Almost all moral progress is likely due to tech making it easier and more profitable to be good rather than evil by any moral system you choose. I think humans have changed along a lot of dimensions over cultural-evolutionary history but the moral dimension ain't one of them
Conversation
Ie the distribution hasn't shifted at all. The span between saints and psychopaths, has remained the same. The median mediocrity has had about the same amount of moral fiber throughout. What has changed is opportunity structure to be good/evil in the environment.
Replying to
Hrm. A hypothesis that remains to be held up to convincing accounts of big shifts in moral epistemes (eg, Neitzsche).
1
Replying to
Not being evil doesn't necessarily equate to being good. As living standards increase, a lot of incentives for evil behaviour disappear & people's morality is tested less frequently. Just by being alive in easy conditions, without actively being evil, you are assumed to be good.
Replying to
This is mostly true but doesn't tell the whole story. Among other things people now are probably much less violent than in the past due to artificial selection against people with violent tendencies (capital punishment weeding out genetic traits likely to produce murderers.)
1
Replying to
I call this moral technology.






