What makes humans moral?
I've read in the December 2007 issue of TIME magazine the following: "Morality and empathy are writ deep in our genes. Alas, so are savagery and bloodlust... ... We're a species that is capable of almost dumbfounding kindness. We nurse one another, romance one another, weep for one another... And at the same time, we slaughter one another... we've visited untold horrors on ourselves --- in Mogadishu, Rwanda, Chechnya, Darfur, Beslan, Baghdad, Pakistan, London, Madrid, Lebanon, Israel, New York City, Abu Ghraib, Oklahoma City, an Amish schoolhouse in Pennsylvania --- all of the crimes committed by the highest, wisest, most principled species this planet has produced. That we're also the lowest, cruelest, most blood-drenched species is our shame --- and paradox." What do you think? Why are there people like Mohandas Gandhi and, at the same time, like Osama Bin Laden? What shapes our moral judgment? Erudite thoughts are very much appreciated. FOLLOW-UP QUESTION: This is a classic moral dilemma: A runaway trolley is heading down the tracks toward five workmen who can't be warned in time (you're just too far away). You are standing near a switch that would divert the trolley onto a siding, but there is a single unsuspecting workman there. Would you throw the switch, killing one to save five? FOLLOW-UP QUESTION: This is a classic moral dilemma: You are adrift in a life raft after your cruise ship has sunk. There are too many survivors for the life rafts, and yours is dangerously overloaded. The raft is certain to sink, and even with life vests on, all the passengers are sure to die because of the frigid temperature of the water. One person on the boat is awake and alert but gravely ill and will not survive the journey no matter what. Throwing that person overboard would prevent the raft from sinking. Time is running out. Could you be the one who tosses the person out?
Psychology - 11 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Our perceptions of religion shape our morality, in my opinion.
2 :
Free will. Each man chooses his own road.
3 :
Hmmm... good question. I will keep an eye on this question.
4 :
i think it is the culture our beliefs and prejudice that shapes who we are as a person. it is also the environment that we live in and our experiences (past and present) that makes us behave in a certain way.
5 :
My morals came from my parents and church. lol
6 :
I WANTED to answer this question, but I'm afraid I'm not erudite enough. Sigh...
7 :
I think it might be genetic. I've seen whole families that have a quiet disposition and kind hearts. Then again, I've seen families...All they do is fight with each other and also with others. It might be a learned behavior though. If there's no love in your house, how would you learn how to love? Sort of like Monkey see, Monkey do!
8 :
Morals are individual. We have a brain and when it is in good working order and we are raised in a good enviornment then we develop empathy, sympathy, the ability to love, trust and care for others. If the brain is damaged in some way then even the best parents can not make us develop these characteristics. If our brains are healthy but the enviornment is not then we don't develop these characteristics..... I'm sure you have heard that poem about " A child who is loved learns to love. A child who is shown hate learns to hate ....." A stray cat will defend her young at all costs yet there are human mothers who beat or kill their own children. We are more evolved than the rest of the animal kingdom because of our brains and for that reason we are also more complex and confusing.
9 :
Wow, this is more of philosophical question. When we studied it, humans weren't considered innately good...and morals are difficult to define. What may be considered moral in one place, might not be in another. So, perhaps Osama feels he's moral when he does what he does. Just keep in mind that there is a general rule behind almost every moral. A moral, in its most basic form, is what keeps a society together...instead of in a natural state. A natural state is considered to be barbaric...where people don't have groups that they work with, but work only for themselves. They don't have communication or cooperation. It would be terrible, in other words. Morals prevent this and insure our survival. For example, murdering is innately bad. Why? Because if everyone went around killing people, eventually there would be no trust and without trust there would be no communication. This is because we must trust what someone is saying in order to say something back. Say I asked you what time it is and you respond by saying "3:30 pm". If I didn't trust you, then I wouldn't believe that it's actually 3:30 pm. Eventually, communication becomes pointless. And, without communication, there is no society. That's why murder is wrong. The same goes for stealing and raping. It leads to mistrust. But, say that Osama believes that killing people is wrong, but that in order to prevent murder, he must kill certain people. A good example of this type of logic is the death penalty for murderers. Murder is wrong in our eyes, but to prevent more death, we kill that murderer. This is a very simple form of Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a belief that is widely followed by westerners (whether they know it or not). It's much like hedonism in the way that it wants everyone to be as happy as possible and that in order to achieve this we can do basically anything as long as our happiness does not cause harm to others. It also uses quantity to balance the scales. Say for example, that one person is very happy when they kill a bunch of people. Unfortunately, it causes MUCH more harm to a lot more people than it does joy to that single person. And, again, lets go back to the example of the death penalty. While one person may suffer, a lot more people are going to stay alive because of it. Of course, all of our logic can be a little skewed and sometimes blatantly wrong, but this is mostly how utilitarianism works. What I'm saying, simply, is that people have universal morals, but that our cultures/religion/philosophical views/upbringing can change how we judge what is moral and what is not. That's where we get such extreme cases such as the two examples you used above. And, honestly, there are just weird human beings that don't follow the code...because they don't really care about the consequences, or don't think that the rules apply to them. Or, they can be psychologically damaged as well. It's a case by case thing.
10 :
I think that our moral judgments are shaped by many a factors. There is the "genetic" disposition of a person, tempered by the society in which they grow up and live in. Immoral acts are usually "morally justified" depending what culture you come from. Osama Bin Laden would feel morally justified about killing American civilians in retaliation for what he sees as American immoral behavior. George Bush feels morally justified for going to war for what he See's as Arab immoral behavior. When somebody commits an immoral act they rarely believe that they are committing an immoral act. Who is Moral and who is immoral is defined by what side of the fence you are sitting on.
11 :
There are always nut cases out there but just as an example, a general collapse of morality can be seen in most every high school in the US. For most of us, our morality is founded on feelings. Call it conscience or common sense, it is a set of unfocused feelings. All of us need acceptance and society has used that need from our infancy to get us to behave. We do something in accordance with society standards and we get praise and acceptance and if not, they with hold praise and acceptance. It is quite similar to training an animal except an animal responds better to food than to praise. When we're adults, we don't need real praise, imagined praise is usually sufficient. You mentioned empathy but what is empathy or sympathy other than a feeling? But a set of feelings is a poor foundation for morality for what obligation do we really have to obey a feeling? None that I know of. So when it's easy and convenient and to our own best interest to behave in some way, we will. If we consider that there is a higher moral authority behind our feelings, then we have an obligation. That higher moral authority has to be God. If I think God has put our capacity for empathy and sympathy into our human nature, then I immediately also have to think that I have an obligation to respect what my Creator has done. The feelings suddenly gain an importance because they point to an authority.
Read more discussion :
