Why Are We Moral? An LLM-based Agent Simulation Approach to the Study of Moral Evolution
Zhou Ziheng, Huacong Tang, Mingjie Bi, Wanying He, Fang Sun, Yizhou Sun, Ying Nian Wu, Demetri Terzopoulos, Yipeng Kang, Fangwei Zhong
Abstract
The evolution of morality presents a puzzle: natural selection should favor self-interest, yet humans developed moral systems promoting altruism. Traditional approaches must abstract away cognitive processes, leaving open how cognitive factors shape moral evolution. We introduce an LLM-based agent simulation framework that brings cognitive realism to this question: agents with varying moral dispositions perceive, remember, reason, and decide in a simulated prehistoric hunter-gatherer society. This enables us to manipulate factors that traditional models cannot representsuch as moral type observability and communication bandwidth-and to discover emergent cognitive mechanisms from agent interactions. Across 20 runs spanning four settings, we find that cooperation and mutual help are the central drivers of survival, with universal and reciprocal morality exhibiting the most stable evolutionary outcomes while selfishness is strongly disfavoured. We also observe two central mechanisms that emerge from cognition, including a cost of moral judgment and a self-purging effect among selfish agents. We validate robustness across multiple LLM backbones, architecture ablations, and prompt sensitivity analyses. This work establishes LLM-based simulation as a powerful new paradigm to complement traditional research in evolutionary biology and anthropology, opening new avenues for investigating the complexities of moral and social evolution. Moral Types Universal Moral Agents: help anyone, harm no one even when exploited Reciprocal Moral Agents: help anyone as long as they reciprocally treats back Kin-focused Moral Agents: help only kinship members and don't care anyone outside
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on5
- CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model SocietyGuohao Li, Hasan Hammoud, Hani Itani, Dmitrii Khizbullin et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 1,975 citations
- Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human BehaviorJoon Sung Park, Joseph C. O'Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris et al.UIST 2023 · 1,882 citations
- Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject StudiesGati V. Aher, Rosa I. Arriaga, Adam Tauman KalaiICML 2023 · 651 citations
- Richelieu: Self-Evolving LLM-Based Agents for AI DiplomacyZhenyu Guan, Xiangyu Kong, Fangwei Zhong, Yizhou WangNeurIPS 2024 · 48 citations
- Simulating Human-like Daily Activities with Desire-driven AutonomyYiding Wang, Yuxuan Chen, Fangwei Zhong, Long Ma et al.ICLR 2025
Related papers
- Cooperate or Collapse: Emergence of Sustainable Cooperation in a Society of LLM AgentsGiorgio Piatti, Zhijing Jin, Max Kleiman-Weiner, Bernhard Schölkopf et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 151 citations
- How do Role Models Shape Collective Morality? Exemplar-Driven Moral Learning in Multi-Agent SimulationJunjie Liao, Huacong Tang, Zhou Ziheng, Yizhou Wang et al.ACL 2026 · 1 citation
- Many LLMs Are More Utilitarian Than OneAnita Keshmirian, Razan Baltaji, Babak Hemmatian, Hadi Asghari et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 10 citations
- Investigating Prosocial Behavior Theory in LLM Agents Under Policy-Induced InequitiesYujia Zhou, Hexi Wang, Qingyao Ai, Zhen Wu et al.AAAI 2026 · 1 citation
- SPARK: Simulating the Co-evolution of Stance and Topic Dynamics in Online Discourse with LLM-based AgentsBowen Zhang, Yi Yang, Fuqiang Niu, Xianghua Fu et al.EMNLP 2025 · 1 citation
