Good paper. I liked it. I have 3 points to make if you're accepting criticism.
1 You list selection of reciprocal altruistic behaviour and sexual selection as to leading factors of human morality. You state that one by itself isn't inclusive by itself, implying that theese 2 alone can explain the whole of morality. You only list 3 universal moral constructs and only 2 possibilities of contributing factors.
2 Are you wrinting about moralities foundation or attacking the origins of the theists morality. It would be prudent to list religion as a proponent in the history of morality. Perhaps a broader selection of religions with citations could be of better use in your arrangement. You could break up the second praragraph into 2 paragraphs; 1 about different historical/ religous backgroud of morality and another about scientific discoveries about the psychology of morality. I think that would make it read easier as well.
3 I don't know many christians who only believe what the bible tells them as the rules for their morality, so without quoting numbers or citing polls your perspective seems a little biased. The entire last paragraph could be completely redone for a more formal conclusion with a lot less subjective rhetoric.
Thanks for the read and great job!
-Dave
1 You list selection of reciprocal altruistic behaviour and sexual selection as to leading factors of human morality. You state that one by itself isn't inclusive by itself, implying that theese 2 alone can explain the whole of morality. You only list 3 universal moral constructs and only 2 possibilities of contributing factors.
2 Are you wrinting about moralities foundation or attacking the origins of the theists morality. It would be prudent to list religion as a proponent in the history of morality. Perhaps a broader selection of religions with citations could be of better use in your arrangement. You could break up the second praragraph into 2 paragraphs; 1 about different historical/ religous backgroud of morality and another about scientific discoveries about the psychology of morality. I think that would make it read easier as well.
3 I don't know many christians who only believe what the bible tells them as the rules for their morality, so without quoting numbers or citing polls your perspective seems a little biased. The entire last paragraph could be completely redone for a more formal conclusion with a lot less subjective rhetoric.
Thanks for the read and great job!
-Dave
