Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Oldenbourg November 14, 2019

Reply to Comments

  • Allen Buchanan EMAIL logo and Russell Powell
From the journal Analyse & Kritik


Commentators on The Evolution of Moral Progress: A Biocultural Theory raise a number of metaethical and moral concerns with our analysis, as well as some complaints regarding how we have interpreted and made use of the contemporary evolutionary and social sciences of morality. Some commentators assert that one must already presuppose a moral theory before one can even begin to theorize moral progress; others query whether the shift toward greater inclusion is really a case of moral progress, or whether our theory can be properly characterized as ‘naturalistic’. Other commentators worry that we have uncritically accepted the prevailing evolutionary explanation of morality, even though it gives short shrift to the role of women or presupposes an oversimplified view of the environment in which the core elements of human moral psychology are thought to have congealed. Another commentator laments that we did not make more extensive use of data from the social sciences. In this reply, we engage with all of these constructive criticisms and show that although some of them are well taken, none undermine the core thesis of our book.

Published Online: 2019-11-14
Published in Print: 2019-11-01

© 2019 by Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart

Downloaded on 28.3.2023 from
Scroll Up Arrow