For a long time the influence of god has been seen as the basis of humans guidelines to determine was is deemed wrong and right within society. Frans De Waals main point of the argument is to highlight these examples that he gives of primates behaviors and demonstrate that they too display the same moral emotions that humans do while never having any guiding pricinples. An example of this is chimpanzees and bonobos displaying acts of unselfishness by voluntarily opening doors for companions to get access to food, even if that means they will not receive any. In present day human beings have become much more technologically advanced than …show more content…
For example, he has observed how with female chimpanzees, they can be seen dragging males together to reconcile after fighting with each other. Along with females bringing males together, the elders in the chimpanzee groups can be seen as neutral mediators for disputes within their community (De Waal). This example of reconciliation and the way chimpanzees deal with it, show fundamental moral behaviors that can exemplify emotions that humans too exhibit between each other. In addition, the articles goes into concepts of empathy. De Waal uses a powerful example of an older chimpanzee named Peony that has arthritis, sometimes making it difficult to climb and walk. Many times he said he witnessed younger females behind Peony to assist her into climbing frames to join the rest of the group of chimps. This gesture made by the younger female chimpanzee shows a basic moral behavior of empathy and compassion to help a fellow chimp in need, very similar to a man or woman that shows empathy to help their grandma cross a street because they might not be very mobile like Peony. Another persuasive tactic in the article is mentioning that other mammals can be seen giving affection and showing empathy. He makes a convincing argument that humans tend to