I don’t think you mentioned “nobility” before. What you wrote was just:
Evolution has instilled in me the instinct of valuing the welfare (fitness) of kin at a significant fraction of the value of my own personal welfare.
which seemed to me to be a kind of claim that a utilitarian could make with equal credibility. If you’re now saying that you feel noble and proud that your values come from biological instead of cultural evolution… well I’ve never seen that expressed anywhere else before, so I’m going to guess that most people do not have that kind of feeling.
...seemed to me to be a kind of claim that a utilitarian could make with equal credibility.
Well, he could credibly make that claim if he could credibly assert that the ancestral environment was remarkably favorable for group selection.
… you’re now saying that you feel noble and proud that your values come from biological instead of cultural evolution...
What I actually said was “my own (genetic) instincts derive a kind of nobility from their origin …”. The value itself claims a noble genealogy, not a noble essence. If I am proud on its behalf, it is because that instinct has been helping to keep my ancestral line alive for many generations. I could say something similar for a meme which became common by way of selection at the individual or societal level. But what do I say about a selfish meme. That I am not the only person that it fooled and exploited? I’m going to guess that most people do have that kind of feeling.
I think you misinterpreted the context. I endorsed kin selection, together with discounting the welfare of non-kin. Someone (not me!) wishing to be a straight utilitarian and wishing to treat kin and non-kin equally needs to endorse group selection in order to give their ethical intuitions a basis in evolutionary psychology. Because it is clear that humans engage in kin recognition.
Now I see how you are reading the “kind of claim that a utilitarian could make” bit.
As you previously observed, the actual answer to this involves cultural evolution—not group selection.
The “evolutionary psychology” explanation is that humans developed sophisticated culture which was—on average—beneficial, but which allowed all kinds of deleterious memes in with the beneficial ones.
A utilitarian could claim:
Evolution has produced in me the tendency to value the welfare of non-kin at a significant fraction of the value of my own personal welfare.
...on the grounds that their evolution involved gene-meme coevolution—and that inevitably involves a certain amount of memetic hijacking by deleterious memes—such as utilitarianism.
I don’t think you mentioned “nobility” before. What you wrote was just:
which seemed to me to be a kind of claim that a utilitarian could make with equal credibility. If you’re now saying that you feel noble and proud that your values come from biological instead of cultural evolution… well I’ve never seen that expressed anywhere else before, so I’m going to guess that most people do not have that kind of feeling.
Well, he could credibly make that claim if he could credibly assert that the ancestral environment was remarkably favorable for group selection.
What I actually said was “my own (genetic) instincts derive a kind of nobility from their origin …”. The value itself claims a noble genealogy, not a noble essence. If I am proud on its behalf, it is because that instinct has been helping to keep my ancestral line alive for many generations. I could say something similar for a meme which became common by way of selection at the individual or societal level. But what do I say about a selfish meme. That I am not the only person that it fooled and exploited? I’m going to guess that most people do have that kind of feeling.
Not group, surely: kin. He quoted you as saying: “welfare (fitness) of kin”.
I think you misinterpreted the context. I endorsed kin selection, together with discounting the welfare of non-kin. Someone (not me!) wishing to be a straight utilitarian and wishing to treat kin and non-kin equally needs to endorse group selection in order to give their ethical intuitions a basis in evolutionary psychology. Because it is clear that humans engage in kin recognition.
Now I see how you are reading the “kind of claim that a utilitarian could make” bit.
As you previously observed, the actual answer to this involves cultural evolution—not group selection.
The “evolutionary psychology” explanation is that humans developed sophisticated culture which was—on average—beneficial, but which allowed all kinds of deleterious memes in with the beneficial ones.
A utilitarian could claim:
...on the grounds that their evolution involved gene-meme coevolution—and that inevitably involves a certain amount of memetic hijacking by deleterious memes—such as utilitarianism.