Normative standards and objectification

I'm now proposing is that what is unique to human cognition is their ability to objectify and use objectifying normative standards to guide thought and behaviour.

These 'normative standards' or 'normative virtues' (using Brain Cantwell Smith's term) include e.g. true-untrue (applied to beliefs), fair-unfair (applied to judgments), good-bad or praiseworthy-blameworthy (applied to actions), valuable-worthless (applied to objects).

The argument is that these norms and meta-cognition that works with them is unique to human beings. Chimps, for instance, don't feel pride or shame for doing something 'praiseworthy' or 'blameworthy'; they don't practice something to get 'excellent' at it, they don't strive to achieve 'true' beliefs, and so on. (Can you imagine a bunch of chimpanzees screaming at another chimpanzee for being responsible for getting them lost somewhere?)

Here's a simple point:

Evolution of adaptive traits can be either originate from:

Social competition = individual level selection

OR:

Social cooperation (and intergroup competition) = group level selection

On my theory, the evolution of human-unique intelligence mechanisms (e.g. planning, inhibition, working memory, decision-making in the pre-frontal lobe) is driven by normative virtues (e.g. fair vs unfair, good-bad) IN INTERACTION with underlying implicit motives (e.g. dominance, affiliation), acting in a socially cooperative (group selection) or competitive (individual selection) context.

Thus some of the normative virtues - being 'good'/'excellent', doing things that are 'praiseworthy', and wanting to possess 'valued' objects, naturally align themselves with competitive - e.g. dominance/power primate motives; other normative virtues - being 'fair', being 'good', being 'righteous' naturally align themselves with cooperative - e.g. affiliative primate motives.

Now here is where it gets interesting. These normative virtues are objectifying - unlike the implicit motives that might fuel them. This makes group level ideologies/religions so potentially dangerous - because there is such a conviction of the 'absolute truth' in certain beliefs, gods, moralities, religious narratives, etc.

However, and this is what makes human intelligence and cognition really transcendent, normative virtues - due to their intrinsic objectified nature - can become genuine ends in themselves, detached from individual or group level interests. For instance, wanting to find understanding or truth or justice beyond the group level - but at some 'universal' level. Or wanting to do things according to standards of 'excellence' or 'perfection' even when this motive conflicts with personal/social level interests.

It is this latter characteristic that seems so exceptional and marvellous in our species in my view. And cultures that encourage it (e.g. elite culture in classical Greek times, perhaps Buddhist cultures, and liberal arts traditions in western cultures) are a wonderful accomplishment - unlike e.g. modern nationalistic capitalism, which increasingly encourages competitive, instrumental self-interest, group-focused 'morality', and hypocrisy!

I suppose, this is where Socrates' dictate: 'Know yourself' comes in. If you don't apply it, you end up 'reifying' evaluations that simply project implicit competitive or cooperative motives that we share with other primates.