Are humans capable of distinguishing the difference between what's moral and immoral without being told?

Answer 1

Yes.

Humans are born with the knowledge of good and evil.

Answer 2

Feral is a term referring to a creature that has not been 'domesticated' and has returned to a 'wild' state. It's easy to imagine a feral dog or cat, but there have also been a number of examples of feral HUMANS. Sometimes these were children abandoned, lost, or who ran away into the wild. Sometimes these are the result of abuse (one recent example was a young lady who was essentially locked in a closet for more than a decade). These victims of circumstance tend to show some very similar characteristics.

One which bears on the point you bring up is a kind of learning. Past a certain age, pretty much all feral children seem to completely lose the ability to learn certain things, which include language and social customs. Those that have been rescued have to be looked after for their entire lives... some even flee back to the wilds which are more understandable to them.

These people have never been told what is moral and what is immoral and their behaviour makes it obvious that their conception of such things is so primitive as to be practically nonexistant. They behave no more morally than any animal. And worst of all, they not only don't see such differences, they seem largely incapable of even learning what they are. They are just too alien.

What this suggests for the rest of us is a matter of debate. Certainly we can say that if feral children once did instinctively know moral from immoral, they have lost that ability. And a simpler explanation still would be to suggest that there was no (or not much) of an inherent moral sense to lose or corrupt.

So it goes.

Answer 3

This is a very interesting question. A few months ago, I was looking at a PBS interview with Salman Rushdie, and he said something really startling. He said, "Morality precedes Religion." In essence, he is saying that humans conceive what is "right" and "wrong" prior to the emergence of any codified system ( of morality/ immorality) be that system civil, religious, or otherwise. I believe this. I also believe that following the ideas of "right" and "wrong" cultures are then shaped by these conceptions of morality and immorality. Consider the gods of the ancient Greeks and, later on, the Romans. These gods seem to reflect human frailties; they seek revenge; they are jealous, lustful, etc. They are very different from the god(s) of the major world religions, among others. It is not illogical to then assumes that questions of morality and immorality are initially decided by human beings, that culture then perpetuates these decisions, and later generations inherit concepts of what's "moral" and "immoral". They may even, revise such conceptions in a bid to render them more relevant to their time and their generation. Ultimately, everything is in flux, but man deigns to distinguish between what is moral and immoral; man then superimposes these on the major systems of his civilization, be these religious, civil, cultural, or philosophical.

Answer 4

Well, if anyone could answer this question with certainty, we would put to rest a number of complex issues about morality and the nature of knowledge. However, to figure this out empirically, we would have to conduct research that would be considered inhumane. To be able to figure this out, we would have to isolate babies, permit them to grow up without being exposed to languages or any other type of influence until such an age when they could meaningfully interact with moral situations.

If they consistently chose the moral options, then we would know that there is such a thing as innate ideas and thus would we understand that something greater than us exists that puts these ideas in our minds. If the children expressed confusion or were inconsistent in their choosing, then we could conclude that there are no innate ideas and that morality is a learned convention.

This experiment cannot, however, take place. Isolating infants in such a way (no contact with others and no presence of language) has proven to be cataclysmic to their development. in the past. Any child subjected to this experiment would likely never be in a developmentally appropriate state to answer any questions about morality.

Answer 5

Morality and immorality are subjective terms, constructs of human societies. While most human societies have a huge commonality to these moral constructs - being as they are rooted in practices proven to nurture the species and build society - there is no evidence to suggest people are born with a set of universal moral values, or that such a set exists. Basic survival instincts will be given full reign without a "moral framework" provided by society because we subsume those individual instincts only when the society is:
a) Stronger - so we submit to its greater strength, and/or
b) A collective more effective in providing the sustenance we need.

In other words, an isolated, under-nurtured Tarzan would as easily attack Jane – possibly even eat her – if he felt in any way threatened or desperate for food. Even if he felt unthreatened he might still attack or rape her in order to dominate something he desired.

Had Tarzan been raised in any size of human collective and he would have assimilated that society’s rules designed (ever imperfectly) to organise, sustain and protect that collective, and so improve his individual survival within its bounty. Such rules are intended to foster co-operation and place the good of the collective above that of the individual (though are, of course, subject to distortion in the interests of a society within a society, or elite). Our individualistic, animalistic survival instincts remain, however, and this tension between common good of the collective and impulses of the individual is inherent in every society - and therefore every morality system.

Murder, for example, is outlawed in every society but, equally, every society sanctions forms of killing perceived to be in that society's interest - executions, wars, euthansia, etc. Even killing of children, while always seen as repugnant, can be permitted - abortion is legal in most mature democracies, possibly an anthropological signal that the expanding world population our sophisticated societies has fostered is in danger of being undermined by its own growth. One thing is for sure; if there are too many people competing for too little resources those baser instincts will roar back with a vengeance – and all those little babies will be born into a moral framework somewhat different from today's.

Answer 6

I believe there is an inherent morality that transcends social rules that we all recognise. The immoral/moral values that I believe are universal to all human beings are:
lying/honesty
stealing/giving
abuse/caring
betrayal/trust
denial/acceptance

Answer 7

I do not think so. Knowledge about morality is about culture and education.

Our standards about morality in Malaysia is definitely different from that in the west. I am not going to enter into a debate about which is right or wrong, but I hope you get my point.

Ask someone in the USA, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Malaysia about their standards of morality; I am sure you will have different answers.

Answer 8

I don't think I can really answer your question because what on person considers to be moral and immoral can differ totally from what another person thinks. For example; I think it is immoral for marijuana to be illegal because it grows naturally and the government is trying to ban something that was around way before us.

Answer 9

No. Absolutely not. "Moral" and "Immoral" are human terms, conceived and designed by humans, (more specifically, the church), and imposed on humans. if a human were to somehow grow up without any influence about right and wrong, then the idea would be totally foreign to them.

Answer 10

No. Morals need to be taught, as you can see at just about any time, there are several examples among the human population where they were not taught, and the poof sod didn't try to learn them on their own accord either.

Answer 11

I believe so. God gave us the capability to distinguish good from evil, and also the capability to resist temptations and choose the right things.