Collapse . 1) Is conscience a cultural relative or universalistic phenomenon? What are the neuro-biological and psychological theories about conscious action, including conscious moral action? Be sure that you understand the difference between conscious and conscience. Conscience is a universal phenomenon because it is “the essence of the moral life” (Boss, p. 74). This is to say that all individuals have a conscience, but it is how they use it that sets them apart. Boss describes conscience as it “provides us with knowledge about what is right and wrong. However, it is more than just a passive source of knowledge. Conscience involves reason and critical thinking; it also involves feelings” (p. 74). Conscience is made up of the conscious and unconscious thought process and can be driven by external voices, such as a strong affinity towards God whereby their moral actions come from religious beliefs. 2) Describe some of the hereditary or biological factors in the development of conscience, including Freud’s superego, Aristotle’s habituation, and determinism in your answer. Altruistic behavior “predisposes us to care for and help others” (Boss, p. 76) and is seen early on in life. When other …show more content…
Additionally, he lacked broad research of women in his study. He was quick to form a basis on men’s moral development and to discredit women’s moral development. Gillian “decided it was time to correct this” (Boss, p. 95), so she conducted several interviews with women. It was found that women and men differed in moral development. “Men tend to by duty and principle oriented; women are more context oriented and tend to view the world in a more emotional and personal way” (Boss, p. 95). As a result, Gillian developed a stages of moral reasoning for women that complimented Kohlberg’s three stages of moral
Friedrich Nietzsche is recognized for being one of the most influential German philosophers of the modern era. He is known for his works on genealogy of morality, which is a way to study values and concepts. In Genealogy of Morals, Friedrich Nietzsche mentions that values and concepts have a history because of the many different meanings that come with it. Nietzsche focused on traditional ethical theories, especially those rooted in religion. Not being a religious man, he believed that human life has no moral purpose except for the significance that human beings give it. People from different backgrounds and circumstances in history bend morality's meaning, making it cater to the norms of their society. For example, the concept of what is "good" in the ancient Greek culture meant aristocratic, noble, powerful, wealthy, pure, but not in modern era. Meaning, in the past the term “good” was not applied to a kind of act that someone did but rather applied to the kind of person and background they had. Nietzsche’s project was to help expand one’s understanding by re-examining morality through genealogy of morality; helping one to be more aware of a potential confusion in moral thinking. He feels that the current values and concepts that have been instilled into a society are a reversal of the truth, forcing him to believe that one’s moral systems had to have been created within society. In the works of genealogy of morality, Nietzsche traces out the origins of the concepts of guilt and bad conscience, which will be the main focal point, and explaining its role in Nietzsche’s project against morality. It will be argued that guilt and bad conscience goes against Nietzsche’s role against morality because it can conflict with the moral co...
Experiments like the Asch Experiment and the Milgram Experiment provides evidence that individual’s conscience really did not have a part in how one behaved in a scenario. These experiments provided evidence that the behavior is situational, and one must have contextual details to understand these findings. Personal conscience did not have effect on behavior, but situational variables
Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46). Throughout the work, Nietzsche uses decidedly negative terms to describe “bad conscience,” calling it ugly (59), a sickness (60), or an illness (56); leading some to assume that he views “bad conscience” as a bad thing. However, Nietzsche hints at a different view when calling bad conscience a “sickness rather like pregnancy” (60). This analogy equates the pain and suffering of a pregnant woman to the suffering of man when his instincts are repressed. Therefore, just as the pain of pregnancy gives birth to something joyful, Nietzsche’s analogy implies that the negative state of bad conscience may also “give birth” to something positive. Nietzsche hopes for the birth of the “sovereign individual” – a man who is autonomous, not indebted to the morality of custom, and who has regained his free will. An examination of Nietzsche’s theory on the evolution of man’s bad conscience will reveal: even though bad conscience has caused man to turn against himself and has resulted in the stagnation of his will, Ni...
In order to recognize moral issues, one should be aware that his/her actions may harm or benefit other individuals. Moral judgment involves evaluating and formulating all the possible solutions to a particular moral issue to determine the ones which have a moral justification (Drumwright et al 440). It involves reasoning around all possible solutions to know the ones that are ethically sound. The third component, moral intention refers to the motivation a particular moral decision over another. When faced with two solutions to a particular dilemma, one may select the one that will increase his individual power or the one which is morally right (Kalshoven et al
The definition of a human conscience is the ability to choose the difference between right
People perpetrate seemingly selfless acts almost daily. You see it all over the news; the man who saved that woman from a burning building, the mother who sacrificed herself to protect her children from the bomb blast. But how benevolent are these actions? Are these so-called “heroes” really sacrificing themselves to help others? Until recently, it was the common belief that altruism, or selfless and unconditional kindness, was limited primarily to the human race. However, within the last century, the works of several scientists, most prominently George Price, have provided substantial evidence concluding that altruism is nothing more than a survival technique, one that can be calculated with a simple equation.
Kohlberg’s theory of the stages of moral development has gained some popularity despite being controversial. The claim that the levels form a “ladder,” the bottom being the immature child with a pre-conventional level and the top being a post conventional ethical individual. The sequence is unvarying and the subject must begin at the bottom with aspirations to reach the top, possibly doing so. (7) Research confirms that individuals from different cultures actually progress according to Kohlbergs theory, at least to the conventional level. Kohlberg’s stages of moral development continue to provide a foundation for psychology studies of moral reasoning. (6)
In this paper I will defend David Hume’s Moral Sense Theory, which states that like sight and hearing, morals are a perceptive sense derived from our emotional responses. Since morals are derived from our emotional responses rather than reason, morals are not objective. Moreover, the emotional basis of morality is empirically proven in recent studies in psychology, areas in the brain associated with emotion are the most active while making a moral judgment. My argument will be in two parts, first that morals are response-dependent, meaning that while reason is still a contributing factor to our moral judgments, they are produced primarily by our emotional responses, and finally that each individual has a moral sense.
Carol Gilligan is one of the first to address gender differences in psychology. She argued that the sexes think differently, notably when dealing with moral problems.Her most popular addition to modern psychology was her rework of Lawrence Kohlberg 's theory of moral development. Gilligan challenged that differences were based on social influences and gender attitude, this often disesteemed women 's way of thinking. With her theories of female moral development and decision-making, she focused on studies in both children and college students. While there has been criticism of her works, Carol Gilligan has changed the modern psychology with her feminist views. She has paved the women in the field and the research of psychology
Rushton, J. Philippe. “Is Altruism Innate?” Psychological Inquiry 2.2 (1991): 141-143. Web. 5 Feb. 2012.
The second essay, "'Guilt,' 'Bad Conscience,' and the like" deals with guilt, bad conscience. Bad conscience came about with the transition from hunter-gatherer societies to permanent settlements. In settling down from the old nomadic ways of life a form of judicial system or laws rose up to enslave the animalistic natural tendencies of early man. Prehistoric people were more free spirited, less mediocre, they lacked depth. They allowed themselves to be governed by their instincts, and their will to power was turned outward toward conquest and survival. They had no interest in themselves and made no effort to control or understand their being.
In contrast, humanistic conscience "is the voice in every human being and (is) independent from external sanctions and rewards." The concept of humanistic conscience assumes all men have a grasp of morality. The distinction between authoritarian and humanistic consciences is based on motivation. If a person obeys a conscience out of fear of hell, or the reward of heaven, they are obeying an authoritarian conscience. However, if a person acts, or does not act, because they know in their heart the action (or inaction) is moral, they are following a humanistic conscience. (2-3)
Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: the nature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
For years, the matter of morality has been a widespread topic of discussion, debating whether it is a product of our chemical composition or our free will. Before I get started, I will provide you with what I believe morality exactly is. Ethics is a “code of conduct,” much like a University’s student handbook, but applied to the expected morality of a larger group or society. Morals are how individuals choose to interpret and follow such code. Just as a student may not always act in complete obedience with the student handbook, humans also deviate from their ethical codes of conduct. Therefore, morals are the set of a person’s specific values and opinions formed by their interpretation of their society’s code of ethics. With this version of the meaning of morality, I believe that individual free-will and the neurological hardwiring in which we are born with both significantly influence the development of our mature human morality due to a variety of factors including: human brain development, differences in our upbringing and education, which give rise to disparities in matters such as what is considered right or wrong, decision-making processes, and our ultimate behavioral choices, and lastly, because morality cannot exist if based solely on human nature, it must also involve our own self-determination. My position that morality is not the product of one side of the debate or the other, but rather arises through the integration of both components, allows for a complete demonstration of morality in its entirety. In this system, the ambiguities present in the one-sided arguments are removed, making it easy to link any individual’s action to their personal moral accountability.
Conscience is defined as “the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, intentions, or character together with a feeling of obligation to do right or be good”(Conscience). The issue I will be writing about is the following: Should our conscience determine what actions are morally right and morally wrong? I believe that our conscious should not be what measures right or wrong.