Authors: Bradley Franks, Andrew Stewart
Published: 2020-04-30
DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x19002553
Source: Full article
AbstractTomasello's account of the origins and nature of moral obligation rightly emphasises the key roles of social relations and a cooperative sense of “we.” However, we suggest that it overlooks the complexity of those social relations and the resulting prevalence of a divided “we” in moral social groups. We argue that the social identity dynamics that arise can lead to competing obligations in a single group, and this has implications for the evolution of obligation.