A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value

A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value presents a philosophical argument that challenges moral realism based on evolutionary theory. Street examines the tension between the notion of mind-independent moral truths and the role of natural selection in shaping human moral beliefs. The book outlines two potential paths moral realists can take to resolve this dilemma - either embracing or denying a relation between evolutionary influences and moral truth. Through analysis of both options, Street demonstrates key problems each path faces in reconciling evolutionary psychology with moral realist claims. The work engages with major philosophical figures in metaethics and draws on research from evolutionary biology, psychology, and anthropology. Street builds her case through systematic examination of core moral realist arguments and their compatibility with scientific understanding of human moral development. At its core, this book raises fundamental questions about the foundations of human morality and our ability to access objective moral truths. The work contributes to ongoing debates about the relationship between science and ethics.

There are not enough internet reviews to create a summary of this book. Instead, here is a summary of reviews of Sharon Street's overall work: Sharon Street's academic work generates discussion primarily among philosophy scholars and graduate students rather than general readers, as she publishes in academic journals rather than books for public audiences. Readers appreciate: - Clear writing style that makes complex philosophical arguments accessible - Integration of evolutionary science with moral philosophy - Strong logic in challenging traditional moral realism - Practical examples that illustrate abstract concepts Common critiques: - Arguments can become highly technical and dense - Some find the implications of evolutionary debunking too skeptical - Limited engagement with religious perspectives on morality Her papers are frequently cited in academic contexts but don't have traditional consumer reviews on sites like Goodreads or Amazon. The 2006 "Darwinian Dilemma" paper has been cited over 1,000 times according to Google Scholar. Philosophy forums and blogs show active discussion of her ideas, with graduate students often praising the clarity of her writing compared to other contemporary philosophers.

The Evolution of Morality by Richard Joyce A philosophical examination of how natural selection shapes moral beliefs and the implications for moral realism.

Making Sense of Evolution by Massimo Pigliucci An analysis of evolutionary theory's impact on ethics, epistemology, and the foundations of normative claims.

Mind and Cosmos by Thomas Nagel A critique of reductionist materialism that explores how consciousness and value fit into an evolutionary framework.

The Ethical Project by Philip Kitcher A naturalistic account of ethics that traces the development of moral thinking through evolutionary and cultural history.

Created from Animals by James Rachels A study of how Darwinian theory transforms traditional moral philosophy and challenges objective moral truth claims.

🌟 Sharon Street developed this influential argument while still a graduate student at Harvard, and it became one of the most discussed challenges to moral realism in contemporary philosophy. 🧬 The work draws fascinating parallels between evolutionary psychology and meta-ethics, exploring how our moral judgments may have been shaped by natural selection rather than tracking objective moral truths. 📚 While originally published as a journal article rather than a book, this work has become required reading in many university philosophy courses and has generated numerous response papers and debates. 🤔 Street's argument suggests that if moral realism were true, it would be an incredible cosmic coincidence that evolution happened to lead humans to discover genuine moral truths—similar to expecting evolution to give us accurate beliefs about quantum physics. 🎓 The paper spurred a new wave of discussion about evolutionary debunking arguments in ethics, influencing work by philosophers like Richard Joyce, Richard Vavova, and Justin Clarke-Doane.