Evolutionary precursors of social norms in chimpanzees: a new approach

Abstract

Moral behaviour, based on social norms, is commonly regarded as a hallmark of humans. Hitherto, humans are perceived to be the only species possessing social norms and to engage in moral behaviour. There is anecdotal evidence suggesting their presence in chimpanzees, but systematic studies are lacking. Here, we examine the evolution of human social norms and their underlying psychological mechanisms. For this, we distinguish between conventions, cultural social norms and universal social norms. We aim at exploring whether chimpanzees possess evolutionary precursors of universal social norms seen in humans. Chimpanzees exhibit important preconditions for their presence and enforcement: tolerant societies, well-developed social-cognitive skills and empathetic competence. Here, we develop a theoretical framework for recognizing different functional levels of social norms and distinguish them from mere statistical behavioural regularities. Quasi social norms are found where animals behave functionally moral without having moral emotions. In proto social norms, moral emotions might be present but cannot be collectivized due to the absence of a uniquely human psychological trait, i.e. shared intentionality. Human social norms, whether they are universal or cultural, involve moral emotions and are collectivized. We will discuss behaviours in chimpanzees that represent potential evolutionary precursors of human universal social norms, with special focus on social interactions involving infants. We argue that chimpanzee infants occupy a special status within their communities and propose that tolerance towards them might represent a proto social norm. Finally, we discuss possible ways to test this theoretical framework. 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 2 Abstract 52 53 54 Moral behaviour, based on social norms, is commonly regarded as a hallmark of 55 humans. Hitherto, humans are perceived to be the only species possessing social norms and to 56 engage in moral behaviour. There is anecdotal evidence suggesting their presence in 57 chimpanzees, but systematic studies are lacking. Here, we examine the evolution of human 58 social norms and their underlying psychological mechanisms. For this, we distinguish 59 between conventions, cultural social norms and universal social norms. We aim at exploring 60 whether chimpanzees possess evolutionary precursors of universal social norms seen in 61 humans. Chimpanzees exhibit important preconditions for their presence and enforcement: 62 tolerant societies, well-developed social-cognitive skills and empathetic competence. Here, 63we develop a theoretical framework for recognizing different functional levels of social norms 64 and distinguish them from mere statistical behavioural regularities. Quasi social norms are 65 found where animals behave functionally moral without having moral emotions. In proto 66 social norms, moral emotions might be present but cannot be collectivized due to the absence 6...

Animal morality: What is the debate about?

“…Though this result could be explained in a variety ways (e.g., the monkeys merely avoided doing something that caused an aversive stimulus), a not unreasonable interpretation is that the monkeys recognized and wished to avoid causing distress in others, suggesting some degree of sympathetic concern. Similar pro-social helping behaviours suggestive of empathy and sympathy have been documented in several species, including rats (Bartal et al, 2011;Sato et al, 2015), and chimpanzees, who have been shown to direct consoling behaviours towards losers after fights (de Waal, 1996;Fraser and Aureli, 2008) and display physiological signs of emotional arousal in response to images of violence or other chimpanzees displaying fearful or distressed facial expressions (reviewed by Rudolf von Rohr et al, 2011).…”

“…Researchers like de Waal , 2006aFlack and de Waal, 2000) are rather less generous, however, arguing that what we find in animals, particularly other primates, is proto-morality: various psychological "building blocks" or "evolutionary precursors" to morality, but not the fully-fledged article. They argue that while there is important evolutionary continuity here, a crucial evolutionary change occurred uniquely in the human lineage, giving rise to genuine morality (see also Joyce, 2006;Kitcher, 2006Kitcher, , 2011Rudolf von Rohr et al, 2011;Boehm, 2012;Haidt, 2012;Suddendorf, 2013;Prinz, 2014). At the other end of the spectrum are researchers like Korsgaard (2006) and Ayala (2010), who deny, albeit for different reasons, that anything remotely resembling morality or a moral psychology can be found in animals.…”

“…Special place is typically accorded to infants, for instance, such that aggression towards them is met with loud protests and active intervention on the part of uninvolved bystanders (Rudolf von Rohr, et al, 2011. Many other social mammals also appear to enforce various behavioural norms.…”

“…Though much of the relevant research is controversial, largely for methodological reasons, since much of it consists of anecdotal reports of animal behaviour, and because there has been some inconsistency between the results of field and lab-based studies of pro-social behaviour (see de Waal, 2006a;Bekoff and Pierce, 2009;Rudolf von Rohr et al, 2011;Tomasello, 2016), it is not the data itself that has been the primary focus of this debate. Nor, indeed, has there been much disagreement about what specific psychological capacities can be inferred from this data.…”

“…De Waal also places emphasis on the evolution of human language as a tool for regimenting and transmitting genuine moral norms and judgments. Albeit with some important differences in detail, Joyce (2006), Kitcher (2006), Rudolf von Rohr et al (2011), Boehm (2012, Haidt (2012), and Suddendorf (2013), among others, have made similar claims to de Waal about the continuity yet distinctiveness of human morality and animal proto-morality.…”