{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T09:34:50Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 23.1, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a094f6-fcab-7343-87a9-725c8d31a3c5\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: evolution of morality\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: ACT.ACT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 80.7, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a094f6-fc96-79f1-a7db-6dbaba5b2de2\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: evolution of morality\nRegistry id: vr.tr.evolution-of-morality\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into t" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:45:36+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "owners" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:31+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q5418655", "registryId": "vr.tr.evolution-of-morality", "name": "evolution of morality", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q5418655/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.evolution-of-morality", "name": "evolution of morality", "purpose": "Enable an agent to distinguish, compare and assess explanations of how moral capacities, norms and practices emerge, persist and change without treating evolutionary success as moral justification.", "definition": "Evolution of morality is the emergence and transformation of capacities, motivations, judgments and norms concerning right and wrong through biological and cultural processes, with disagreement over which features constitute morality and how their evolution should be explained.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the explanatory concept of evolution of morality: proposed biological, cultural and interacting processes underlying moral capacities and changing moral systems, including competing definitions, evidence requirements and limits of inference.", "in_scope": [ "Competing definitions of morality and the capacities or practices each explanation seeks to explain", "Proposed biological origins of capacities implicated in moral judgment and conduct", "Cultural transmission, transformation and institutional stabilisation of moral norms", "Interactions among inherited dispositions, development, social learning and institutions", "Evidence and operationalisations used to distinguish evolutionary explanations", "Boundaries between evolutionary explanation, historical change and claims of moral progress" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Normative theories determining which actions or principles are morally right", "General evolutionary mechanisms apart from their application to morality", "Individual moral development without a specified connection to population-level evolution", "Complete histories of particular religions, legal systems or ethical traditions", "Cooperation or animal social behaviour without an explicit account of its relationship to morality", "Evolutionary explanations of cognition unrelated to moral capacities or practices" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "An instance identifies a moral target, such as obligation judgments or norm enforcement, rather than treating every beneficial social behaviour as morality.", "An evolutionary explanation specifies a process connecting variation and persistence or change across populations or transmission cycles; a chronology alone does not suffice.", "The account distinguishes evolution of capacities for moral judgment from changes in the content of particular moral norms.", "Biological inheritance, cultural transmission and individual learning are identified separately wherever the explanation invokes them.", "Claims about adaptive advantage or historical spread remain distinguishable from claims that a norm is justified or represents moral progress." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Explanatory target", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Moral capacity; emotion; judgment; motivation; behaviour; norm; enforcement practice; institution", "why_it_matters": "Prevents evidence about one component, such as helping behaviour, from being treated as an explanation of morality as a whole." }, { "name": "Definition of morality", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Explicit attributed definition, inclusion criteria and contested cases", "why_it_matters": "Different definitions change which organisms, behaviours and social systems count as relevant evidence." }, { "name": "Evolutionary channel", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Biological; cultural; gene-culture interaction; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Determines what must be inherited or transmitted and what evidence can support the explanation." }, { "name": "Proposed explanatory mechanism", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Kin selection; reciprocity; partner choice; reputation; between-group competition; social learning; drift; constraint; by-product; other explicitly specified mechanism", "why_it_matters": "Makes competing or complementary mechanisms explicit without assuming that any one explains the selected moral target." }, { "name": "Population and temporal coverage", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Account linked to specified populations, species, historical intervals and transmission cycles", "why_it_matters": "Limits generalisation beyond the populations and periods addressed by the evidence." }, { "name": "Moral operationalisation", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Study-specific indicators and units, such as judgment ratings, helping frequency, punishment rate or norm prevalence", "why_it_matters": "Allows an agent to check whether the measured outcome actually represents the moral phenomenon being explained." }, { "name": "Evidential standing", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposed; formally modelled; empirically examined; contested; unresolved, with supporting and contrary evidence", "why_it_matters": "Separates explanatory possibility from evidence that a mechanism operated in the relevant case." }, { "name": "Normative inference", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "None; moral progress claim; justification claim; evolutionary debunking claim; other explicit inference", "why_it_matters": "Flags arguments that require philosophical premises beyond an account of evolutionary origins." } ], "affordances": [ "Classify an explanation by its moral target, definition, evolutionary channel and proposed mechanism.", "Compare competing accounts using shared outcomes and explicitly different predictions.", "Check whether behavioural measurements support claims about moral judgment, motivation or obligation.", "Trace a proposed norm change through transmission pathways, enforcement practices and institutional conditions.", "Identify missing evidence and propose observations that would discriminate among explanations.", "Flag unsupported transitions from evolutionary origins or persistence to moral authority, inevitability or progress." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Summarize scientific and philosophical accounts of how morality evolved, noting where they disagree.", "Distinguish descriptive claims about evolution from claims about what is right." ], "must_not": [ "Use evolutionary accounts to argue that some peoples or groups are morally inferior.", "Present a contested hypothesis as settled science.", "Claim that because a behaviour evolved it is therefore justified." ], "requires_human": [ "Using claims about evolved morality to shape policy that affects particular groups." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Evolutionary arguments have been misused to justify racism, sexism and cruelty.", "Explaining morality should not be confused with excusing harm." ], "affected_parties": [ "Groups targeted by pseudo-science", "Students and readers" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the field; researchers in biology, psychology and philosophy keep its record.", "master_systems": [] }, "what_it_is_for": [ "The evolution of morality is studied in evolutionary biology, anthropology, psychology and philosophy to explain the emergence of moral capacities and social norms.", "It provides a framework for comparing biological and cultural explanations of cooperation, punishment and judgments about right and wrong." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Treating evolutionary advantage as moral justification can legitimize harmful conduct without an ethical argument.", "Presenting speculative evolutionary explanations as established facts can reinforce stereotypes and obscure cultural variation.", "Confusing explanations of behavior with excuses for behavior can undermine accountability." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "interfaces": "No formal standard, law or official classification specifically governs this explanatory concept.", "recognition": "The evolution of morality is an abstract explanatory subject without directly perceptible identifying features." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q5418655: evolution of morality", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5418655", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Evolution of morality", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "moral-targets-and-boundaries", "name": "Moral targets and boundaries", "description": "Identify what an explanation counts as morality and which aspect of morality it seeks to explain.", "rationale": "Accounts can appear to disagree while explaining different targets, or appear to agree only because morality is left undefined.", "layers": [ { "id": "definitions-and-schools", "name": "Definitions and schools", "description": "Represent competing definitions with their proponents and criteria for inclusion.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-morality-definition", "name": "Attributed morality definition", "description": "Record whether an account centres cooperation, obligation, evaluative judgment, emotions or another criterion, identifying who adopts that definition.", "questions": [ { "text": "What does this account require for a capacity or practice to count as moral, and which researchers or traditions endorse that requirement?", "kind": "definition", "id": "attributed-morality-definition-q01" }, { "text": "Would conventional rule following, strategic cooperation or harm avoidance count under this definition, and why?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attributed-morality-definition-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "capacity-and-content", "name": "Capacity and content", "description": "Separate the emergence of moral capacities from the evolution of particular norms and practices.", "findings": [ { "id": "specified-explanandum", "name": "Specified explanandum", "description": "Record whether the account explains a capacity to make moral judgments, a motivation to act, or the distribution of a particular moral rule.", "questions": [ { "text": "Is the target the capacity to experience obligation, the motivation to comply, or the content of a particular obligation?", "kind": "definition", "id": "specified-explanandum-q01" }, { "text": "What observation would show that the account explains its stated target rather than only a neighbouring phenomenon such as compliance?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "specified-explanandum-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "biological-evolutionary-explanations", "name": "Biological evolutionary explanations", "description": "Represent hypotheses connecting biological evolution to capacities implicated in morality.", "rationale": "A proposed adaptive explanation needs a specified trait, mechanism and evidential basis rather than an appealing ancestral narrative.", "layers": [ { "id": "traits-and-evolutionary-routes", "name": "Traits and evolutionary routes", "description": "Specify the proposed biological target and distinguish selection accounts from alternative origins.", "findings": [ { "id": "trait-origin-hypothesis", "name": "Trait origin hypothesis", "description": "Record the proposed capacity, inheritance assumptions and whether its moral role is explained as an adaptation, co-option, by-product or unresolved outcome.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which capacity is proposed to have evolved biologically, and what connects variation in that capacity to inheritance and reproductive consequences?", "kind": "definition", "id": "trait-origin-hypothesis-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes selection for this capacity's proposed moral function from co-option, constraint or a by-product explanation?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "trait-origin-hypothesis-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "social-selection-conditions", "name": "Social selection conditions", "description": "Specify the social conditions under which a proposed mechanism could support a morality-related trait.", "findings": [ { "id": "mechanism-and-payoff-conditions", "name": "Mechanism and payoff conditions", "description": "Record assumptions about relatedness, repeated interaction, partner choice, reputation and group structure wherever an account depends on them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which social conditions make the proposed trait advantageous, and whose costs and benefits are being counted?", "kind": "definition", "id": "mechanism-and-payoff-conditions-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence supports those conditions in the relevant population rather than merely showing that the mechanism works in a formal model?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "mechanism-and-payoff-conditions-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "cultural-change-and-institutions", "name": "Cultural change and institutions", "description": "Represent how moral norms are transmitted, modified, enforced and displaced.", "rationale": "Explaining the spread of a moral rule requires attention to transmission and power as well as any benefits associated with compliance.", "layers": [ { "id": "norm-transmission", "name": "Norm transmission", "description": "Identify the moral content transmitted and the pathways through which it persists or changes.", "findings": [ { "id": "transmission-and-transformation", "name": "Transmission and transformation", "description": "Record who learns from whom, what is retained or reconstructed, and whether spread is attributed to learning biases, persuasion, coercion or other processes.", "questions": [ { "text": "What moral rule or practice is transmitted, and how are continuity and substantive change recognised across generations or groups?", "kind": "definition", "id": "transmission-and-transformation-q01" }, { "text": "Which observations distinguish conformity or prestige-based adoption from coercion, independent invention or reasoned revision?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "transmission-and-transformation-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "enforcement-and-norm-distribution", "name": "Enforcement and norm distribution", "description": "Connect norm persistence and variation to sanctions, authority and institutional arrangements.", "findings": [ { "id": "institutional-maintenance-and-change", "name": "Institutional maintenance and change", "description": "Record how formal and informal enforcement affects public compliance, private endorsement and opportunities for norm revision.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who rewards, punishes or authorises the norm, and how do the costs and benefits differ across affected groups?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "institutional-maintenance-and-change-q01" }, { "text": "How does the evidence distinguish sincere moral endorsement from compliance produced by surveillance, dependence or threat?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "institutional-maintenance-and-change-q02" }, { "text": "What change in enforcement or authority would help test the proposed explanation of the norm's persistence?", "kind": "action", "id": "institutional-maintenance-and-change-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "development-and-comparative-evidence", "name": "Development and comparative evidence", "description": "Assess how developmental, cross-cultural and cross-species evidence bears on evolutionary accounts.", "rationale": "Present-day behaviour can constrain explanations of origins, but developmental timing or behavioural similarity alone cannot establish an evolutionary history.", "layers": [ { "id": "developmental-and-cultural-interaction", "name": "Developmental and cultural interaction", "description": "Separate individual acquisition from population-level change while representing proposed interactions.", "findings": [ { "id": "acquisition-and-inheritance-links", "name": "Acquisition and inheritance links", "description": "Record how an account connects developmental predispositions, learning environments and cultural feedback to its evolutionary claims.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which observations concern learning within a lifetime, and which support change across biological generations or cultural transmission cycles?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "acquisition-and-inheritance-links-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence would distinguish an early-developing predisposition from an effect of early experience or their interaction?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "acquisition-and-inheritance-links-q02" }, { "text": "If gene-culture interaction is proposed, what feedback pathway and evidence are specified for each direction of influence?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "acquisition-and-inheritance-links-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "comparative-operationalisation", "name": "Comparative operationalisation", "description": "Assess whether comparisons measure sufficiently similar phenomena across settings or species.", "findings": [ { "id": "comparable-moral-indicators", "name": "Comparable moral indicators", "description": "Record what helping, punishment, inequity responses or obligation judgments indicate under each study's definition and design.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the task measure behaviour, motivation, norm understanding or explicit judgment, and is that interpretation comparable across the sampled populations or species?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "comparable-moral-indicators-q01" }, { "text": "What alternative explanations, such as reward expectation, learned association or task misunderstanding, remain compatible with the result?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "comparable-moral-indicators-q02" }, { "text": "What additional evidence would justify treating a cross-species similarity as shared ancestry rather than convergence or superficial resemblance?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "comparable-moral-indicators-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "explanatory-assessment-and-normative-limits", "name": "Explanatory assessment and normative limits", "description": "Evaluate causal support and make explicit any philosophical conclusions drawn from evolutionary accounts.", "rationale": "A model must support judgment about explanatory strength while preventing empirical descriptions from silently becoming moral prescriptions.", "layers": [ { "id": "competing-explanations", "name": "Competing explanations", "description": "Compare accounts through assumptions, discriminating predictions and unresolved evidence.", "findings": [ { "id": "discriminating-evidence", "name": "Discriminating evidence", "description": "Record which observations support one mechanism over alternatives and where multiple mechanisms remain compatible with the evidence.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which prediction differs between the proposed explanation and its strongest specified alternative?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "discriminating-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Which sources provide direct observations, reconstructions or model results, and what inferential gap separates each from the claimed historical process?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "discriminating-evidence-q02" }, { "text": "What feasible observation or analysis would most reduce uncertainty between the competing explanations?", "kind": "action", "id": "discriminating-evidence-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "origins-justification-and-progress", "name": "Origins, justification and progress", "description": "Separate evolutionary explanation from arguments about moral truth, authority and improvement.", "findings": [ { "id": "explicit-normative-bridge", "name": "Explicit normative bridge", "description": "Record additional premises whenever an account uses evolutionary origins to justify, undermine or rank moral beliefs.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the argument infer moral validity, unreliability or progress from an evolutionary history, and what additional premises support that inference?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "explicit-normative-bridge-q01" }, { "text": "If a change is called moral progress, which evaluative standard is used and who endorses or disputes it?", "kind": "definition", "id": "explicit-normative-bridge-q02" }, { "text": "Which conclusions should an agent withhold if the evolutionary explanation is supported but the proposed normative bridge remains disputed?", "kind": "action", "id": "explicit-normative-bridge-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "No sense was recorded; this account includes both biological origins and cultural change rather than selecting one interpretation.", "The relative contributions of kin selection, reciprocity, partner choice, cultural group selection and other mechanisms remain debated and require claim-specific evidence.", "The measurements listed are study-specific proxies, not universal measures of morality; claims about nonhuman morality depend strongly on the definition adopted." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Biological evolution of capacities underlying morality", "Cultural evolution of moral norms and institutions", "Gene-culture coevolution of moral dispositions and practices" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Evolutionary anthropology compares cooperation, punishment and norm enforcement across societies to investigate explanations of moral behavior.", "Comparative psychology studies empathy, reciprocity and social responses in other animals as possible precursors of human morality.", "Experimental research uses allocation, cooperation and punishment tasks to test proposed mechanisms supporting moral behavior.", "Historical and cultural research investigates how moral norms spread, persist and change.", "Moral philosophy examines whether evolutionary explanations affect the justification or apparent objectivity of moral beliefs." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Cooperative choices in a specified experimental task", "typical_range": "0-100; depends on task, incentives and population", "unit": "percent of choices" }, { "quantity": "Endorsement of a specified moral judgment or norm", "typical_range": "0-100; depends on wording, sampling and context", "unit": "percent of respondents" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Inferring that an evolved disposition is morally justified, desirable or inevitable.", "Treating cooperation, altruism or obedience to norms as sufficient evidence of morality without specifying a definition.", "Offering adaptive explanations without evidence distinguishing selection from by-products, learning or historical contingency.", "Generalizing from narrow participant samples or artificial tasks to humanity's evolutionary history.", "Presenting societies as stages on a single ladder of moral advancement, encouraging ethnocentric or discriminatory conclusions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Societies differ in the content and scope of moral obligations, including obligations to kin, strangers and other groups.", "Local institutions, subsistence practices, religions and histories can influence norm transmission and enforcement; geographic differences alone do not establish genetic differences." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "name": "Moral development", "difference": "Concerns changes within an individual's lifetime; evolution of morality concerns origins and changes across biological or cultural generations." }, { "name": "Evolutionary ethics", "difference": "Examines the implications of evolutionary accounts for ethics, including justification; evolution of morality primarily concerns explanatory accounts of origins and change." }, { "name": "Evolution of cooperation", "difference": "Studies how cooperative behavior arises and persists, including in organisms without moral judgment; morality additionally involves disputed criteria such as obligation, evaluation or accountability." }, { "name": "Biological altruism", "difference": "Is defined by fitness costs to an actor and benefits to recipients, independently of intentions or judgments about right and wrong." }, { "name": "Moral progress", "difference": "Requires an evaluative claim that morality has improved; evolutionary change need not constitute improvement." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of evolution of morality this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which definitions of morality permit useful comparison across human cultures and other species without equating morality with all cooperation or excluding relevant nonverbal capacities?", "For each proposed moral capacity, what evidence can distinguish adaptation for a moral function from co-option, developmental constraint or by-product explanations?", "How can research estimate the relative contributions and interactions of biological inheritance, cultural transmission, institutions and individual reasoning to a particular moral change?", "Which historical evidence can distinguish a norm's spread through beneficial social effects from spread through coercion, demographic change or unequal power?", "Under which additional philosophical premises, if any, should evolutionary explanations alter confidence in moral judgments or assessments of moral progress?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 17, "questions": 32 } }