[mensetmanusman]

That’s just the ‘there are no morals, just genes’ type of argument. Which assumes no free will (which is itself a supernatural concept under most definitions).

In the end this kind of comes down to a belief or not in free will, which is a faith based discussion since we can never ethically prove whether we have free will or not being our own observer.

[lisper]

I'm not suggesting you read TSG because of its position on morality but because of its explication of what evolution optimizes for. TSG does address the question of morality, specifically how altruism can evolve, but Axelrod gives a much more complete and up-to-date account.

> In the end this kind of comes down to a belief or not in free will, which is a faith based discussion

No, it doesn't, and no it isn't. The illusion of free will is enough, i.e. it suffices that we lack a complete understanding of our own brains.

You should read this:

https://blog.rongarret.info/2018/01/a-multilogue-on-free-wil...