Evening Republican, Volume 15, Number 46, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 23 February 1911 — IDEAS OF MORALITY [ARTICLE]

IDEAS OF MORALITY

Anthropologist Talks of Primitive Man’s Standard. Religion Has No Natural Connection With Morals As Is Often Supposed—lncest Cannot Be Based on Reason. Berkeley, Cal. —Addressing the Philosophical Union on the subject of “Moral Theory and Practice in Primitive Life," Prof. A. L. Kroeber of San Francisco, head of the department of anthropology at the university, announced a'doctrine that reverses the general idea of morality and its existence. The savage, he says, Is Just as moral as the civilized man of this or any other age, and man, as a race, is moral and immoral because he is made that way and cannot help It. “There are four stages of morals,” said Professor Kroeber, “instinctive morals, which are evident in the animals as well as ourselves; next, morals shaped by social standards, as in primitive man; then a stage where conscience enters, and, fourth, a stage that no race has yet reached, but which it may, where morality is entirely a matter of intelligence. “But all these later stages arise from the first, wherein we do not differ frpm the lower animals, but feel instinctively that a thing is good or bad, and base our actions on that instinct. The repugnance which murder, incest and cannibalism have for us are purhly Instinctive, and are possessed by the savage just the same as by the civilized man. "Where real virtue arises is in living up to our standards, and In that sense we are no better than the most primitive savage, often not as good. The setting of our standards is not a moral matter, but one of culture and civilization. “Religion has no natural connection with morals, and the two do not go hand in hand, as is often supposed. Religion Is a product of our civilization. At certain times religion gets an opportunity to sejze upon morality and incorporate it ijftto itself, but the two never assimilate. It Is due to this that morals have now become almost entirely divorced from religion

and the two institutions stand separate.” \ In discussing the matter of incest, Professor Kroeber said that it could not be based on reason, because it is a biological fact that the nearness of relation of parents does not produce inferior offspring. It is a popular mistake that marriage of cousins and nfear of kin is an occasion of weak children, unless It has been continued for generations; and in the case of horses and dogs, breeding; is customarily done between animals of the nearest blood relationship. The fact that there is nothing more at the bottom of our morals than these vague feelings or instincts causes different peoples to go on trying to justify them in reason, with widely opposite results. In England, until recently, it was thought wrong for a man to marry his brother's widow, while in other nations it was frequently made compulsory for him to do so, he said. In England the Instinct against incest was built upon to an abnormal degree. Doctor Kroeber told the story of a Pacific island mother who went to a white woman visiting on the island, telling of an awful wrong other people had done in eating her baby. The white woman, of course, had an equally keen sense of the wrong, but, on investigation, learned that the mother considered herself wronged because she had not been allowed to participate In the meal. This exemplified, he said, the way people often attempt to condemn an act in reason and do so by directly opposite means. In conclusion, he stated that we should not go back of our instincts, but let them stand as reason in themselves.