Postulating an innate moral preference fails to explain the missing-contract puzzle mechanistically.

Evidence

The article’s central problem is, “since [people] didn’t, why should it be so?” (sect. 1, para. 2). The authors’ proposal of an innate moral preference to solve this “puzzle of the missing contract” (sect. 1, para. 3) just names the phenomenon, rather than supplying a proximate mechanism for the contract-like faculty. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 225

Categorization

• XREF: This critique of naming-a-phenomenon instead of supplying a mechanism resonates with the reader’s Big God / fumi-e framework — the fumi-e works precisely because it attacks a mechanism (partner choice), not a named preference. — connects to: Morality evolves from individual partner-choice competition, not group selection. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 605

Related

• Morality evolves from individual partner-choice competition, not group selection. (similarity 0.82)
• Morality may have evolved via partner choice over partner control (similarity 0.81)
• Partner-choice cooperation theory does not explain the intrinsic moral sense. (similarity 0.80)
• Morality evolved because fair partners were preferred in cooperative interactions (similarity 0.80)
• People feel moral obligations they never actually agreed to. (similarity 0.80)
• Moral intuitions evolved as flexible, context-sensitive responses rather than a single universal faculty. (similarity 0.79)
• The underdetermination of partner-control models explains moral diversity, not failure. (similarity 0.79)
• Human morality is contingent rather than invariant across circumstances. (similarity 0.79)
• Fairness evolved as a psychological device because outside market options constrain benefit distribution. (similarity 0.78)
• Morality evolved as a propensity for fair cost-benefit sharing among cooperators. (similarity 0.78)
• Partner choice selects among folk-theorem equilibria just as group selection does. (similarity 0.78)
• A partner-choice account of morality predicts avoidant emotions dominate moral life (similarity 0.78)
• Partner choice predicts fair cooperation while group selection predicts utilitarian cooperation. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Morality evolves from individual partner-choice competition, not group selection. #complicates (0.75) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 605