Biologist Richard D. Alexander has argued that "Ethical questions, and the study of morality or concepts of justice and right and wrong, derive solely from the existence of conflicts of interest" and that such conflicts are a necessary consequence of genetic individuality. He also argues that "Because morality involves conflicts of interest, it cannot easily be generalized into a universal despite virtually continual efforts by utilitarian philosophers to do that; morality does not derive its meaning from sets of universals or undeniable facts." Alexander’s views are shared by many scientists and starkly contradict moral realism.
Biologist Richard D. Alexander has argued that "Ethical questions, and the study of morality or concepts of justice and right and wrong, derive solely from the existence of conflicts of interest" and that such conflicts are a necessary consequence of genetic individuality. He also argues that "Because morality involves conflicts of interest, it cannot easily be generalized into a universal despite virtually continual efforts by utilitarian philosophers to do that; morality does not derive its meaning from sets of universals or undeniable facts." Alexander’s views are shared by many scientists and starkly contradict moral realism.