Where do morals come from? Recent study shows infants as young as 6 months choose between 'right and wrong'?

Question

I use this article as an exhibit for the question "Do humans have morals in the absence of religion?"

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/dt.cms.support.viewStory.cls?cid=25830&sid=6&fid=2

Armenian - I just asked a question, that being 'Where do morals come from?' - You provided on possible answer - thanks.

Nightwind - do you prefer being bound in semantics, or searching for truth? Your chains are of your own making, as language is a blunt tool at best. One last question for you - "Where do morals come from?" and please, don't use semantics to distract me from your refusal to answer.

Sarcastibitch - semantics is the study of meaning in language. I think that most people would assert that naughty is akin to wrong, and nice is akin to right. The meaning of the question is "where do morals come from?" - Do you have an opinion, or is your sarcasm a cover for stupidity?

Answer 1

I'm amazed at some of the things my kids do and understand without ever having been "programmed". I'd have to say that they had a basic grasp of right/wrong, is/ought, naughty/nice, should/shouldn't - I don't care what you call it - at around 6 to 8 months. I think at that age that basic sense is more associated with things they know are going to get parental approval or disapproval than with what we would call "morals". But as they start to understand themselves as separate individuals from their parents, they start to engage in willful acts of right and wrong - because they're acting as independent children - more of what we would define as "morality". So I think the basic sense is ingrained; it's a genetic fact of life. But the extent to which it manifests as either a sense of approval from a higher authority, or as an expression of conscience, depends on the extent to which the person views themself as an individual.

And of course religion has nothing inherently to do with morals. It can be a conditioning force either way - for good or bad.

Peace to you.

Answer 2

It is amusing to note...that you consider wikipedia as an authority on Hindu religious matters. Do you know that even apes like me can edit a wiki page and make you believe in monkey business ??? Coming to the question...What Prr says is right and what you say is also right. In one of the puranas i remember reading this about Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashyapa. But dont remember which one or where..But i am sure it was not a Dharma Shastra texts ..but a purana. Traditionally some families consider the second born of the twins to be elder. Shoumn has given an explanation in that question. It has happened in case of one of our cousins. But not all families follow this practices. Some traditionally orthodox ones do it. Otherwise as a general acceptance, the ones who come out first is elder. As i read the answers in the link again...i find that you have also given a similar answer as Shoumn. So now things are very clear !!! This question is an outcome of jealousy. You are upset that you didnt get the best answer inspite of quoting from an 'authority' (wikipedia).... LOLOL.

Answer 3

I like your question but Nightwind is right. The source you site isn't about morals- it is about response to stimuli. And you may want to look up the definition of semantics while you search for a relevant source.

Answer 4

If we define moral as society-acceptable behavior, then infants and even animals certainly can be trained to be moral. My moral dog brings me the newspaper, for example.

But I think we define moral as doing the right thing for the right reason. Training depends on hope of rewards and fear of punishments and we generally reject rewards and fear as acceptable motivations for morality. By the time we're adults, our training results in feelings (i.e. conscience); good feelings when our behavior is acceptable and bad feelings when it is not. Therefore our feelings serve as rewards and punishments.

Feelings are a very poor foundation for morality because feelings aren't based on reality. Our feelings change in accordance with everyday circumstances.

Morality really depends upon a moral authority higher than ourselves, a moral authority to whom we have an obligation to honor. That can only be God.

Answer 5

Read the article you quote! First line: "Even infants can tell the difference between naughty and nice playmates, and know which to choose, a new study finds."

Naughty and nice does not equate to right and wrong. The children could figure out that hanging out with the naughty toys could get them hurt, while a nice toy would be supportive. This is about judgment skills, not morality.

Answer 6

Given that a good deal of our social behavior or at least the basis for it is strongly genetic, I would say that this is yet another good piece of evdence that morality is not exclusively religion based.

On the other hand, there is no reason to believe that morality has anything to do with religion.

Answer 7

God's moral standards are the basis on man's attempts at morality.

Even a 6 year old knows what a lie is, and chooses to be honest or lie based on their own view of ethics, including what God has imparted, by His Spirit, even through others, including the written Scriptures.

One definition of morals seems apropo to your question ...
"Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior: a moral lesson."

That describes the bible to me. The teaching may be done directly by the Spirit of God, on a personal level, AND/OR through the Bible written for all to read and study, inspired by God's Spirit through many men of God!

If a child reasons right or wrong it is possibly taught by God directly to their hearts, or through humans, including teachers, parents, the church, the bible, and other influences, including peers.

Answer 8

Morals have nothing to do with religion. They are part of human nature. Other species have them as well. Not the same as ours of course but a moral code never the less

Answer 9

Oh yes, I've always thought so. I really believe that we're all born with the desire to either do what is right or what is wrong. I think more of us are born wanting to do what is right, but I think it's there. I also think it might have to do with empathy. You know how you would feel if something was done to you ,so you don't do it to another person.

Answer 10

The propensity toward "moral" behavior is ingrained in humans because they are social animals, and their groups will not function if the members don't exhibit restraint and kindness in their relationships with others.