Philosophical thread of the day: Is morality inherent to our human nature?

[Turanil]

I did read this in another thread:

You should hear the rationalizations that real thieves use to defend their activities and define them as anything but theft.

Frankly, I often notice how much dishonnest people strive to find justifications for their wrongdoings, and this puzzles me. Does this mean that deep inside themselves they know that they do wrong, and must find some rationalization to justify their wrongdoings, so be able to sleep peacefully with their consciousness?

Of course I have no idea what is the percentage of "evildoers" that try to justify their wrongdoings with some rationale of their own. However, it seems to me that it is an important majority. For example, thrice in my life I have been victim of aggression in the street. What's interesting, is that each time the perpetrators felt the need to come up with an absurd excuse that they told me to explain me that they were totally justified to attack me (in none of these case it was to steal money, always to have some kind of fun it seems). In fact, the third time I recognized the pattern and stroke the guy before he finished his idiotic tale (then ran away ).

Most of the time, robbers, crooks, and unfair economic competitors will claim that this is the so-called "Life's Jungle's Law" and what they do is only natural, or they are avenging some wrong they suffered, or whatever. Now despite I don't know any criminal, it seems to me that all of them try to find a justification. For example, the "Cosa Nostra", what's this if not a justification on purely criminal doings? Well, I lack example at this time, but I am sure many of you have some to recount here. So what do you think? Are there some people who steal from someone in the street as naturally as I get a coconut on the desert island's tree?

 

[Zander]

Volumes of criminological studies have shown that so-called "blue collar" criminals have disproportionately below average levels of intelligence. These criminals often feel, when challenged, that they need to justify what they did. They rarely feel genuine contrition. High levels of recidivism belie the fact that they don't feel truly remorseful.

 

[fusangite]

It sounds like you're asking not if morality is inherent in humans but whether it is universal in humans. If this is the case, I'll have to change my carefully reasoned "yes" to an emphatic "no." For God's sake, having frontal lobes or even a spinal cord isn't universal.

 

[TheGogmagog]

Volumes of criminological studies have shown that so-called "blue collar" criminals have disproportionately below average levels of intelligence. These criminals often feel, when challenged, that they need to justify what they did. They rarely feel genuine contrition. High levels of recidivism belie the fact that they don't feel truly remorseful.

I was going to speculate from my experience. The 'criminals' that I know have little sense of empathy for the victims. There are justifications for this reduced empathy, starting from shoplifting from a huge store when you wouldn't consder stealing from a small shopower, because they can 'write off the loss'. Then it progresses to this small showpowner has wronged me, shouldnt have been there or whatever.

I think they do have the sense that what they are doing is wrong. By reducing the victim to something you have no empathy for, a company or someone who has wronged you by being who they are, they allow to relieve themselves of the remorse that they would have fealt.

 

[Ukyo the undead]

I think they do have the sense that what they are doing is wrong. By reducing the victim to something you have no empathy for, a company or someone who has wronged you by being who they are, they allow to relieve themselves of the remorse that they would have fealt.

That´s the mecanism for every kind of premeditated violence. From your example to the support to death penalty.

Reduce a person into a object(non-person).

Or better, not defend values, but persons (ourselves, our family, our friends, our equals). "I dont defend propertie as a value, I defend my propertie"; "I dont defend life, health, freedom as values, unless it is the life, health, freedom of myself, my loved ones or the ones I consider equals".

It´s incredibly hard to defend values, because it´s only possible when you are capable of seeing the bigger picture, with is pretty complicated when you are worried about your own security, confort, life.

 

[Psionicist]

I did read this in another thread:
Frankly, I often notice how much dishonnest people strive to find justifications for their wrongdoings, and this puzzles me. Does this mean that deep inside themselves they know that they do wrong, and must find some rationalization to justify their wrongdoings, so be able to sleep peacefully with their consciousness?

Dishonest according to...? There's a difference between doing something you think is right and many others think is right, doing something you think is right but many others think is wrong, and doing something you yourself think is wrong and many other think is wrong too. Only in the latter can I see how someone tries to justify doing [whatever] in the first place, despite personal moral code. If I do something I think is right and you think is wrong, any kind of justification you think I made up is, well, something you made up yourself.

For example, let's say I kill a mosquito because it tried to suck my blood. I don't have to justify killing it, because I don't think it's wrong if I do that. A friend of mine however think it's wrong to harm anything living, even if it attacked you first. Not knowing if I think this action is right or wrong, he will perhaps try to justify my action from my poing of view. If he ask me why I killed the mosquito, I will just respond "reflexes" or something like that. From his point of view, I'm trying to justify my action.

My point is, the justifications you speak of could be honest.

 

[Bloodstone Press]

My point is, the justifications you speak of could be honest.

No.
When psychologists use the term "justification" they mean it as a method for the person in question to reduce cognitive dissonance that occurs when they consider their actions that conflict with their self-concept.

When you are killing the mosquito you do not experience cognitive dissonance, since you don’t have any ideas that it would be wrong to kill the mosquito.

So no, you are not "justifying".

See my post in the other thread, where I separated out justification from a criminal self-concept. If you perceive yourself as a criminal, you have no need to justify your actions, because you don't experience cognitive dissonance when you commit a crime. Conversely, you experience cognitive dissonance when you obey the law, because that behavior conflicts with your self-concept. So you would have to justify your law-abiding behavior, instead.

Similarly, if your friend were to kill a mosquito, in direct conflict with his current beliefs and self-concept, he would experience a high level of cognitive dissonance and need to either justify his actions, equivocate, or change his self-concept.

You have no preconceived notions that your killing is wrong, so you're not justifying.

Besides that, I agree with most everything else people have said so far in this thread.

 

[Bloodstone Press]

Philosophical thread of the day: Is morality inherent to our human nature?

Most psychologists believe that humans, being social creatures, are hard wired for pro-social behavior. Indeed, it is this hard wiring that leads to a lot of other psychological factors, especially factors of interpersonal influence.

When people diverge from pro-social behaviors it is because some sort of aberration has occurred.

Personally, I'm not so sure about it, I'm just telling what I've read.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I did read this in another thread:
Frankly, I often notice how much dishonnest people strive to find justifications for their wrongdoings, and this puzzles me. Does this mean that deep inside themselves they know that they do wrong, and must find some rationalization to justify their wrongdoings, so be able to sleep peacefully with their consciousness?

I don't think the human mind is designed to perceive itself as evil. Very few people seem capable of operating smoothly while doing something that they consider to be wrong-- though a lot of people can justify wrongdoing simply by saying it's what they need to do to survive.

Most people, though, prefer to justify it entirely, by forming a justification for how their activities are simply not wrong in the first place. Noone is exempt from this, including myself-- the rational, level-headed arguments I use to defend some of my own positions and actions could just as easily be labelled "rationalizations" and "justifications" as the Robin Hood nonsense you get from street-corner muggers and Sovereign Citizens.

This doesn't mean I'm wrong; almost everyone needs to have moral justification for what they believe in, especially when it comes under fire. It also doesn't mean I believe in subjective (or relative) morality-- it just means that I understand that other people have different views on morality, and that they can disagree with some of those views without being bad people.

In fact, the third time I recognized the pattern and stroke the guy before he finished his idiotic tale (then ran away ).

Good man.

Good thing you learned to recognize it, too-- especially if you can recognize it before you're in trouble.

Most of the time, robbers, crooks, and unfair economic competitors will claim that this is the so-called "Life's Jungle's Law" and what they do is only natural, or they are avenging some wrong they suffered, or whatever.

This could lead me to an entirely different discussion-- since I think everything boils down to the Law of the Jungle, in the end. Even the rule of law and the boundaries established by good decent people, because their laws must be enforced before they have any weight.

Sure, I believe in higher notions of right & wrong-- but until I've got the power to do what is right and to punish those who do what is wrong, my morality is an empty, pointless and valueless thing.

edit: Forgot about the profanity filter. Sorry, Granny!

 

[Umbran]

No.
When psychologists use the term "justification" they mean it as a method for the person in question to reduce cognitive dissonance that occurs when they consider their actions that conflict with their self-concept.

Well, there's the justification you give yourself, and the justification you give someone else. They need not be the same. Some folks may not feel the need to justify actions to themselves, but recognize the need to make others feel the act was less reprehensible by giving a good story.

If someone on the street is talking to Turanil before roughing him up, I doubt that person is trying to give his own real justification for the event. That sounds a lot more like "playing with your victim" than trying for real justification.