[Right Wing Professor]

He uses phrases like "evolved a moral compass" and "innate sense of fairness" as if these were biological categories when these just refer to conscience, a moral category that is not passed along in the genes or chemicals

The statement that is is not present in the genes is belied by evidence, and seems to be merely an unsubstantiated assertion.

[blue-duncan]

"The statement that is is not present in the genes is belied by evidence, and seems to be merely an unsubstantiated assertion."

If conscience is genetic then how can we hold someone responsible for actions if he/she does not have the "evolved moral compass" and "innate sense of fairness" genes? In other words, how can you have a
"moral objection to pedophilia or infanticide" when the actor does not have the genetic makeup to conform his/her actions to what other genetically equipped individuals consider acceptable behavior. As a scientist, rather than make a "moral" judgment, would it not be more logical to make the scientific observation that it was just the actions of a genetically deficient individual? Moral judgment implies the actor being equipped to make "moral" decisions.