Ethics are Cultural by design...
Not quite true.
I went through a book once on Rational Emotive Therapy (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_emotive_behavior_therapy), which described research into the invariants of morality. It's true that different cultures have variations (
https://classroom.synonym.com/cultural-differences-in-moral-reasoning-12087801.html) on what is considered moral, but the research found that two invariants existed in virtually all human cultures: (1) Be kind and considerate to others; (2) Include yourself in rule (1). In other words, The Golden Rule. Unfortunately I don't have that quote on hand because that was so many years ago.
If you think about it, these two rules are just a subset of wisdom in the bigger view of things. Since fortunes change and different people will be in power at different times, no person can guarantee they will always be in charge, therefore every rational, self-honest person is going to have to agree that no other moral system will be guaranteed to be tolerable. It's interesting that psychology experiments on monkeys prove that even monkeys have empathy for less fortunate monkeys, although admittedly sometimes grudgingly so (
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/aug/26/animalbehaviour.medicalresearch). Logically this is a survival heuristic that applies to all species, since no individual can predict when he/she/it will need the help of another member of its species, so killing off or socially alienating oneself from others is dangerous in the long term. Bees and ants take this heuristic to an extreme.
P.S.--As for your comment about survival of the fittest, there exists a good quote by Euell Gibbons, I believe in his book "Stalking the Good Life". He points out that, even among plants, one method of competing successfully in nature is to be useful to others, such as in commensalism and mutualism (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commensalism), so cooperation in nature is pretty standard, so nature is not "red in tooth and claw" as the common phrase and associated common misperception suggest (
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/red-in-tooth-and-claw.html).
P.P.S.:
(5-11-19: I found one quote I mentioned):
(p. 223)
The great genius Thomas Huxley, while one of the first to
challenge this theory of "gradualism" in evolution, loved to
emphasize the violent competitiveness and overpowering aggres-
sion in nature. The great Victorian poet Tennyson used such
(p. 224)
phrases as "Nature, red in tooth and claw," and our own Wil-
liam James, while deploring the growing softness of our young
people, urged that they be enlisted in "man's eternal war on
nature."
Despite scientific refutation, this fallacy has persisted into our
day, and is still found in the most respectable quarters. One of
the greatest minds of our time, Arnold Toynbee, in his book An
Historian's Approach to Religion, speaks of "Nature's lust and
bloodthirstiness," and even writes--and I quote, "the first as-
spect in which Nature presents herself to Man's intellect and will
is as a monster who is creating and destroying perpetually,
prodigally, aimlessly, senselessly, ruthlessly and immorally."
I pity a man who can see nature only through such eyes.
When I hear a man using phrases as "Nature's lust and
bloodthirstiness" and "Nature, red in tooth and claw," I think
that here is a man who is getting his attitude toward nature from
books, and not from firsthand observation. If man is really en-
gaged in "eternal war on nature," then I am a traitor to man-
kind, for I have withdrawn from this war and made a separate
peace.
In the same book I have mentioned, Dr. Toynbee says,
"Every living creature is striving to make itself the center of the
universe, and in the act is entering into rivalry with every other
living creature." A good course in ecology would have kept this
truly great man from making such a ridiculous statement. It
ignores the vast community of cooperation, interdependence,
symbiosis, commensalism, and mutualism that is found within
nature. it would be far more true to say that every life form in
order to survive, must relate itself to dozens of other life forms,
and the vast majority of these interrelationships could never be
described as rivalry. I do not ignore the competition and vio-
lences that is found in nature. Of course these things exist. But
when viewed in the context of the interdependence and the great
areas of cooperation found in nature, the roles of competition
and violence are seen to be pretty small.
Gibbons, Euell. 1974.
Stalking the Good Life: My Love Affair with Nature, Sixth Printing, April 1974. New York: McKay Company.
