Moral-evolution research should follow linguistics in doing descriptive work before theorizing origins.

Evidence

Prioritising a structural account of the moral domain in this way would mirror the way inquiry has unfolded in the linguistic domain, where decades of research on the structural richness of languages aiming at descriptive adequacy have preceded the current claim that Universal Grammar “primarily constrains the ‘language of thought’” (Chomsky 2007, p. 22; cf. Hinzen, in press; Kirkby & Mikhail, in preparation). This claim now also feeds into and constrains evolutionary theorizing in unforeseen ways, which presuppose 50 years of descriptive work in linguistic theory. It seems doubtful that research into the moral sense can bypass this stage. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 473

Categorization

• SEED: An essay angle: ‘descriptive adequacy before evolutionary story’ as a methodological canon — that the moral origins debate (Big God, partner choice, moral grammar) can’t be settled until the descriptive structure of moral systems is mapped, mirroring Chomsky’s 50-year linguistics program.
• XREF: Connects to the linguistic parallel the reader’s own integration invokes; ties moral grammar to the same debate over functionally-evolved versus structurally-nativist accounts. — connects to: The linguistic metaphor reorganizes how social practices are theorized across disciplines.; Moral obligations require overriding force that natural selection doesn’t explain — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 512

Broader Connections

• The linguistic metaphor reorganizes how social practices are theorized across disciplines. #expands (0.80)
• Moral obligations require overriding force that natural selection doesn’t explain #complicates (0.75) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 512