All morality is practical

Often when people talk about morality, they talk about voluntary actions. They assume that moral decisions are entirely conscious and that people weigh up various influences including moral principles, the urge for immediate gratification and other self-interests. I don't think this is a realistic model of morality. I think humans have a moral instinct in the same way that we have sexual and language instincts. Although we are conscious of them in certain ways, the mass, the mechanism is unconscious. We can fall in love without thinking "this individual has genetic characteristics that would be advantageous to the survival of my genes should we combine them. " We can speak fluently without a conscious knowledge of grammar. And we can be driven by morality without really be aware of it or knowing why we act the way we do. Therefore, I reject Con's redefinition of "practical", in particular the part about "voluntary action" and refer him back to the definition I gave in the introduction. morality gives societies a competitive advantageI think the advantages of morality for a society are obvious to everyone. Violence, for example, not only causes immediate physical damage, but it requires everyone to spend time and resources on self-protection which could be more productively spent elsewhere. It also makes people afraid, and fear will cause them to restrict their activities which will also lead to a decrease in production. Much of morality is related to mating, childbirth and raising children, all of which are vital activities for a society. Respect for other people's property, again, means that resources and effort do not need to be spent on hoarding and protection. And so on. Morality is a system that society adopts to guide people to act in ways that are mutually advantageous. The moral instinctHuman beings have always lived in societies, and the moral instinct has evolved with our species. Like language, it can manifest itself in different ways in different societies, but ALL societies have moral systems and they all share the following four features.1. Individuals are driven to observe and judge others' behavior against the moral standard, and react accordingly. In this way, society creates a background pressure to compel people to act morally. This force is obvious. We are always being exhorted to pay attention to people's "values, to pay attention to what they do rather than what they say. When someone is observed acting immorally, everyone is interested and the word spreads quickly. Not only that, but we remember. Our brains are very good at storing this kind of information. Thus, it's possible to see someone in the street years later and think, "I don't remember his name or how I know him, but I know he's a cheat and a liar. "2. Conformity to public opinion is an important force for morality, but in order for the system to work most effectively, individuals need to act morally even when they're unobserved. I've seen two mechanisms for this. The first is that people believe they are observed, that there is an all-seeing, invisible observer (God) who watches everything and remembers. The second mechanism is tied up with self-esteem. Humans are very sensitive to the extent to which they are valued by the people around them, but also how they rate against their own mental standard. Often this mental standard is a moral one. So when people observe themselves acting morally, their self-esteem moves up the scale accompanied by a keen sense of pleasure. And if they observe themselves acting immorally, the reverse is true. People don't need to be particularly conscious, then, of the societal purpose of morality in the context of specific decisions. Of course, most people will be able to defend morality in a theoretical way. They can say, "if we all went around hitting people when we felt like it, the world would be a bad place to live. " But when they find themselves in a frustrating, stressful situation, this isn't what's running through their minds. They're more likely to be thinking, "can I get away with hitting him? No. People are watching. " or maybe "I don't hit; I'm a good person. " External and internal mechanisms for morality respectively.3. Morality, which acts for society as a whole, is in constant competition with self-interest. Morality still works if it's mostly observed. Therefore, everyone - even the most moral - have lapses into self-indulgence now and then, and we expect that.4. Morality is an in-group mechanism. Its actions are strongest within our immediate social group, but weaken dramatically over distance. Thus, we would have moral difficulty eating a three course dinner if a starving neighbouring child were watching us through the window, but no trouble at all eating such a dinner with the knowledge of children starving in countries far away. This is another example of how morality is not so much a rational choice as an instinct. SummaryWhen I say all morality is practical, I mean that the moral instinct - with its accompanying moral systems - has evolved in humans because it enhances the competitive survival of human societies. It's practical in that sense.