Woo Skin - Shop now
$9.99 with 44 percent savings
Digital List Price: $17.95

These promotions will be applied to this item:

Some promotions may be combined; others are not eligible to be combined with other offers. For details, please see the Terms & Conditions associated with these promotions.

You've subscribed to ! We will preorder your items within 24 hours of when they become available. When new books are released, we'll charge your default payment method for the lowest price available during the pre-order period.
Update your device or payment method, cancel individual pre-orders or your subscription at
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Kindle app logo image

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Follow the authors

See all
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.

Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved (Princeton Science Library) Kindle Edition

4.4 out of 5 stars 101 ratings

Can virtuous behavior be explained by nature, and not by human rational choice? "It's the animal in us," we often hear when we've been bad. But why not when we're good? Primates and Philosophers tackles this question by exploring the biological foundations of one of humanity's most valued traits: morality.


In this provocative book, renowned primatologist Frans de Waal argues that modern-day evolutionary biology takes far too dim a view of the natural world, emphasizing our "selfish" genes and reinforcing our habit of labeling ethical behavior as humane and the less civilized as animalistic. Seeking the origin of human morality not in evolution but in human culture, science insists that we are moral by choice, not by nature.


Citing remarkable evidence based on his extensive research of primate behavior, de Waal attacks "Veneer Theory," which posits morality as a thin overlay on an otherwise nasty nature. He explains how we evolved from a long line of animals that care for the weak and build cooperation with reciprocal transactions. Drawing on Darwin, recent scientific advances, and his extensive research of primate behavior, de Waal demonstrates a strong continuity between human and animal behavior. He probes issues such as anthropomorphism and human responsibilities toward animals. His compelling account of how human morality evolved out of mammalian society will fascinate anyone who has ever wondered about the origins and reach of human goodness.


Based on the Tanner Lectures de Waal delivered at Princeton University's Center for Human Values in 2004,
Primates and Philosophers includes responses by the philosophers Peter Singer, Christine M. Korsgaard, and Philip Kitcher and the science writer Robert Wright. They press de Waal to clarify the differences between humans and other animals, yielding a lively debate that will fascinate all those who wonder about the origins and reach of human goodness.

Shop this series

 See full series
There are 61 books in this series.
  • Kindle Price:
    $149.55
    By placing your order, you're purchasing a license to the content and you agree to the Kindle Store Terms of Use.

Customers also bought or read

Loading...

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Celebrated primatologist de Waal expands on his earlier work in Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals to argue that human traits of fairness, reciprocity and altruism develop through natural selection. Based on his 2004 Tanner Lectures at Princeton, this book argues that our morality grows out of the social instincts we share with bonobos, chimpanzees and apes. De Waal criticizes what he calls the "veneer theory," which holds that human ethics is simply an overlay masking our "selfish and brutish nature." De Waal draws on his own work with primates to illustrate the evolution of morality. For example, chimpanzees are more favorably disposed to others who have performed a service for them (such as grooming) and more likely to share their food with these individuals. In three appendixes, de Waal ranges briefly over anthropomorphism, apes and a theory of mind, and animal rights. The volume also includes responses to de Waal by Robert Wright, Christine M. Korsgaard, Philip Kitcher and Peter Singer. Although E.O. Wilson and Robert Wright have long contended that altruism is a product of evolution, de Waal demonstrates through his empirical work with primates the evolutionary basis for ethics. (Oct.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Scientific American

It was not until a year and a half after his voyage on board the Beagle that Charles Darwin first came face to face with an ape. He was standing by the giraffe house at the London Zoo on a warm day in late March of 1838. The zoo had just acquired an orangutan named Jenny. One of the keepers was teasing hershowing her an apple, refusing to hand it over. Poor Jenny "threw herself on her back, kicked & cried, precisely like a naughty child," Darwin wrote in a letter to his sister. In the secret notebooks that he kept after the voyage, Darwin was speculating about evolution from every angle, including the emotional, and he was fascinated by Jennys tantrum. What is it like to be an ape? Does an orangutans frustration feel a lot like ours? Might she cherish some sense of right and wrong? Will an ape despair because her keeper is breaking the rulesbecause he is just not playing fair? Our own species has been talking, volubly and passionately, for at least 50,000 years, and its a fair guess that arguments about right and wrong were prominent in our conversation pretty much from the beginning. We started writing things down 5,000 years ago, and some of our first texts were codes of ethics. Our innumerable volumes of scripture and law, our Departments of Justice, High Courts, Low Courts, and Courts of Common Pleas are unique in the living world. But did we human beings invent our feeling for justice, or is it part of the package of primal emotions that we inherited from our ancestors? In other words: Did morality evolve? Dutch-born psychologist, ethologist and primatologist Frans de Waal has spent his career watching the behavior of apes and monkeys, mostly captive troupes in zoos. As a young student, he sat on a wooden stool day after day for six years, observing a colony of chimpanzees at the Arnhem Zoo. Today he watches chimpanzees from an observation post at Emory Universitys Yerkes National Primate Research Center in Atlanta and at other zoos and primate centers. His work, along with primatologist Jane Goodalls, has helped lift Darwins conjectures about the evolution of morality to a new level. He has documented tens of thousands of instances of chimpanzee behavior that among ourselves we would call Machiavellian and about as many moments that we would call altruistic, even noble. In his scientific papers and popular books (including Chimpanzee Politics, Our Inner Ape and Good Natured), he argues that Darwin was correct from that first glimpse of Jenny at the zoo. Sympathy, empathy, right and wrong are feelings that we share with other animals; even the best part of human nature, the part that cares about ethics and justice, is also part of nature. De Waals latest book, Primates and Philosophers, is based on the Tanner Lectures that he delivered at Princeton Universitys Center for Human Values in 2004. In this book he triesas he has many times beforeto refute a popular caricature of Darwinism. Many people assume that to be good, be nice, behave, play well with others, we have to rise above our animal nature. Its a dog-eat dog world out thereor, as the Romans put it, homo homini lupus, man is wolf to man (a curious proverb for a people whose founding myth was the suckling by a wolf of the infant twins Romulus and Remus). Thomas Henry Huxley, Darwins self-appointed bulldog, promoted this dark, cold view of life in a famous lecture, Evolution and Ethics. "The ethical progress of society depends, not on imitating the cosmic process, still less in running away from it, but in combating it," he declared. In Fyodor Dostoyevskys The Brothers Karamazov, Ivan puts it another way: if there is no God, then we are lost in a moral chaos. "Everything is permitted." De Waal calls this "Veneer Theory." In this view, human morality is a thin crust on a churning urn of boiling funk. In reality, de Waal reminds us, dogs are social, wolves are social, chimps and macaques are social, and we ourselves are "social to the core." Goodness, generosity and genuine kindness come just as naturally to us as meaner feelings. We didnt have to invent compassion. When our ancestors began writing down the first codes of conduct, precepts, laws and commandments, they were elaborating on feelings that evolved thousands or even millions of years before they were born. "Instead of empathy being an endpoint," de Waal writes, "it may have been the starting point." Back in the 1950s and 1960s, when animal psychologists talked about "sympathy" and "empathy," they always put those words between quotation marks, de Waal notes. Now he wants to take away the quotation marks. He describes one of his best-known demonstrations that animals care about fairness. In the experiment, he had pairs of capuchin monkeys perform simple tasks in their cages. For successfully completing each task they would get a reward, sometimes a slice of cucumber, sometimes a grape. All the monkeys would work for and eat the cucumber slices, but they preferred grapes. If one monkey kept getting paid in cucumber and it could see that its partner in the next cage was getting grapes, it would get mad, like Darwins Jenny. After a while the monkey would refuse to eat or throw the cucumber right out of the cage. Is de Waal right about all this? In the second half of Primates and Philosophers, his arguments are critiqued by a series of commentators, all of whom have written important studies of evolutionary ethics. They cite Freud, Kant, Hume, Nietzsche and Adam Smith. They circle and circle around those pairs of capuchin monkeys: "A capuchin rejects a cucumber when her partner is offered a grapeis she protesting the unfairness, or is she just holding out for a grape?" writes Christine M. Korsgaard, Arthur Kingsley Porter Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. "Of course, if the lucky capuchin were to throw down the grape until his comrade had a similar reward, that would be very interesting!" writes Philip Kitcher, John Dewey Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University. They disagree, they discuss, they bicker a little, like all primates and philosophers. They illuminate not only ageless questions of ethics but also current concerns such as the Geneva convention and "why universal empathy is such a fragile proposal," as de Waal writes in his response to his critics. By the end of the book it seems clear that we can no longer look at morality as a sort of civilized veneer on a cold and selfish animal, even though that view goes back long before Darwin went to the zoo. Its origin lies in the Western concept of original sinwhen Adam and Eve ate their first apple.

Jonathan Weiner won a Pulitzer Prize in 1995 for The Beak of the Finch. He teaches science writing in Columbia Universitys Graduate School of Journalism.

Product details

  • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B003SNJESA
  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Princeton University Press (January 12, 2009)
  • Publication date ‏ : ‎ January 12, 2009
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • File size ‏ : ‎ 3.3 MB
  • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
  • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
  • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • Print length ‏ : ‎ 230 pages
  • Customer Reviews:
    4.4 out of 5 stars 101 ratings

About the authors

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

Customer reviews

4.4 out of 5 stars
101 global ratings

Review this product

Share your thoughts with other customers

Customers say

Customers find the book's writing quality excellent, with one review noting it provides views from five different scholars. The book receives positive feedback for its readability, with customers describing it as a great read.

AI-generated from the text of customer reviews

Select to learn more

9 customers mention "Writing quality"9 positive0 negative

Customers praise the writing quality of the book, describing it as extremely well written and informative on the topic of morality. One customer notes that it provides views from five different scholars.

"...about the meaning of evolution, to bear upon a fundamental question about human morality...." Read more

"...Frans de Waal provides and extremely well written thesis on his views of morality in humans, his views are then analyzed by others, and closes with..." Read more

"...The book has some good thoughts but I much prefer the most recent books that de Waal has written and I would recommend starting there first as they..." Read more

"de Waal and all the other contributors did an amazing job spelling out important issues of morality, altruism, and the different levels they..." Read more

4 customers mention "Readability"4 positive0 negative

Customers find the book readable and valuable.

"This is a great book if only because it provides views from five different scholars. "..." Read more

"Excellent book; Very informative on the topic. This was the "go-to" source for my Philosophy Senior Thesis on sapience and pan troglodytes." Read more

"Wonderful read; very well written...." Read more

"Great Read...." Read more

Top reviews from the United States

  • Reviewed in the United States on February 6, 2010
    This is a great book if only because it provides views from five different scholars. "In the Tanner Lectures on Human Values that became the lead essay in this book, Frans de Waal brings his decades of work with primates, and his habit of thinking deeply about the meaning of evolution, to bear upon a fundamental question about human morality. Three distinguished philosophers and a prominent student of evolutionary psychology then respond to the way de Waal's question is framed, and to his answer. Their essays are at once appreciative of de Waal's endeavor and critical of certain of his conclusions. De Waal responds to his critics in an afterword."

    The main thrust of de Waal's essay is what he calls "Veneer Theory," which is the argument that morality is only a thin veneer overlaid on an amoral or immoral core. The first to respond is Robert Wright (The Moral Animal: Evolutionary Psychology and Everyday Life), who states that he is in fact not an adherent to de Waal's Veneer Theory. Second is Christine M. Korsgaard (Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity), who denies that Veneer Theory is even real. Third is Philip Kitcher (Living with Darwin: Evolution, Design, and the Future of Faith (Philosophy in Action)), who generally attacks Veneer Theory as not being relevant to bridging the divide between primates and humans. The fourth, last, and my personal favorite, comes from Peter Singer (The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty). Singer, I believe, does the greatest justice to the entire argument and I happen to agree with almost everything he says. Singer states, "The issue, then, is not so much whether we accept the Veneer Theory of morality, but rather how much of morality is veneer, and how much is underlying structure. Those who claim that all of morality is a veneer laid over a basically individualistic, selfish human nature, are mistaken. Yet a morality that goes beyond our own group and shows impartial concern for all human beings might well be seen as a veneer over the nature we share with other social mammals."

    In conclusion, I think this is a valuable book and do recommend it. I would also recommend getting Michael Tomasello's Why We Cooperate (Boston Review Books) as it is similar in nature and style. Lastly, I would also mention that Frans de Waal mentions a research experiment in which he "demonstrates" primate empathy, but as Tomasello points out, "But studies [contra de Waal] from three different laboratories in the case of the capuchins, and from our laboratory in the case of the chimpanzees, have all found that this is a spurious result in that it does not depend on a social comparison at all. One of the studies found that simply seeing and expecting to receive the grape makes the cucumber look less attractive to chimpanzees. No other individuals need to be around. There is no social comparison going on, only food comparison. So nothing related to norms of fairness are at work either (pg. 32)." Hope that helps.
    21 people found this helpful
    Report
  • Reviewed in the United States on April 20, 2008
    This book was lent to me by a friend, and after reading I felt it necessary to purchase my own copy. I would have never made this choice, this text is completely outside my normal reading genres, but I'm very glad I did. Frans de Waal provides and extremely well written thesis on his views of morality in humans, his views are then analyzed by others, and closes with his response. I haven't read his other text Good Natured, but intend to do so.
    It is important to note that I am in no way highly educated in the fields of primatology, anthropology, or philosophy; my background is in math and computer science; so I came to this book with a certain ignorance.
    2 people found this helpful
    Report
  • Reviewed in the United States on September 22, 2022
    This book is written in a unique style in that it is almost like you are attending an academic conference on the topic as it is presented by different people. You get to read de Waal's insights and then hear others counter or agree with his positions on animals and morality. The book has some good thoughts but I much prefer the most recent books that de Waal has written and I would recommend starting there first as they are much more interesting and comprehensive. Because I have read those, I was able to follow this a little better. The presentation of the material is okay but not as it is for his other books or other science books. Overall, I'm glad I read it, but would suggest starting with a different book first before picking this up.
    3 people found this helpful
    Report
  • Reviewed in the United States on October 27, 2023
    de Waal and all the other contributors did an amazing job spelling out important issues of morality, altruism, and the different levels they manifest from an evolutionary perspective.
  • Reviewed in the United States on November 23, 2020
    Present for my daughter. She loves it
  • Reviewed in the United States on March 11, 2009
    The notion that our moral sense is not just a thin veneer added by civilization over a cruel and brutish nature, but rather something we inherited in our genes, is now widely accepted. More than anyone else, de Waal contributed to make this view plausible, and probable. His writing is clear and can be understood by anyone. Highly recommended.
  • Reviewed in the United States on October 18, 2013
    This is a fascinating discussion between Frans v d Waal and several philosophers on the nature of the connection between our primate relatives and ourselves, particularly whether chimps and bonobos in particular are 'moral' in the sense we understand it.
  • Reviewed in the United States on October 13, 2015
    Excellent book; Very informative on the topic. This was the "go-to" source for my Philosophy Senior Thesis on sapience and pan troglodytes.

Top reviews from other countries

Translate all reviews to English
  • Jagan
    5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
    Reviewed in India on October 4, 2017
    well written
  • Tarkus
    5.0 out of 5 stars A-morality
    Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 9, 2016
    The earlier reviews posted by Ashtar Command and Stephen A Haines provide very good summaries of the arguments advanced in this book, so I will not repeat them here. I would only stress that the comments in Part Two are those of a group of philosophers all of whom accept that Homo sapiens and the great apes evolved from a common ancestor through natural selection. This means that there is no attempt to invoke religious explanations for human moral exceptionalism (such as it is!). Secondly, all accept that moral goodness is a reality about which truth claims can be made - so moral relativism is given short shrift.

    If, like me, you are happy with these constraints, you may find de Waal's arguments almost irresistible - the contrast between de Waal's empirically-based observations and the "thought experiments" and definitional quibbling of the philosophers is especially telling.

    Whilst most of the material that de Waals describes appears in more - and more satisfying - detail in his earlier book, "The Bonobo and the Atheist", this volume does represent an interesting attempt to create a genuine dialogue between "science" and more purely academic philosophy. It might also act as a useful corrective to those who misinterpret the notion of "selfishness" in its biological, Darwinian sense.

    Highly recommended.
  • Roy
    4.0 out of 5 stars superbe
    Reviewed in France on December 27, 2017
    Cet ouvrage qui comprend en fait une introduction, un article de de waal, deux articles critiques et une réponse de de waal est assez intéressant puisqu'il pose la question du modèle de l'homme. En creux, il critique la théorie standard en matière de comportement humain telle qu'elle est développée, notamment, par l'économie. Les réflexions proposées sont souvent stimulantes et l'ouvrage est bien écrit. Une lecture utile, même si l'on n'est pas intéressé par la zoologie ou la primatologie.
    Report
  • Anónimo
    5.0 out of 5 stars Interesante
    Reviewed in Mexico on May 2, 2024
    Aunque algo complejo para quienes no han leído autores de los cuales trata el autor del libro.
  • Letyou
    1.0 out of 5 stars Sin envoltura >:u
    Reviewed in Mexico on September 29, 2020
    No viene con envoltura :C

Report an issue


Does this item contain inappropriate content?
Do you believe that this item violates a copyright?
Does this item contain quality or formatting issues?