Inhibit Moral Behavior

The instinct that once aided in the survival of people in the past serves a purpose in today’s modern society. Even today “herd behavior can aid in bonding, and it can clarify social expectations” (Moore 1). Humans are social creatures and strive to be part of a group whenever possible. By conforming to the norms of a group, a person is able to relate to the other members and therefore create a bond. In confusing situations, humans also look to people who posses more knowledge or appear to be stronger than themselves for guidance. Following others creates a set of guidelines which help to solidify social norms and expectations. By following others, people actually gain “relative morality” (Jasmine 1). Relative morality is the culturally influenced view of ethical and moral standards. Humans are not only affected in their understanding of societal standards, but also in terms of their ethical and moral values, which provide a basis for their actions. When a person’s ethical and moral standards change to match those of their peers, their actions inevitably change as well. Otherwise good people will suddenly start behaving in a way that is uncharacteristic to them because of relative

Then Greene explains the moral brian, and describes it as “ dual mode camera with both automatic settings and manual mode ” (15). this concepts of moral brains is similar to what Daniel Karmanham author of Thinking Fast and Slow calls system one and sysytems two. system one: aperate automaticlly and quickly with little to no effort and no sences of vountry control(Kahneman20).While system two:allocates attentionto the effortful mental activiteis that demand it , including complex computations(20). There who diffrent settings of the brain that help humans make everyday choices. System one or automatic mode is the setting of the brain that usually uses the gut feeling that causes humans to react automatically. while system two or manual mode is usually for practical reasoning in situations usually causes humans to thinking more when solving a problem.The final idea Greene discusses is Common Currency this is when humans begin to search for a metamorality:a global moral philosophy that can adjudicates among competing tribal moralites (15

What is morality? Where does our sense of morality come from and why is it important for us to know? The cognitive scientist, psychologist, linguist, and scholar, Steven Pinker discusses this in his essay, “The Moral Instinct”. In this essay, Pinker claims that our morality sense is innate, it constantly changes, and it is universal among each culture. Pinker also explains that moral sense shapes our judgement as it is something that we value and seek in other people. The science of the moral sense is important since it shows how morality impacts our actions and it explains why we act in certain ways.

This paper explores the things that have influenced my moral worldview. It includes insight on what I consider when making decisions. I discuss who and what I look too when deciding my morals and what I consider to be right and wrong.

Rebecca Saxe’s Do the Right Thing: Cognitive Science’s Search for a Common Morality analyzes multiple research studies performed on the ethical ideas of morality. Saxe uses three current studies to validate her argument, including a Harvard internet study, research on the cognitive activity in the brains of an infant, and analysis of brain imaging using an fMRI. She uses logos and ethos in this essay to support her argument that scientific research will never fully explain the process that a human takes to make a sound, moral judgement, despite all of the innovative studies being performed. Saxe begins her argument by presenting a scenario that helps the reader to further understand the topic being discussed: moral dilemmas. The scenario includes

Hypothesis and overview of the essay (approximately 1 to 2 pages) This section should focus on using clear, concise writing to introduce your argumentative position based on the "Moral Instinct" editorial.

Harambe, a gorilla at the Cincinnati Zoo was shot to death by the zookeepers to protect a child who fell into the enclosure. This killing was justified by the experts such as Jane Godall saying that it was necessary to kill the aggressive animal to protect the life of the child. The obvious irony is that human beings are the ones who separate wild animals from their natural habitat, imprison them in zoos and finally they are the ones who decide the life and death of wild animals. Another tragic incident occurred in May, 2016, just six days before Harambe was killed, at Santiago Metropolitan Zoo where “two lions have reportedly been shot dead by zookeepers in front of a crowd of visitors after severely mauling a man who had entered their enclosure in an apparent suicide attempt” (Bulman, 2016). Therefore, it is high time for us to realise that animals are not mere ‘instruments’ or ‘objects’ that can be kept for our enjoyment, relaxation and

While the participants of this study may have higher NFC as university students, their likelihood of wanting to engage in effortful thinking does not reflect a high cognition in dilemmas. In addition, having the participants to rate their response does not engage cognitive thinking or moral emotions as much as being forced with a yes-no option in a situation. One would feel urgency to make an instantaneous decision, rather than to take time and weigh their affective or rational judgement. According to Haidt’s Social Intuition Model(2001), moral emotion fuels moral judgement, giving moral responses while reasoning is a post-hoc process to provide rational support to responses. Reasoning process may not be activated until after utilitarian response is made which is slower and requires effort; responses are then made by

This paper will compare the usefulness of character-based and consequence-based approaches in making moral decisions. In a character-based approach, the consideration of the moral agent is central in making decisions, and actions are made in order to reflect and strengthen good character. In a consequence-based approach, the consideration of the outcome is central in making moral decisions, and actions are judged based on the outcome. Usefulness will be defined in terms of three aspects: consistency, convenience and assurance, with assurance being defined as the confidence that the decision made is correct. Through the comparison of the two approaches, it becomes clear that a character-based approach is more useful in making a decision.

Amit and Greene posed the question of whether or not visual imagery influences some moral judgements over others. To test their hypothesis, Amit and Greene (2012) broke the main question down into two parts and tested them over the course of three experiments. The first hypothesis stated that visual imagery influenced deontological judgements, and the second state that verbal cognitive processes influenced utilitarian judgements.

On May 28, 2016, tragedy struck, when a three-year-old boy fell into a gorilla cage inhabited by a 440-pound male silverback, named Harambe. Inside the Cincinnati Zoo, chaos ensued, as the mother of the child panicked, horrified by the gorilla dragging her son by the arm and leg across the enclosure. Harambe had climbed down to investigate the child who was stuck in the corner of the moat, simply wishing to inquire about what was occurring. In the end, Harambe was tragically killed, as the zookeepers did not wish to chance a child’s life. While it was a tough and appalling decision, we as a society can now conclude that it was the correct one, as a human beings’ life should be saved at any expense.

When an individual is proposed with a moral dilemma they will often seek the advice of others rather than acting solely upon their immediate cultural, familial, and cognitive predispositions; suggesting that judgments are also made about the moral judgments of others (Rest, Cooper, Coder, Masanz & Anderson, 1974).

Typically little children tend to behave this way but some adults use this type of moral thinking in their daily lives. Using this type of behavior is usually due to situations where the situation may be wrong but the action was provoked by the person 's definition of fair or the right thing to do no matter what. The question that may be asked while thinking in this manner may be, “What must I do to avoid pain, gain pleasure?”(“Kohlberg 's Stages of Moral Development”). In this stage, making a decision that leads to a positive outcome clearly shows increase in the hierarchy of moral development that can be seen in level 3!

The theory of moral development, advanced by psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg is one of the most well-known persuasive theories in the field of cognitive science and stems from the work of Jean Piaget, which hypothesizes on the direct correlation that exists between moral and cognitive development. Kohlberg speaks of the appearance and understanding of what is right and wrong from childhood to adulthood and explains by this transition through the identification of various levels of morality known as pre-conventional, conventional and post conventional. People will make decisions based on the understanding of the possible outcome and through reasoning of morals. (Target Concept)

Morality is an important component of a human being because it helps shape the ethical foundation that every human being has. Whether to be good, evil, honest, or deceitful are just some of the traits morality helps us develop. Thus, it is evident that morality is a crucial component of a human being. However, what ultimately drives moral action? This question is debated and investigated against many philosophers, a few of them being Thomas Hobbes, Frans de Waal, and David Hume.