which makes sense, since in some sense systematizing from our own welfare to others’ welfare is the whole foundation of morality
This seems wrong to me. I think concern for others’ welfare comes from being directly taught/trained as a child to have concern for others, and then later reinforced by social rewards/punishments as one succeeds or fails at various social games. This situation could have come about without anyone “systematizing from our own welfare”, just by cultural (and/or genetic) variation and selection. I think value systematizing more plausibly comes into play with things like widening one’s circle of concern beyond one’s family/tribe/community.
What you’re trying to explain with this statement, i.e., “Morality seems like the domain where humans have the strongest instinct to systematize our preferences” seems better explained by what I wrote in this comment.
This seems wrong to me. I think concern for others’ welfare comes from being directly taught/trained as a child to have concern for others, and then later reinforced by social rewards/punishments as one succeeds or fails at various social games. This situation could have come about without anyone “systematizing from our own welfare”, just by cultural (and/or genetic) variation and selection. I think value systematizing more plausibly comes into play with things like widening one’s circle of concern beyond one’s family/tribe/community.
What you’re trying to explain with this statement, i.e., “Morality seems like the domain where humans have the strongest instinct to systematize our preferences” seems better explained by what I wrote in this comment.