The Seeming Innatism of Justice

The Scientific Skeptic - 2018

Over the many years here, we have tried to present and discuss the scientific evidence and philosophical arguments central to a discussion about our possible human nature.

In an effort to find those possible answers, we've discussed and presented findings in evolutionary biology, genetics, neuroscience, psychology, sociology, behavioral economics, etc., even jurisprudence, history, and moral philosophy.

In addition to research concerning only our particular species, we've also looked for clues in the evidence of non-human animal behavior.

One of the most interesting conclusions that we have drawn from the evidence of both human and non-human animal behavior is that we seem to share an almost innate concern for something we might call justice.

This sense of justice, an ostensibly and exclusively Homo sapien concept seems to actually be fairly ubiquitous among many social animals.

Now, you might want to argue, for example, that other apes don't have a legal system, or that "justice" is exclusively a human construct and solely a by-product of human cultural evolution.

How could something like "justice" be said to be an innate trait of humans or other animals?

Well, what do you think justice is? Is justice not about a concern for or a sense of fairness, of equity, reciprocity, an assessment of and retributive set of instincts against some form of harmful behavior within a tribe, clan, kin, group. or society?

Is it possible then that part of our evolved social biology includes a sense of noticing and caring about what seems "fair" or equitable or sufficiently cooperative behavior among social actors?

Is it possible that, as a social animal, there was a selection value or a competitive advantage afforded to behavior which was more "just," more socially cooperative, less selfish, more prone to reciprocity?

What of these things we refer to as manners and common decency? How did those come about? The Magna Carta, natural law, social contract, UDHR, anyone?

I think it is possible that something like justice is a part of our evolved biology. And I think the evidence strongly supports it.

It turns out that many social animals, in various experiments, like chimps, (and even elephants) don't much like it when someone doesn't participate equally in carrying out group tasks or is afforded an unequal amount or type of food, or benefits disproportionately from the efforts of the group.

In the social sciences, including economics and game theory, it is referred to often as the free-rider (or freeloading) problem. Interestingly, we also seem to collectively make special allowances for those who are deemed less capable of being self-sufficient and to try to provide for and protect them, whether children, the infirmed, or the elderly.

When chimps are given different treats, for example, for working together to perform a particular task, they get quite upset if they notice that only one was given a particularly tasty treat or an unequal share of the labor compensation. Does that behavior not sound a lot like how humans behave in similar situations? It does sound a lot like the behavior that promotes humans to demand "justice," retribution, and compensation.

Unfortunately, we also know that social animals covet and behave in a way that we describe as competitive, vindictive, selfish, envious, and jealous. Those behaviors, of course, make it that much more complicated to try to determine any actual objective "justice" or what constitutes "unfair" behavior.

It's as if we could really use some sort of objective optimal value algorithm to really know how to differentiate between fairness and unfairness and how to effectively remedy or crowd out harmful behavior.

A god could be really useful right about now.

In non-human animal societies, uncooperative and "unfair" or "unjust," if you will, behavior can be and is sanctioned via violence, shunning, a diminution of social status and sexual reproduction opportunities, and not sharing of social goods and services, like food, tools, sexual and grooming behavior.

In human societies, it used to be doled out by chieftains, elders, and other collective and individual decision-making.

And then?

Then we developed law; formal legal systems, with norms, rules, methods, and prescriptions for determining and officially adjudicating on matters of justice and fairness.

We seemed to begin with more of a draconian "eye for an eye" and have increasingly settled more for humane and compassionate ethics based on the legal notion of proportionality and even rehabilitation.

And what of the role of religion in the conversation about justice? Well, justice is big in the religion industry.

Justice has always been a central pillar of religion, from Hammurabi to Moses, arguably the most famous fabled human "law givers," but, far more importantly, it is our great concern for justice that might have led to one of the most powerful functions of religion - providing for an objective, cosmic, superceding, and impossible to avoid system of justice.

You think you can get away with sleeping with your neighbor's wife? Stealing his donkey?

Good luck with that.

You will be judged in a cosmic court of justice, by a perfect omniscient, Judge Judy in the sky, and the consequences might be nothing less than eternal torture or the damnation of your soul.

Be a good Santa's helper in your life?

Be rewarded with cosmic goodies like eternal bliss and possibly even a harem of female virgins (what do women get, by the way? Is there some Chippendales equivalent up there?), depending on your religious preferences. Oh, and by the way, that might be a bad translation and virgin actually referred to grapes.

Religion is also in the business of providing cosmic purpose, an answer to everything, and solving that whole mortality and dying conundrum too. But, it's very large in the business of making sure humans get justice.

Oh yeah, I forgot that whole schadenfreude phenomenon. Why do people get so excited when someone gets their legal or moral comeuppance?

It's almost like a sense of justice is innate and we get really angry when people get away with things, jump for joy when people get caught doing bad things, and parade in the streets when really bad people receive our ultimate punishments.

While the conversation about moral realism versus moral relativism is open to debate, the question that social animals seem to have some innate sense or perception of justice (fairness, if you prefer) does not seem very controversial.