Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Good

Good denotes the property of actions, objects, or states that fulfill the natural ends or proper functions of beings, particularly rational agents, thereby promoting flourishing and order over disorder or harm, as articulated in classical moral philosophy.^[1] In Plato's metaphysics, the Form of the Good serves as the transcendent source of all reality, knowledge, and value, analogous to the sun illuminating the intelligible world.^[2] Aristotle reconceives it immanently as eudaimonia, human well-being achieved through habitual virtue and practical wisdom in alignment with one's telos.^[3] Subsequent traditions, including Kant's deontological emphasis on a good will acting from duty irrespective of consequences, underscore rationality as the criterion distinguishing moral good from mere inclination or utility.^[4] Defining characteristics include its objectivity, contested by relativist views yet supported by cross-cultural moral universals such as prohibitions on gratuitous harm, and its causal role in generating sustainable cooperation and individual fulfillment, evident in empirical studies of virtue ethics outcomes.^[5] Controversies persist over whether good derives purely from divine command, as in Leibniz's theodicy where God embodies perfection, or from secular first principles of rational self-interest extended to benevolence.^[6]

Definitions and Etymology

Linguistic Origins

The English word good derives from Old English gōd (with a long "o" sound), appearing in texts from the 9th century onward, where it signified "excellent, fine, valuable, desirable, beneficial, righteous, or pious."^[7] This form stems from Proto-Germanic *gōda-, which primarily meant "fitting" or "suitable," a root shared across Germanic languages, including Old Frisian god, Old Saxon gōd, Old Norse goðr, Dutch goed, German gut, and Gothic goþs.^[7] The Proto-Germanic *gōda- reconstructs to the Proto-Indo-European root *gʰedʰ- (also transcribed as ghedh-), denoting "to unite, be associated, or suit," with an underlying connotation of cohesion, adequacy, or belonging together.^[7] Reflexes of this root extend beyond Germanic branches, appearing in Sanskrit gadh- ("to seize" or grasp firmly, implying unification), [Old Church Slavonic](/page/Old Church Slavonic) godu ("favorable time," suggesting aptness), and Lithuanian goda ("honor," evoking fitting esteem).^[7] Semantically, the term's earliest senses emphasized functional or relational fitness—something that "fits" or joins harmoniously—before broadening in Old and Middle English to encompass moral virtue, kindness, skill, and holiness by the 11th–14th centuries.^[7] This evolution parallels comparative forms like better and best, which irregularize from the same stock, highlighting a persistent Germanic pattern linking "goodness" to graded suitability rather than absolute quality.^[8]

Objective versus Subjective Conceptions

Objective conceptions of the good assert that goodness exists as an independent feature of reality, akin to physical laws, capable of being discerned through reason, observation, or rational deliberation without reliance on personal preferences or cultural consensus.^[9] Moral realists supporting this view maintain that objective moral facts enable cross-cultural ethical evaluation and progress, as evidenced by near-universal condemnation of practices like torture across societies, which subjectivists struggle to justify without appealing to deeper, non-arbitrary standards.^[10] Such conceptions ground ethics in discoverable truths, allowing claims like "unnecessary suffering is bad" to hold irrespective of individual endorsement, thereby providing a basis for moral disagreement as cognitive error rather than mere taste divergence.^[11] Plato exemplified this approach by theorizing the Form of the Good as a transcendent, eternal archetype that structures all reality and serves as the ultimate aim of human inquiry, much like light enables vision of objects.^[2] Aristotle further developed an objective framework through his doctrine of the good as eudaimonia—rational activity in accordance with virtue—rooted in the teleological nature of living beings, where human flourishing aligns with inherent ends observable in biological function and empirical study of character.^[12] These ancient formulations emphasize that the good is not invented but apprehended, with virtues like justice contributing to objective well-being, as deviations (e.g., vice-induced dysfunction) demonstrably lead to personal and social disintegration across historical records.^[13] In contrast, subjective conceptions posit that the good emerges from mental states, such as desires, emotions, or approved sentiments, rendering it relative to the perceiver or group without external validation.^[9] David Hume argued that moral evaluations stem from internal feelings of sympathy or aversion rather than objective properties, famously bridging the "is-ought" gap by claiming reason alone cannot motivate action or dictate value, only passions can.^[14] Friedrich Nietzsche extended this by rejecting transcendent goods in favor of perspectival values created through the will to power, critiquing traditional morality as a subjective imposition by the weak to constrain the strong, urging a revaluation where "good" aligns with individual enhancement over universal norms.^[14] Proponents of subjectivism highlight its alignment with observed ethical diversity—e.g., varying norms on honor killings or property rights across cultures—as evidence against imposed objectivity, though critics note this permits defending evident harms like genocide if subjectively endorsed by perpetrators.^[10]

Philosophical History

Ancient Greek Foundations

Ancient Greek philosophy initiated systematic inquiry into the nature of the good, equating it with eudaimonia—human flourishing or well-being—attained through virtuous activity of the soul. Socrates (c. 469–399 BCE), as depicted in Plato's early dialogues, maintained that virtue (aretē) constitutes knowledge, asserting that no one commits wrongdoing knowingly; vice stems from ignorance of the good.^[15] Thus, ethical conduct requires dialectical examination to discern the true good, which aligns the soul with rational pursuit of excellence, rendering external goods secondary to internal moral states.^[16] Plato (c. 428–348 BCE) elevated the good to metaphysical primacy in works like the Republic, positing the Form of the Good as the ultimate source of intelligibility, truth, and existence among the eternal Forms. Analogous to the sun illuminating the visible world, the Good grants visibility to the intelligible realm, enabling knowledge beyond mere opinion.^[15] Philosopher-kings, grasping this Form through rigorous education culminating in dialectic, achieve justice by aligning the soul's parts—reason, spirit, and appetite—in harmony, mirroring the ideal state's structure where the good governs collective order.^[15] Aristotle (384–322 BCE), in the Nicomachean Ethics composed around 350 BCE, critiqued Plato's transcendent Forms while grounding the good in teleological function (ergon). The highest human good is eudaimonia, realized as rational activity of the soul in accordance with complete virtue over a complete life, encompassing both moral virtues (e.g., courage, temperance) cultivated via habit and intellectual virtues (e.g., wisdom) via contemplation.^[17]^[12] Unlike Plato's unified Form, Aristotle's good varies by context yet converges on self-sufficiency, where virtue balances excesses and deficiencies through the doctrine of the mean, supported by empirical observation of human capacities rather than abstract ideals.^[12] This framework influenced subsequent ethics by emphasizing practical wisdom (phronesis) in pursuing the good amid contingent circumstances.^[12]

Medieval Synthesis

In the early medieval period, patristic thinkers like Augustine of Hippo (354–430 CE) laid groundwork for synthesizing classical notions of the good with Christian theology by identifying the supreme good as God Himself, with evil understood as a privation or absence of good rather than a substantive entity. In The City of God (413–426 CE), Augustine contrasts the earthly city's pursuit of temporal goods with the heavenly city's eternal peace as the true summum bonum, attainable through orientation toward divine order.^[18] This Neoplatonically influenced view subordinated Platonic forms of the good to God's immutable essence, emphasizing that human flourishing depends on participation in divine goodness via grace and moral conversion.^[19] Boethius (c. 480–524 CE), bridging late antiquity and the Middle Ages, advanced this synthesis in The Consolation of Philosophy (c. 523–524 CE), where Lady Philosophy demonstrates through dialectical reasoning that the supreme good equates to happiness, which is self-sufficient and identical with God as the source of all perfections.^[20] Drawing on Aristotle's teleological framework and Plato's hierarchical goods, Boethius argues that earthly goods like wealth or power are illusory and participatory derivatives of the divine good, which alone satisfies the will's infinite appetite; true felicity thus requires detachment from fortune and alignment with providential order.^[21] This work preserved Aristotelian and Platonic texts for later Scholastics while embedding them in a Christian cosmos where God governs as the final cause of goodness. High medieval Scholasticism, peaking in the 13th century, refined this integration through systematic theology, with Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274 CE) achieving the most comprehensive synthesis by harmonizing Aristotle's empirical ethics with scriptural revelation. In Summa Theologica (1265–1274 CE), Prima Pars, Question 5, Aquinas establishes that "goodness is what all things desire," convertible with being itself, as every entity is good insofar as it actualizes its form and perfection; God, as pure act of existence without potentiality, constitutes the greatest good and first cause of all others.^[22] Human acts are morally good when they align with the rational nature's telos, ordered by natural law derived from eternal divine law, yet the ultimate end—beatitude—transcends natural capacities, requiring supernatural virtues (faith, hope, charity) and grace to unite the soul with God.^[22]^[23] Aquinas critiques purely Aristotelian self-sufficiency by insisting that eudaimonia, while involving cardinal virtues like prudence and justice for earthly order, remains incomplete without the beatific vision of God's essence, thus preserving reason's autonomy in discerning secondary goods while subordinating it to faith for the primary good.^[23] This framework influenced natural law theory, positing objective goods (e.g., preservation of life, procreation, sociality) discernible by unaided reason, yet oriented toward divine telos, countering relativistic or purely immanent conceptions prevalent in some classical schools.^[24] The synthesis affirmed causal realism, with goodness flowing hierarchically from God's efficient, exemplary, and final causality, ensuring empirical observability of moral order in creation without conflating it with arbitrary divine will.^[25]

Enlightenment and Modern Developments

The Enlightenment marked a pivotal shift in conceptions of the good, emphasizing reason, human autonomy, and secular foundations over divine command or tradition. Thinkers like David Hume argued that moral distinctions arise from sentiment rather than pure reason, with the good identified through a natural capacity for sympathy that produces pleasure in contemplating benevolent actions and pain in vice.^[26] This empiricist view posited the good as aligned with human passions and social utility, influencing later developments by grounding ethics in observable psychological mechanisms rather than abstract metaphysics.^[27] Immanuel Kant, bridging Enlightenment rationalism, redefined the good through the Critique of Practical Reason (1788), asserting that only a good will—motivated by duty and adherence to the categorical imperative—is unconditionally good, independent of empirical consequences or inclinations.^[4] For Kant, actions derive moral worth from their conformity to universalizable maxims derived from reason, such as treating humanity as an end rather than a means, elevating the good to a transcendental postulate necessary for moral agency.^[4] This deontological framework contrasted with consequentialist alternatives, prioritizing formal principles over outcomes. In the 19th century, utilitarianism formalized a consequentialist account, with Jeremy Bentham's Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789) defining the good as the maximization of pleasure and minimization of pain, measured quantitatively across affected parties.^[28] John Stuart Mill refined this in Utilitarianism (1863), distinguishing higher intellectual pleasures from base ones and arguing that the greatest happiness principle serves as the ultimate standard of morality, influencing policy and economics by equating the good with aggregate well-being.^[28] Friedrich Nietzsche's late 19th-century critique disrupted these paradigms, challenging in Beyond Good and Evil (1886) the Enlightenment's egalitarian notions of the good as a slave morality rooted in resentment, which he contrasted with an ancient master morality valuing strength, nobility, and life-affirmation.^[29] Nietzsche urged a "revaluation of all values," viewing traditional good-evil binaries as historically contingent constructs stifling human potential, thus paving the way for perspectival and existential approaches in 20th-century philosophy.^[29] Modern developments since the early 20th century have seen a revival of virtue ethics, as in Elizabeth Anscombe's 1958 essay "Modern Moral Philosophy," which critiqued rule-based systems like Kantianism and utilitarianism for neglecting character and eudaimonia, advocating a return to Aristotelian teleology where the good consists in fulfilling human function through cultivated virtues. Analytic metaethics, meanwhile, interrogated the nature of "good" itself, with G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica (1903) rejecting naturalistic reductions via the open-question argument, positing good as a non-natural, indefinable property. These debates underscore ongoing tensions between realist ontologies of the good and subjectivist or constructivist alternatives, informed by empirical advances in psychology and evolutionary biology.

Religious Perspectives

Abrahamic Traditions

In Abrahamic traditions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—the concept of good is intrinsically tied to the nature and commands of the singular, omnipotent God, who is the ultimate source of moral order and value.^[30] This divine command theory posits that actions are good insofar as they align with God's revealed will, as opposed to human-derived standards, emphasizing obedience, righteousness, and the promotion of life as reflections of God's inherent goodness.^[31] Creation itself is deemed good by God in foundational texts, establishing a baseline where existence, when ordered toward divine purpose, manifests goodness rather than inherent neutrality or evil.^[31]^[32] In Judaism, good is operationalized through covenantal fidelity to God's Torah, comprising 613 commandments (mitzvot) that govern ethical conduct, ritual, and social justice. The Torah's narrative begins with God repeatedly affirming creation as "good" (tov in Hebrew), culminating in "very good" after humanity's formation, underscoring that moral good emerges from participating in God's purposeful design rather than autonomous human judgment.^[31] Ethical imperatives, such as the Golden Rule—"What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow"—articulated by Hillel the Elder around 10 BCE–10 CE and echoed in Leviticus 19:18, serve as a core principle, prioritizing harm avoidance and communal harmony under divine law.^[33] Rabbinic tradition, as expounded by figures like Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, frames Jewish ethics within the covenant at Sinai (circa 1312 BCE per tradition), where moral good fosters human dignity and societal repair without relativism, countering modern egalitarian dilutions by grounding value in God's unchanging holiness.^[34] Christian theology builds on this foundation, defining good as conformity to God's character, exemplified in Jesus Christ, whom the Gospels portray as the embodiment of divine goodness through teachings on love for God and neighbor (Matthew 22:37–40).^[35] The New Testament emphasizes "good works" not as meritorious self-effort but as fruits of faith empowered by grace, including virtues like kindness, patience, and self-control listed in Galatians 5:22–23, which align human actions with God's redemptive purposes.^[32] Patristic and medieval thinkers, such as Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), integrated Aristotelian notions of the good as telos (end or purpose) with biblical revelation, arguing that true good perfects human nature toward union with God, rejecting secular moral autonomy as deficient.^[32] In Islam, good (khayr) is delineated through submission (islam) to Allah's will as revealed in the Quran (circa 610–632 CE) and the Prophet Muhammad's Sunnah, with moral excellence measured by deeds that enjoin benefit and forbid harm (amr bil-ma'ruf wa-nahi anil-munkar).^[36] The Quran states, "Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly" (5:42), linking good to justice, charity (zakat, obligatory almsgiving at 2.5% of wealth annually), and good character (akhlaq), as in the hadith: "The best among you are those who have the best manners" (Sahih al-Bukhari 6029).^[37] Taqwa (God-consciousness) guides actions, prioritizing eternal accountability over temporal expediency, with sources like Yaqeen Institute noting sincerity (ikhlas) as essential to distinguish authentic good from hypocritical display.^[38] Across these traditions, deviations from divine good—such as idolatry or injustice—introduce disorder, but redemption remains possible through repentance and realignment, affirming moral realism over subjective relativism.^[36]^[35]

Eastern Traditions

In Hinduism, the notion of good is intrinsically linked to dharma, defined as the cosmic order, moral duty, and righteous conduct specific to one's social role, caste, and stage of life. Adherence to dharma produces positive karma, which influences future rebirths and ultimate liberation (moksha) from the cycle of samsara, whereas deviation leads to negative consequences. This framework prioritizes contextual ethics over universal absolutes, with texts like the Bhagavad Gita (composed circa 400 BCE–200 CE) illustrating good actions as those fulfilling prescribed obligations without attachment to outcomes.^[39] Buddhist ethics conceptualizes good through kusala (skillful) actions that diminish suffering (dukkha) for oneself and others, contrasting with akusala (unskillful) ones that perpetuate it via greed, hatred, and delusion—the three poisons. The foundational Noble Eightfold Path, outlined in the Pali Canon (compiled circa 29 BCE), prescribes right view, intention, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and concentration as pathways to ethical conduct and enlightenment (nirvana), with precepts like abstaining from killing, stealing, and false speech serving as practical guidelines. Unlike dualistic moral binaries, goodness here is pragmatic, measured by its causal efficacy in reducing karmic bondage rather than divine command.^[40] Taoism eschews absolute distinctions between good and evil, viewing them as relative polarities within the undifferentiated Tao—the natural way of the universe—where moral labels arise from human interference rather than inherent essences. The Tao Te Ching (attributed to Laozi, circa 6th–4th century BCE) advocates wu wei (effortless action) as the epitome of goodness, entailing alignment with spontaneous harmony over forced virtue, as "the Tao is like water: it benefits all things without striving" (Chapter 8). Evil, when addressed, is categorized as causal (disruptive forces) or consequential (imbalances from excess), resolvable through reversion to natural equilibrium rather than opposition.^[41] In Confucianism, good centers on ren (humaneness or benevolence), the supreme virtue embodying empathetic reciprocity and moral cultivation in human relationships, as articulated in the Analects (compiled circa 475–221 BCE). Confucius defined ren as "to love others" (Analects 12.22), extending from filial piety (xiao) to broader social harmony via rites (li) and righteousness (yi), with the ideal sage-king exemplifying it through self-restraint and governance that fosters communal flourishing. This relational ethic prioritizes virtue ethics over consequentialism, positing that innate human goodness (ren xing) can be realized through education and ritual, without reliance on supernatural sanctions.^[42]

Scientific and Biological Interpretations

Evolutionary Adaptations

From an evolutionary perspective, behaviors aligned with conceptions of "good"—such as altruism, cooperation, and fairness—emerged as adaptations that increased inclusive fitness in social species, including humans, by resolving conflicts between individual and group interests under kin selection, reciprocity, and iterated interactions.^[43] These mechanisms prioritize gene propagation over individual sacrifice, with empirical support from mathematical models and cross-species observations showing that pure self-interest fails in interdependent environments.^[44] Kin selection, formalized by W.D. Hamilton in 1964, accounts for altruism toward relatives by inclusive fitness, where an individual's reproductive success includes effects on kin weighted by genetic relatedness r. Hamilton's rule states that a gene for altruism spreads if rB > C, with B as the recipient's fitness benefit and C the actor's cost; relatedness r averages 0.5 for full siblings, 0.25 for cousins, enabling costly aid like food sharing or defense in ancestral human bands.^[44] This explains nepotistic behaviors observed in primates and humans, such as maternal investment, which empirical studies in behavioral ecology confirm enhances lineage survival despite personal risk.^[43] Reciprocal altruism, introduced by Robert Trivers in 1971, extends prosociality to non-kin via delayed mutual benefit, stable only if mechanisms like memory, reputation, and punishment deter "cheaters" who exploit without reciprocating.^[45] In humans, this adaptation likely supported pair-bonding, alliance formation, and resource pooling in small groups, with genetic and cognitive prerequisites like empathy and foresight evolving to track obligations; field data from hunter-gatherers show reciprocity norms reducing free-riding and boosting group productivity.^[46] Further refinement came from game-theoretic models of cooperation, notably Robert Axelrod and W.D. Hamilton's 1981 analysis of iterated prisoner's dilemma tournaments, where the "tit-for-tat" strategy—starting cooperative, then mirroring the opponent's prior move—dominated 14 entries by being provocable yet forgiving, yielding higher long-term payoffs than defection or unconditional niceness.^[47] Axelrod's 1984 book detailed two tournaments with over 60 strategies, confirming tit-for-tat's robustness across noise levels and partner variability, mirroring real-world dynamics like trade or warfare where conditional cooperation stabilized human societies of 150 individuals, per Dunbar's number derived from primate grooming limits.^[47] These adaptations, layered with cultural enforcement, underpin moral intuitions of fairness, with neuroimaging linking them to reward circuits activated by equitable outcomes.^[48]

Psychological Mechanisms

Psychological mechanisms underlying conceptions of the good primarily involve cognitive processes that distinguish moral judgments from other evaluations, often integrating automatic emotional responses with deliberate reasoning. Research identifies a dual-process model where intuitive, affect-driven intuitions—such as disgust or empathy—provide rapid assessments of actions as good or bad, while controlled cognitive deliberation refines these through perspective-taking and consequentialist analysis.^[49] This framework, supported by neuroimaging, implicates regions like the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in emotional moral processing and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in overriding impulses for utilitarian outcomes.^[50] Empathy serves as a foundational mechanism, enabling the perceptual simulation of others' affective states, which motivates prosocial behaviors aligned with the good. Functional MRI studies demonstrate that empathic concern activates the anterior insula and anterior cingulate cortex, correlating with donations in economic games and reduced harm infliction.^[51] Kin selection and reciprocal altruism, rooted in evolutionary pressures, amplify this by prioritizing aid to relatives or cooperators, as evidenced by behavioral experiments showing heightened generosity toward those signaling future reciprocity.^[52] Moral emotions like guilt and shame function as internal regulators, enforcing adherence to norms of fairness and loyalty that promote group-level good. These emotions arise from anticipated social costs, with guilt specifically linked to reparative actions in violation scenarios, as measured in self-report and physiological studies.^[53] Mind perception—the attribution of agency and experience to others—underpins moral agency judgments, where entities perceived as mindful are deemed capable of good or evil, influencing blame and praise allocation.^[54] From an evolutionary standpoint, these mechanisms likely coevolved with social complexity to facilitate cooperation, with modular domains for behaviors like reciprocity and heroism adapting to environmental demands for mutual benefit.^[55] Experimental paradigms, such as the trolley dilemma, reveal individual differences in mechanism dominance, with empathic aversion to direct harm often trumping abstract utility calculations.^[56] Disruptions, as in psychopathy, underscore causality, where impaired amygdala-prefrontal connectivity diminishes guilt and empathy, leading to antisocial outcomes.^[51]

Key Debates and Criticisms

Moral Realism versus Relativism

Moral realism asserts that moral facts exist independently of human opinions, attitudes, or cultural frameworks, such that statements like "torturing innocents for pleasure is wrong" can be objectively true or false.^[57] This position contrasts with moral relativism, which maintains that moral truths are relative to individual, cultural, or societal standards, implying no universal wrongs beyond what a given group endorses.^[58] Proponents of realism argue that moral claims function like factual assertions in other domains, tracking mind-independent properties, while relativists emphasize observed moral diversity as evidence against objectivity.^[59] Empirical evidence from cross-cultural studies challenges strong relativism by revealing widespread moral universals. A comprehensive analysis of ethnographic data from 60 societies identified seven cooperation-based norms—such as helping kin, aiding one's group, reciprocity, fairness in resource division, respect for property, deference to authority, and commitment to truthfulness—as positively valued across diverse cultures, suggesting an innate basis rather than arbitrary relativity.^[60] Similarly, a machine-learning review of texts from 256 societies confirmed the prevalence of these and related morals (e.g., prohibiting harm to kin) in nearly all cultural regions, with variations in emphasis but not absence.^[61] Experimental data from 42 countries on sacrificial dilemmas further showed consistent preferences against harming individuals for group benefits, indicating shared intuitive judgments transcending local norms.^[62] These findings align with evolutionary accounts where moral intuitions evolved as adaptations for social coordination, providing objective fitness advantages rather than culturally constructed illusions.^[63] Relativism faces criticism for exaggerating cultural divergence while overlooking such convergences; for instance, prohibitions on unprovoked murder and incest appear in Donald E. Brown's catalog of over 300 human universals derived from anthropological records, including moral sentiments like guilt, shame, and justice concepts.^[64] Folk intuitions also lean realist: surveys indicate that laypeople across demographics treat moral wrongs as objectively binding, not merely subjective preferences, with realism correlating to stronger condemnation of violations.^[65] Relativism's logical implications undermine consistent critique; if morals are framework-dependent, no external standpoint allows condemning practices like female genital mutilation in endorsing cultures, yet universal aversion to gratuitous harm persists empirically.^[66] Jonathan Haidt's Moral Foundations Theory posits innate modules (e.g., harm avoidance, fairness) as a "first draft" of morality, shaped by culture but rooted in biology, explaining both universals and variations without requiring full relativity.^[67] Philosophical defenses of realism invoke causal efficacy: moral facts, if real, explain behavior via natural supervenience (e.g., pain's badness grounding harm prohibitions), avoiding relativism's explanatory gaps.^[68] While relativists cite persistent disagreements (e.g., on authority or purity), these often concern applications, not core principles, as evidenced by convergent judgments in global surveys.^[69] Academic emphasis on diversity may stem from descriptive anthropology's focus on outliers, but quantitative syntheses favor realism's parsimony in accounting for both shared intuitions and adaptive origins. The debate persists, yet accumulating data from psychology and anthropology tilts against pure relativism, supporting realism's alignment with observable human moral cognition.

Critiques of Egalitarian Theories

Philosophers have long argued that egalitarian theories overlook fundamental human differences in capacities, motivations, and merits, rendering equality an incoherent or undesirable ideal. Friedrich Nietzsche characterized egalitarian impulses as "slave morality," a resentful inversion of natural hierarchies where the weak devalue strength, nobility, and excellence in favor of pity, humility, and uniformity, thereby stifling human potential.^[70] Similarly, Friedrich Hayek contended that since individuals possess varying talents and preferences, equal treatment under law inevitably produces unequal outcomes, and attempts to enforce substantive equality require coercive interference that undermines liberty and spontaneous order.^[71] These critiques posit that egalitarianism conflates formal equality of opportunity with outcome leveling, ignoring desert and personal responsibility. Modern philosophical objections highlight paradoxes in egalitarian enforcement and the moral basis for redistribution. Tibor Machan argued that egalitarian policies, such as those proposed by John Rawls and Ronald Dworkin, create unjust authority structures where some wield unequal power to impose equality on others, echoing Orwell's dictum that "some are more equal than others."^[72] John Kekes further critiqued the assumption that all inequalities are unjust, noting that justice demands consideration of individual responsibility and merit; for instance, egalitarian logic applied to innate differences like men's shorter average life expectancy (about 5 years less than women in recent U.S. data) would absurdly require compensatory subsidies or interventions, revealing the theory's impracticality.^[73] Stan Husi identified four obstacles to basic moral equality: the quality conferring equal status must be significant (not trivial like minimal height), uniformly distributed, immune to variations in related traits (e.g., intelligence levels), and threshold-based without arbitrary cutoffs, challenges that egalitarians often fail to resolve.^[74] Empirical analyses of egalitarian policies underscore their adverse effects on prosperity and sustainability. Cross-national data from 1970–2017 show that higher egalitarianism correlates with reduced adjusted net savings (by 33% of a standard deviation per unit increase), elevated CO₂ emissions (3–4% higher per capita and per GNI), and greater resource depletion, contrasting with economic freedom's positive impacts on efficiency and weak sustainability.^[75] Historical implementations, such as centralized redistribution in socialist states, have stifled incentives and productivity, leading to widespread poverty and famine despite professed equality goals, as equalizing efforts pillage wealth without regard for merit-based creation.^[72] These outcomes suggest that egalitarianism, by prioritizing uniformity over differential contributions, hampers growth and environmental stewardship, privileging ideological symmetry over causal realities of human variation.

References

[1]
On the First Principles of Moral Reason - Public Discourse
Jul 6, 2020 · In classical philosophy the good of anything has the nature of an end. The good of a thing is the fulfillment or performance of its proper ...
[2]
Plato's Form of the Good - 1000-Word Philosophy
Feb 13, 2018 · Consider Plato's influence on theology: The Form of the Good is the ground of all being, an immaterial object that exists more perfectly than ...
[3]
The Good Life and How to Live It Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics ...
Key Concepts · Final Good – A good that we pursue for its own sake. · Instrumental Good – A good that we pursue for the sake of some other good. · Eudaimonia ...
[4]
Kant's moral philosophy
Feb 23, 2004 · He proceeds by analyzing and elucidating commonsense ideas about morality, including the ideas of a “good will” and “duty.” The point of this ...
[5]
René Descartes: Ethics - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
A rich analysis of virtue, the good, happiness, moral judgment, the passions, and the systematic relationship between ethics and the rest of philosophy.
[6]
Leibniz' Ethics - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Aug 26, 2004 · According to Leibniz, God is the measure of the good, the primary directive of his ethics is that one ought to imitate divinity as far as possible.
[7]
Good - Etymology, Origin & Meaning
Originating from Old English gōd and god, from Proto-Germanic *gōda- meaning "fitting, suitable," the word means excellent, beneficial, righteous, or a good ...Goods · Good den · Good-bye · Good-day
[8]
https://www.etymonline.com/word/better
[9]
Defining Objective Morality, Subjectivism, Relativism, and More
Apr 12, 2021 · Objective morality (or “moral realism”) is the view that there are true moral statements that are true independent of anyone's desires, beliefs, or subjective ...
[10]
Moral Relativism and Moral Realism - VoegelinView
Apr 9, 2021 · The alternative to moral subjectivism or relativism, is moral realism. Moral realism is the notion that good and evil actually exist. They ...
[11]
The Ethics of Human Rights (91): Moral Realism vs Moral Subjectivism
Jul 2, 2014 · Moral realism is a cognitivist and objectivist theory about morality: some ethical propositions are objectively true, independent of subjective ...
[12]
Aristotle's Ethics - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
May 1, 2001 · Aristotle follows Socrates and Plato in taking the virtues to be central to a well-lived life. Like Plato, he regards the ethical virtues ( ...
[13]
Moral Objectivism vs. Subjectivism | Definition & Examples - Study.com
Unlike moral relativism, moral subjectivism holds that morality is decided by the individual. Culture doesn't define right and wrong, nor do accepted beliefs.What Is Moral Objectivism? · What Is Moral Subjectivism?
[14]
The Virtue Ethics of Hume and Nietzsche | Reviews
Apr 13, 2017 · Hume and Nietzsche alike seek to rescue conceptions of the good life from an underpinning in religious morality and associated doctrines (6).
[15]
Plato's Ethics: An Overview - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Sep 16, 2003 · That is to say, happiness or well-being (eudaimonia) is the highest aim of moral thought and conduct, and the virtues (aretê: 'excellence') are ...
[16]
Ancient Ethical Theory - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Aug 3, 2004 · The second central idea is that the most important good of the soul is moral virtue. By being virtuous one enjoys a psychological state whose ...
[17]
Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle - The Internet Classics Archive
For in so far as they are man, they will in no respect differ; and if this is so, neither will 'good itself' and particular goods, in so far as they are good.
[18]
Excerpts from Augustine's City of God - Gerald W. Schlabach
That the saints are in this life blessed in hope. Since, then, the supreme good of the city of God is perfect and eternal peace, not such as mortals pass ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[19]
CHURCH FATHERS: City of God (St. Augustine) - New Advent
In the first place, Augustine shows in this book how the two cities were formed originally, by the separation of the good and bad angels; and takes occasion to ...Book 1 · Book 10 · Book 22 · Book 19
[20]
The Consolation of Philosophy Book III, Part X Summary & Analysis
Dec 23, 2019 · Since “supreme good is the same as happiness,” Philosophy concludes, “God is the essence of happiness.” And there cannot be “two supreme goods,” ...
[21]
The Consolation of Philosophy Book III, Part XII Summary & Analysis
Dec 23, 2019 · In conclusion, Philosophy declares, “it is the supreme good, then, which mightily and sweetly orders all things.” Boethius says he is “very ...
[22]
SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: Goodness in general (Prima Pars, Q. 5)
### Summary of Thomas Aquinas' Key Arguments and Definitions (Summa Theologiae, Q. 5)
[23]
Thomas Aquinas: Moral Philosophy
On the one hand, Aquinas follows Aristotle in thinking that an act is good or bad depending on whether it contributes to or deters us from our proper human end ...
[24]
THOMAS AQUINAS' CHRISTIAN ARISTOTELIANISM
Jan 22, 2006 · Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), the dominant thinker of the middle ages, combined the science and philosophy of Aristotle with the revealed truths of Christianity.
[25]
The Synthesis of Christian Doctrine and Aristotelian Metaphysics
Sep 12, 2023 · Thomas Aquinas' metaphysical system represents a profound synthesis of Aristotelian philosophy and Christian theology. His exploration of being, ...The Background: Aristotle... · Being as Being · The Act of Being: Esse<|separator|>
[26]
Hume's Moral Philosophy
Oct 29, 2004 · Hume sides with the moral sense theorists: we gain awareness of moral good and evil by experiencing the pleasure of approval and the ...Issues from Hume's... · Is and Ought · The Nature of Moral Judgment
[27]
Enlightenment - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Aug 20, 2010 · The Good: Political Theory, Ethical Theory and Religion in the Enlightenment. 2.1 Political Theory; 2.2 Ethical Theory; 2.3 Religion and the ...The True: Science... · The Good: Political Theory... · Religion and the Enlightenment
[28]
The History of Utilitarianism - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
that is, consider the good of others as well as ...
[29]
Nietzsche's Moral and Political Philosophy
Aug 26, 2004 · Although Nietzsche's illiberal attitudes (for example, his rejection of the moral equality of human beings) are apparent, there are no grounds ...
[30]
Religion and Morality in Western Philosophy
Sep 27, 2006 · The idea of God that is central in Greek philosophy is the idea of God attracting us, like a kind of magnet, so that we desire to become more ...
[31]
Good & Evil - Jewish Virtual Library
A major corollary of the Jewish belief in the One God is that, seen in its totality, life is good. Viewing the cosmos as it emerged from chaos, God said, ...
[32]
The Goodness, Holiness, and Love of God
Apr 20, 2023 · This article explores in a scripturally charged fashion three key attributes, namely goodness, holiness, and love.
[33]
What Judaism Says About the Golden Rule
May 6, 2017 · As early as the second century, Rabbi Akiba proclaimed that the Golden Rule is “the great principle of Judaism” itself. Of course, there are ...
[34]
The World's Most Enduring Moral Voice: An Introduction to Ethics
At the heart of Jewish ethics is the concept of covenant, a mutually binding pledge or promise between God and human beings. It was Nietzsche who saw that the ...
[35]
Good and Evil - Grace Community Bible Church: Austin, TX
The simple definition of good is this, that which accords with who God is. How can I say that? Let's give a view to the beginning of the conversation that Jesus ...
[36]
Good and Evil in Islam - The Fountain Magazine
Apr 1, 2005 · Islam teaches that, from our perspective, doing good and staying away from evil is a means of getting closer to God.
[37]
20 Qur'an Verses About Doing Good and Helping Others - My Islam
Apr 16, 2024 · Jabir reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The believer is friendly and befriended, for there is no goodness in one who is neither ...
[38]
The Guiding Principles of Faith: Sincerity, Honesty, and Good Will in ...
Jul 19, 2018 · In Islam, we must always practice our faith with sincerity (al-ikhlas), honesty (al-sidq), and goodwill (al-nasihah).
[39]
Morality and moral development: Traditional Hindu concepts - PMC
Dharma is a concept of central importance in Hindu religion and philosophy and is defined in The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions as “the order and custom ...
[40]
Buddhist Ethics: Ten Virtues and Non-Virtues - Namchak.org
The Ten Virtues of Buddhism: ; Body, Protect Life, Give Generously, Maintain One's Discipline ; Speech, Speak Honestly, Reconcile, Speak Pleasantly, Speak ...
[41]
[PDF] Problem of Evil in Taoism - Religious Inquiries
In the. Taoist tradition, especially in Tao Te Ching, evil is divided into two categories: causal evil and consequential evil. Causal evils are those evils that ...
[42]
Ren (Benevolence) - Key Concepts in Chinese Thought and Culture
Ren (Benevolence). The basic meaning of the term is love for others. Its extended meaning refers to the state of harmony among people, and the unity of all ...
[43]
Morality and Evolutionary Biology > The Evolution of Altruism ...
The basic idea is that psychological altruistic dispositions can evolve as proximate mechanisms or “modules” for promoting the biological advantages.
[44]
Evolutionary Foundations of Human Prosocial Sentiments - NCBI - NIH
Altruism can only evolve if altruists confer benefits selectively on others who carry the same altruistic alleles. Kin selection (Hamilton, 1964a) and ...
[45]
[PDF] The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism - Greater Good Science Center
Parental care, of course, is to be explained by Hamilton's (1964) model, but there is no reason why selection for reciprocal altruism cannot operate between ...
[46]
Kin selection and altruism - ScienceDirect.com
Jun 3, 2019 · Trivers coined the term 'reciprocal altruism' to describe how seemingly altruistic behavior can evolve over reciprocal interactions (in which ...
[47]
[PDF] The Evolution of Cooperation*
Adapted from Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic ... Using an American colloquial phrase, this strategy was named Tit for Tat.
[48]
The Evolution of Morality
Darwin proposed the moral sense as an inevitable outcome of four elements: social instinct, memory, language, and habit. In describing the evolution of humans ...
[49]
The Psychology of Morality: A Review and Analysis of Empirical ...
The consideration of specific psychological mechanisms involved in moral reasoning prompted many psychological researchers to engage with this area of inquiry.
[50]
How does morality work in the brain? A functional and structural ...
Sep 12, 2013 · Orbital and ventromedial prefrontal cortices are implicated in emotionally-driven moral decisions, while dorsolateral prefrontal cortex appears ...
[51]
The Neurobiology of Moral Behavior: Review and Neuropsychiatric ...
The neurobiological evidence indicates the existence of automatic “prosocial” mechanisms for identification with others that are part of the moral brain.
[52]
Evolutionary moral psychology: Lessons from Westermarck
Moral emotions and moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58 (1) (2007), pp. 345-372. Crossref View in Scopus Google Scholar. Taylor and McGuire, 1988.
[53]
The dark side of morality: Neural mechanisms underpinning moral ...
Blame-related feelings may serve as proximate psychological mechanisms that act to regulate violent behavior. The tendency to engage in blame directed at ...
[54]
Mind Perception Is the Essence of Morality - PMC - NIH
Mind perception entails ascribing mental capacities to other entities, whereas moral judgment entails labeling entities as good or bad or actions as right ...
[55]
Modular morals: Mapping the organization of the moral brain
This theory of 'morality as cooperation' suggests that there are (at least) seven specific moral domains: family values, group loyalty, reciprocity, heroism, ...
[56]
The science of morality - American Psychological Association
Jun 1, 2021 · Liane Young's Boston College lab explores how people interpret the moral actions of others and the brain regions underlying these judgments.
[57]
How to Measure Moral Realism - PMC - NIH
Jun 1, 2018 · Moral realism and anti-realism belong to metaethics. This means that rather than being or entailing judgements about what is actually morally ...
[58]
Moral relativism is moral realism - ResearchGate
Aug 9, 2025 · I think of moral relativism as a version of moral realism. I compare moral relativism with the relativity of motion and with the relativity of language.
[59]
The Necessity of Moral Realism | Issue 6 - Philosophy Now
Moral realism is the theory that at least one indicative moral propositions is true. If any ethical claim of the form “x is right” or “x is wrong” is true, then ...<|separator|>
[60]
Seven moral rules found all around the world | University of Oxford
Feb 11, 2019 · The present study, published in Current Anthropology, is the largest and most comprehensive cross-cultural survey of morals ever conducted.
[61]
Moral universals: A machine-reading analysis of 256 societies
Mar 30, 2024 · Again, we find evidence of most of the seven morals in most societies, across all cultural regions. The new method allows us to detect minor ...
[62]
Universals and variations in moral decisions made in 42 countries ...
Jan 21, 2020 · We report the largest cross-cultural study of moral preferences in sacrificial dilemmas, that is, the circumstances under which people find it acceptable to ...
[63]
Moral Foundations Theory | moralfoundations.org
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) was developed by a team of social and cultural psychologists, primarily Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham.Publications · Questionnaires · Other Materials · Videos and Press
[64]
[PDF] Donald E. Brown's List of Human Universals - Joel Velasco
THIS LIST, COMPILED in 1989 and published in 1991, consists primarily of. "surface" universals of behavior and overt language noted by ethnographers. It does ...
[65]
Revisiting Folk Moral Realism - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH
Psychological Studies on Folk Moral Realism. Empirical psychology has long neglected metaethical intuitions.9 In the last 15 years, however, interest in them ...
[66]
[PDF] Critiquing Cultural Relativism - Digital Commons @ IWU
Cultural relativism disarms men by proclaiming that there are no standards, whether moral of any other form, by which cross-cultural judgment is at all possible ...
[67]
Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations
Haidt & C. Joseph, 2004), the authors developed several ways to measure people's use of 5 sets of moral intuitions: Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup ...
[68]
[PDF] A Defense of Moral Realism - Eagle Scholar
Apr 11, 2022 · Shafer-Landau holds that. “realists do see moral judgements as beliefs, some of which are true, and true in virtue of correctly reporting moral ...
[69]
Universality and Cultural Diversity in Moral Reasoning and Judgment
Dec 13, 2021 · This review discusses the current formulation of moral theories that attempt to explain cultural factors affecting moral judgment and reasoning.
[70]
The master and slave moralities: what Nietzsche really meant
Jul 11, 2018 · Of equally great importance to Nietzsche is the idea that the slave morality, under any guise, couldn't stand any competing moral systems ...
[71]
Equality, Value, and Merit by Friedrich A Hayek - Wold Wide Web
From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be Inequality in their actual position,, and that the ...Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
[72]
[PDF] The Errors of Egalitarianism - Hoover Institution
Egalitarianism, even less radical versions, tends towards ensuring everyone has the same benefits, like health care and education, despite claims to the ...
[73]
The Absurdity of Egalitarianism - Law & Liberty
Nov 19, 2018 · Egalitarians believe that inequality is unjust and justice requires a society to move steadily toward greater equality.
[74]
Are we truly equal? UWM philosopher thinks not - Humanities
May 4, 2018 · How can this be?” The main arguments against moral equality. In his paper, Husi identifies four obstacles to the notion of moral equality. No ...
[75]
Economic freedom vs. egalitarianism: An empirical test of weak ...
Mar 8, 2022 · Egalitarian democracy consistently reduces economic sustainability and increases atmospheric pollution. There is some evidence for an inverted-U ...