Would all possible intelligent species tend towards the same moral and ethical precepts that humans do? Or would species with radically different biologies, brain structures, mating patterns, etc. tend towards equally different moral precepts and ethical concerns?

This is a wonderful question, which goes to the heart of just what ethics is about. Some philosophers--such as Immannuel Kant--have maintained that ethics consists in universal principles of practical reason, which must therefore apply to all rational beings, including God, angels, devils, and any other rational being whatsoever. This 'universalist' conception of ethics obviously abstracts away from any other differences among beings to identify rationality and the capacity to be bound by ethical obligations. If, however, one thinks that ethics is about how agents negotiate their relations with one another, how they, as it were, 'get along', then it would seem that the sorts of differences that you point out would be relevant to shaping the ethical relations of these beings, and consequently, differences in biology, etc., might well lead to different ethical concerns. So what is ethics about? Is it about duties that apply to all rational beings? Or is it about how beings negotiate their relations with one another? Or is it about something else altogether? How one answers these questions will have deep and far-reaching implications, and these questions deserve further reflection.

Read another response by Sean Greenberg
Read another response about Biology, Ethics