First off, evolution is a monotonic process. That is, the tiger is a superior predator compared to its ancestor. If it weren't, the tiger would have gone extinct and its predecessor would still be around. Human morality, that set of culturally agreed upon norms of good and evil, comes in ebbs and flows. In the time of Caligula, everything was up for grabs. In the Victorian era, they weren't. In Weimar Germany they were. In 1950s America they weren't. Now they are. That doesn't sound like evolution to me.
Second, how would evolutionary morality actually work? Males of all species are designed to try to mate with as many females as possible in order to propagate their genes. Millenia of the ebbs and flows described above have shown that if you define good and evil from the point of view of the children, then traditional marriage is superior to hooking up. Is that where we are now? If morality was evolutionary, wouldn't you expect to see a gradual increase in marriage rates instead of this?
|Illegitimacy rates in the US. Why would an inferior trait become more common?|
The illegitimacy rate shows more than just an inferior trait taking hold, it shows how the conflict between individual evolutionary behaviors and collective evolutionary behaviors is resolved in favor of the individual. The rise in illegitimacy is exactly what you'd expect to see in a culture where, for a variety of reasons, males were no longer forced to marry the mothers of their children. The species and community have no real sway at all, it's the primal instincts of the male that win out.
In short, morality doesn't behave at all like an evolutionary trait. Height, on the other hand, does.
|This is how you'd expect an evolutionary trait to behave.|