Moral Mind

When something or action stimulates an emotional trigger in the brain this cause ones moral response to initiate, when having to think of other’s feeling or well being. For example, the reading used the soldiers during WWII, it described how about 20% of the soldiers actually shot at the enemy because they could not reason killing someone. there moral reasoning distinguished right from wrong, to kill someone is considered, in our society to be wrong (generally.

What I found to be interesting after this soldiers statistic was published the army felt the need to, lets say, re wire the moral reactions of future soldier to increase the amount for soldiers firing there guns. Soldiers were taught to shoot from long ranges or high altitude to disassociate the action of shooting bullets that would potentially kill with the person the could potentially die, “Army managed to turn personal moral situations into a impersonal reflex” (180) In addition to meddling to the soldiers metal moral processing the Military also have made religious soldier go against there beliefs as well. The reading reminded us of the 10 commandments one in particular says a person should not kill. This to me raises a question, where is the military’s morality? What gives them the right to meddle with the minds of our soldiers? I have respect for those out fighting, or have fought, I pass no judgment on them, but I do question if they really know why they are there and if they really agree with the reasons?

In relation to my service learning, there is nothing to the extreme moral reasoning of if we are going to kill any one, but we do have to make decisions that will affect others besides our selves. Moral judgment is to take under consideration others. For our service learning we evaluate a homeless or possible homeless persons situation and that make a decision on whether to help them or not, or how much to help them with. In some cases emotion definitely in triggered, I have found myself making decisions on first impulse or thought a certain way base on my emotional reaction. “And like the reading said feelings come first and the reasons come on the fly” (first half of Moral Mind) after my emotional reaction, I talk with my community partner and reasoning start kicking in.

What is and what should never be

Acting morally is just natural for most people. Although morality and judgment go hand in hand with legality, that doesn’t mean breaking a law is morally wrong. With that said there are some laws which morality steps in like murder. “When you act in a moral manner-when you recoil from violence, treat others fairly, and help strangers in need- you are making decisions that take people besides yourself into account. You are thinking about feelings of others, sympathizing with their states of mind. This is what psychopaths can’t do.” (The Moral Mind, pg 169) What happens though if killing one person would save many lives? For example, what if someone decided to assassinate Hitler and did? Wouldn’t that have been morally right or at least not morally wrong? Let’s turn the tables around for a moment and talk about our military. We go to other countries, fight for our country, and kill many people, yet this action is patriotic, American, and viewed as morally right. What makes these murders right and why? I don’t think killing of any kind is morally right, but this reading has left me with more questions than answers. It talked about psychopaths and their lack of emotional brain and how it prevents them from feeling any empathy or regret, but than what is the excuse for soldiers of any military? Also, the story about the siblings having sex was very shocking because it’s true. Why is it immoral? I know I think it’s immoral, but then when I think of why, I have no logical explanation, other than that it is wrong. It seems people’s biological factors as well as their environment, play a part in moral and ethics in a person’s life.

What is Right and What is Wrong?

Reading “The Moral Mind” brings up the issue of what is right and what is wrong and why people do the things they do. Some people follow all of “Societies’’ rules while other thrive on breaking them. “Societies” is in quotes, because there are different societies around the world, and what is wrong some place may be acceptable in another. I feel that this can be connected to my service learning, because at County Community you can see kids who have mad bad mistakes and broke societies rules and therefore are in a different school from most their peers and have a target on their back that says I have done something wrong, so watch out for me. This brings up the big questions of why do these kids make, “ Poor…sometimes dangerous…moral choices.” This is a question anyone can answer, but it is also a question where we may never know the answer. I believe that it has to do with the family and background the kids are raised in, but their also has to be more than that, because some kids with tough backgrounds turn out great, and others with good family backgrounds have a tough time at that age. The kids at County Community have a tough road to battle ahead of them to get the “target” off their back, but many of the kids I’m working with are trying and succeeding at that. Others are having a tougher time and again the question of why don’t they just do their work comes up and the answer is still left blank.

The Moral Brain

Depending on the type of brain professional you ask, they will often give you different answers on just how the brain works. A psychologist might say that a person's past experiences that shape their brain in terms of retention, feelings and morality. A neurophysiologist will sternly disagree to this sentiment and state that it is the limbic system of a human brain that makes them tick--specifically the amygdala, where the fight-or-flight mechanism is regulated. Ask a humanist and they'll tell you that that morality is something inherent, and what all human beings are born with. So with all these definitions of what makes us moral, which one do we believe?

These articles give us a good insight on just how complicated the issue of morality is. It forces us to question what we consider moral and what other people considered moral. I am especially struck in the article entitled "The Moral Mind" where psychologists constructed several scenarios and asked subjects their opinions on it, or how they feel towards it. The train scenario is one of the situations that certainly got my attention. As a rather indecisive character, I personally would not know what to do when put in this situation. But it also got me thinking as to why one situation is more moral than the other? Does the number of human lives truly matter? In my mind, I pictured the experiment in a different light: what if it was someone's mother or father that was the one person who was about to get run over rather than an unsuspecting stranger? Would it be more moral to spare the lives of 5 people we don't know rather than our own parents? Though we are hardly put in these situations, it is a good way to re-define our idea of morality.

The thought of considering other people's ideas as a part of morality also lingers in my mind. It is true what the article wrote that what's moral is usually defined by what the society we live in. For example, in some countries in Asia it is morally and socially acceptable for couples to have an arranged marriage with a person they barely know. Though it seems blasphemous and unnerving to us to spend the rest of our lives with a person we would have met not more than 2 months before a marriage, this was the case no more than 30 years before our time. To an Asian family a few years ago, this brought great pride, joy, and honor to a son or daughter's parents. In modern times, this type of marriage is no longer acceptable.

Overall, the issue of morality has been brought up, argued, and will continued to be a hot-topic issue in a humane society. But on the same wavelength of morality, we have to consider what is good and evil. Would there necessarily be good without evil?

Moral Points of View and Justifications

I have always been interested in how and why people think the way they do. Some of the time, it's obvious why someone does something; however, the vast majority of the time it seems as though there are underlying reasons, some of which can't be explained. Morality is a very strange concept because, as Lehrer says, "moral decisions are supposed to rest on a firm logical and legal foundation" (171), but the funny thing is that in reality they don't. Morality is based on countless things that can happen in any person's life. Based on the way people have grown up, on their religious views, on their current environments, on random events or any number of experiences that may have changed someones point of view, morality differs for everyone.There are multiple points of view found in every situation. In one person's eyes he is the hero, in another's eyes he is the enemy. Who is he in his own eyes? Lehrer states, "the decisions lead to the same outcome, yet one is moral and one is murder" (177). How can there be such a great discrepancy? If there was a logical foundation for morality, then right and wrong would be black and white. But people are way too complex to have simple morals. In certain situations one thing is acceptable; in another scene the same act can be disrespectful or immoral.

One thing that most people have become very good at, is justifying their actions. Whether they are trying to convince a friend, themselves, or some unseen deity, people attempt to tie meaning and purpose to what they do, even if they know it is wrong. If someone wants to do something, most of the time it is not difficult to come up with a reason, or an excuse, as to why it's alright. As Lehrer puts it, "So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable creature, since it enables one to find or make a reason for everything one has a mind to do" (173). Is it wrong, even if you have a really good reason? People have the abilities to manipulate and change almost everything around them, since morality is already such a flexible subject, it's not a surprise that it is stretched and twisted to meet people's needs.

Empathy in Human Nature

One thing that sets makes humans unique compared to all other creatures is empathy. Empathy is the ability to sympathize with someone, or feel their pain. John Lehrer explores this fascinating emotion and what humans do with it. However, he first explores a human without any empathy with infamous serial killer John Wayne Gacy. Gacy was convicted of 33 murders of teenage boys. When Gacy was analyzed by a psychologist it was discovered that he had no empathy and things that would normally cause emotional distress in one person had little to no effect on him. Thus bringing in the question of if he knew the difference between right, and wrong. Whenever Gacy committed murder he felt no remorse, unlike a normal person who would feel a lot of remorse. These types of psychopathic tendacies connect to the nature of morality which is sometimes hard to define within your own moral code, but simply it is a crucial set of decesion making. The importance of morality is taking other people into account, and how your decesions will affect them, "selfishness needs to be balanced by some selflessness."(Lehrer 175). This is where empathy, and morality both come into play to make good decesions that will affect other people you must have empathy to understand their posistion, and to make the best decesion. This concept relates to my service learning a lot because to truly make a difference with these students you must be empathetic and understanding as to not judge them to quickly. Instead of seeing these students as behaviorally challenged teens it is important to see where there coming from, as to understand the personal battles that they go through everyday.

Reflection on What to Decide

In the chapters from How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer, there was a part that I found really interesting to think about was the story of John Wayne Gary. It was fascinating to me to think that he was not “thinking about the feelings of others, sympathizing with their states of mind” (page 169) when he murdered “thirty-three boys” (page168) at his house. It is mind blowing to think that someone could be “killing without the slightest sense of unease” (page 169). There must be something wrong with the person’s brain to make them feel no emotion while they murder people. In my opinion, psychopaths are scary, monstrous, unmerciful and evil in every way. I really never understood why someone could act this way and am very curious of how they become these people. I wonder if these people were born psychopaths or didthey chose to be psychopaths. Also, I am curious about what makes these people “make poor---sometimes dangerous---moral choices,” (page 168)? A normal person would show emotion and empathy in making moral choices toward other people but I guess psychopaths are incapable of doing these things. They only think about themselves but I am wondering if they are aware of what they are doing to other people and why they act the way they do. I am guessing that on some level they do as regards to what they want out of what they are doing like paying someone for sexual satisfaction like John Wayne Gary did. But they don’t seem to learn from their evil deeds and feel nothing toward the people they kill. I don’t know but all I know is that these people are dangerous and need serious help. We just don’t know if people are normal people all the way around or if they just act normal on the outside to cover up the evil person they are inside. You really don’t know a person until you get closer to them on a personal level. But if that person is a psychopath it might be too late to save your life if they perceive you as threat to revealing who they really are. So it is best to be careful and watch your back if things get dangerous with people like this. Anything can happen when you least expect it especially with a psychopath who could strike at you at anytime.