perhaps, but
I would have to guess that it would still be immoral, as it is violating species altruism. If the lions had evolved to a level of sentience similar to our own; they would have the tools to remove the threat of non-sired cubs, without resorting to killing them.
Perhaps, but you are imposing a human sense of right and wrong, to their situation. It’s just as likely they would have enhanced the science of detection of who the father is, to a fine art, and evolved in accordance with a male dominated, territorial, high priority on making sure you are the father life style.
Provided society integrity is still maintained by the males taking over prides (ritualised combat i.e. sport, or perhaps lottery, wealth, or intelligence), the lionesses will not se a problem with this. (it’s just the way things are for them).
The morals for the Lion are governed by their social environment (high female to male ratio, and harem style relationships, women doing the work and the males sitting back and having a few beers) About now I feeling a bit jealous
By not doing so, they would be violating the third principle of provisional ethics; "the liberty principle: it is a higher moral princilpe to always seek libert with someone else's liberty in mind, and never seek liberty when it leads to someone else's loss of liberty.
Again a very human problem, Is that principle even applicable to the lion. One could modify such a principle perhaps to:
“it is a higher moral principle to always seek liberty with someone else's liberty in mind, once that individual is past a certain age” (reasoning the male lion only kills the cubs, lioneses past a certain age are seen as potential mates or if male will of their own accord become wandering males looking for their own pride)
To implement social change, the moderation principle states that when inoocent people die, extremism in the defense of anything is no virtue, and moderation in the protection of everything is no vice."
Is infanticide seen as immoral for the lion? It might be something the males boast about down at the pub, and the women fawn about over coffee to their friends (“oh how my new husband loves me…….”.
Provided the social system is stable, and society is functional, etc (and admittedly this takes a bit of imagination) infanticide for the lion barely raises an eyebrow.
Moral relativism in the extreme perhaps, just be glad (assuming your male) that we have not evolved from spiders or mantises.
I may have taken this example a bit too far, I’m sure Shermer had never intended such comparison to be made because it perhaps gives the impression that “anything goes” and some people will then justify bad behaviour with that principle. For any life there are optimum solutions in social survival, those solutions become our morals, it’s not “anything goes” for species, but it is “anything goes” for life in general.
Which leaves one dilemma, interspecies warfare/diplomacy (i.e. like in SiFi movies) At this level “anything goes” has problems, and I am yet to think the problem through.
