature has enough diversity to fit almost any ethical taste.”
Kagan says that it is an error to assume that any human ethic is a clear product of some particular class of animal behavior.