Parting with illusions in evolutionary ethics

I offer a critical analysis of a view that has become a dominant aspect of recent thought on the relationship between evolution and morality, and propose an alternative. An ingredient in Michael Ruse's 'error theory' (Ruse 1995) is that belief in moral (prescriptive, universal, and nonsubjective) guidelines arose in humans because such belief results in the performance of adaptive cooperative behaviors. This statement relies on two particular connections: between ostensible and intentional types of altruism, and between intentional altruism and morality. The latter connection is problematic because it makes morality redundant, its role having already been fulfilled by the psychological dispositions that constitute intentional altruism. Both behavioral ecology and moral psychology support this criticism, and neither human behavioral flexibility nor the self-regard / other-regard distinction can provide a defense of the error theory. I conclude that morality did not evolve to curb rampant selfishness; instead, the evolutionarily recent 'universal law' aspect of morality may function to update behavioral strategies which were adaptive in the paleolithic environment of our ancestors (to which our psychological dispositions are best adapted), by means of norms more appropriate to our novel social environment.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/42482/1/10539_2004_Article_5102509.pd

Food Stamp Program Participation and Food Insecurity: An Instrumental Variables Approach

The relationship between Food Stamp Program (FSP) participation and household food insecurity (FI) is investigated using data from the 1996–1997 National Food Stamp Program Survey. Endogeneity of FSP participation is accommodated with an instrumental variables approach. In contrast to other findings reported in the literature, results suggest participation in the FSP reduces the severity of FI. Sociodemographic variables play important roles in FSP participation and FI. Underreporting of FSP participation and limited observations of food-insecure households in previous studies may have also been factors. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

Together is better? Effects of relationship status and resources on young adults' well-being

This study examines differences in well-being among young adults across relationship status. Multilevel regression analyses on two waves of data of the Dutch Panel Study of Social Integration (N = 2818) show that singles have the lowest level of well-being, followed by young adults who are steady dating, and cohabitors. Married young adults have the highest level. These differences are partially mediated by differences between young adults in their access to valued material, personal and social resources. Furthermore, the availability of some resources is more important for the well-being of young adults in a certain relationship status than for those in another relationship status. Gender differences are also discussed. KEY WORDS: cohabitation • dating • marriage • life satisfaction • resource • single • subjective well-being • young adul