The Science of Good and Evil: Why People Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share, and Follow the Golden Rule

From bestselling author Michael Shermer, an investigation of the evolution of morality that is "a paragon of popularized science and philosophy" The Sun (Baltimore) A century and a half after Darwin first proposed an "evolutionary ethics," science has begun to tackle the roots of morality. Just as evolutionary biologists study why we are hungry (to motivate us to eat) or why sex is enjoyable (to motivate us to procreate), they are now searching for the very nature of humanity. InThe Science of Good and Evil, science historian Michael Shermer explores how humans evolved from social primates to moral primates; how and why morality motivates the human animal; and how the foundation of moral principles can be built upon empirical evidence. Along the way he explains the implications of scientific findings for fate and free will, the existence of pure good and pure evil, and the development of early moral sentiments among the first humans. As he closes the divide between science and morality, Shermer draws on stories from the Yanamamö, infamously known as the "fierce people" of the tropical rain forest, to the Stanford studies on jailers' behavior in prisons.The Science of Good and Evil is ultimately a profound look at the moral animal, belief, and the scientific pursuit of truth.… (more)

User reviews

LibraryThing member psiloiordinary

A really seriously beautiful look into this huge and well travelled subject.

What can Shermer add to the huge pile of debate and polemic already out there on this topic? Rational inquiry based upon evidence. This makes his contribution very different to most. Evolutionary theory, morality and

determinism are examined thoughtfully.

Next he examines the religious claims on this topic and develops "provisional ethics" as a rational alternative to blind faith and obedience.

If only more folks would prefer thinking about morality rather than judging others based on the morality they think has been dictated to them, then I think the world would be a far better place.

So go and read this, and then think about it.

Show Less

6 more

LibraryThing member Diwanna

This was the first book that I've read that attempted to take a scientific and statistical approach to understanding morality and Good and Evil. I really enjoyed the first chapter and the last chapter of this book. The middle was hit or miss for me just because I wanted more statistical information

and less description. Michael Shermer definitely knows his stuff and presents some plausible ideas on where human morality came from and where it must go for our species to survive. I also really liked the suggested reading list and list of basic human traits that exist in all cultures around the world. Definitely a good read.

Show Less

LibraryThing member setnahkt

I agree with almost everything Michael Shermer says in this book but he says it in such an annoying way that I’m almost tempted to join up with the other side.

First off, despite the title, this isn’t really a book about science; it’s about philosophy, specifically ethics, and more

specifically Shermer’s personal ethics. There’s nothing wrong with Shermer’s ethics: he’s an advocate of sociobiology or evolutionary psychology or whatever you’d like to call it; he’s in favor of the Golden Rule or the Categorical Imperative or whatever you want to call that; he likes a moderate amount of situational morality, and is in favor of moderate libertarian economics. What’s not to like?

Well, for one thing there’s very little scientific rigor in any of this stuff. I personally think evolutionary psychology is the most powerful tool ever devised for explaining human behavior, but while it looks good on paper it’s practically impossible to actually do any scientifically controlled studies on humans in support of the theory. The book is full of the sort of things that Stephen Gould dismissed correctly as “just so stories”; plausible accounts of how altruism and various other virtues could have arisen among Homo erectus without the slightest way of proving or disproving that this is what happened. Shermer also adopts the popular but entirely unsupported (and, in fact, entirely unDarwinian) belief that the “human race” is “improving” through natural selection - first we were “nice” to our kin, then to our tribe, then to our nation, and finally to our planet. Right.

Although Shermer isn’t as blunt in his rejection of religious belief as, say, Richard Dawkins, the tolerance he advocates for everybody else isn’t in evidence. There’s the usual characterization of Christians as abortion-clinic bombing yahoos, there’s a couple of quotes from Hitler in favor of religion, and there’s a particularly aggravating attempt to show that religious people are no more moral than atheists. The reason this gripes me so much is that it’s a common Creationist tactic to take some ancient work by a scientist - Louis Agassiz or George Macready Price, say - and cite it as if it were current science. Well, the first two studies Shermer mentions in his comments on religious morality were done in 1934 and 1950, and Shermer quotes them as if the discussion ended right there.

This isn’t science, it’s a polemic. A very mild and tolerant and generally agreeable one, true, but if you’re interested in this sort of thing you’re much better off with Dawkins or Pinker. Not recommended.

Show Less

LibraryThing member keylawk

Shermer can unravel a great story while upholding the Standards of scientific inquiry. This is the third volume in his trilogy on the power of belief.
Carefully laying out the evidence for bio-cultural evolution, Shermer presents a "science of provisional ethics" which he applies to specific

controversial concerns -- such as lying, adultery, cloning, abortion. Like Teilard de Chardin (the directional orthogenetic Phenomenon of Man) and more recently, Matt Ridley (the circular causality of nature via nurture), Shermer shows that our species is on a vector toward "more amity" among people.

Show Less

LibraryThing member stipe168

very nicely done and researched. shermer poses some very interesting theories on why human's treat each other the way they do. much of it is from an anthropological sense. i got a lot out of it..

LibraryThing member Fledgist

A scientific examination of moral and immoral behaviour.

LibraryThing member Devil_llama

Worthwhile reading, but not one of Shermer's best.

Fewer