The biological and evolutionist basis of ethics

Abstract

A rational and naturalistic definition of ethical norms must stipulate the preservation of the DNA typical of the species and the maintenance of its intra specific variability. Indeed, this preservation is the basic principle of bioethics. The historically limited behaviour can be related to morality which can assume different norms in different historical contexts. Morality could therefore be governed by religion or normalized by discipline. Ethics, instead should be a purely biological and ecological discipline. Religious ethics, medical ethics, political ethics, environmental ethics, business ethics, bioethics: a never-ending sequel of terms that began in 1892, when Felix Adler (1851-1933), questioning Christian and Jewish control of moral dogmas, established the Society for Ethical Culture in New York. Moreover, the terms moral philosophy and ethics are today often confused starting misunderstandings. So far, the development of ethical norms in western culture has been based on the distinction between theological ethics and humanistic ethics. Theological ethics follow Aristotle, according to whom everything has as an ultimate goal. According to this view, a contemplative life allows individuals to share divine life. The Stoics, following Aristotle, believed that living in accordance with Nature was the basis of moral philosophy, since they regarded Nature as a rational and perfect order being God himself. Humanistic ethics base moral philosophy on human demands, primarily on survival. So it appoints moral philosophy to guarantee the survival of individuals or groups of individuals co-operating and living together in peace. Ethical concepts are marked by duality because they can be either theological or humanistic. This duality peculiar to Western culture can now be overcome and integrated by a global bioethics with rational and naturalistic grounds, as required by the advances in scientific knowledge.