Is being moral a natural human phenomenon?

Question

I am writing a paper for our English and I'm arguing that our society is not immoral based on the fact that people have a natural sense of morality and that morality is directed and fine tuned through our sociological environment. I'm going crazy looking for an exact definition in any resources.... it's a gray topic. I'm trying to say that there are so many different types of morality that it's tough to say what is immoral and what is not, and that most people have some form or moral conscience. If anyone out there could help suggest ways I can ague my point, PLZ HELP!

Answer 1

Here is what is natural:
1) The ability to imagine oneself in the place of another.
2) Love of praise and acceptance.

The first makes possible the emotions of sympathy and empathy which means we have the potential to feel other peoples pain. The second gives society a way to control us.

Society trains us in acceptable behavior from our infancy using praise. Society also uses praise to train our emotions of sympathy and empathy.

The American experience with slavery has shown how society can develop sympathy for some people but not others.

By the time we're adults, all this society training/pressure comes through as feelings of what we call conscience.

But if feeling is all that conscience is, then we would soon rebel because our reason will tell us that we don't have any moral obligation to a feeling.

Christians hold that our ability to feel sympathy and empathy are from God. God is the moral authority behind the feelings. Using the Golden Rule to make moral decisions is not a feel-good option, it is an obligation. This core idea that there is a moral duty we owe to God versus just some good-feelings has been the moral foundation of western civilization.

All moral foundations based only upon feelings will eventually crumble. Europeans are especially fond of their traditions. Holding onto tradition makes them feel good. But how long can that can go on?

Answer 2

I agree that most people have good intentions in SOME ways but having good morals is very rare. I mean, you find lots of people who seem like great people but so many of them are fake. They act good to impress God and their parents because they're afraid to let people down and of going to hell. If they found out there is no such thing as God, half of them would probably do whatever they want. (which is why we have cops) -- Watch a couple detective shows on Court Tv (the real docs) -- You will see that it's not natural and that most people are immoral -- even if they hide it by going to church. Of course, if you're from a small town, you don't see what's really happening out here. And.... we wouldn't need so many cops driving the streets if being moral was a natural human phenomenon. It's a nice thought but it's so far from the truth.
Yeah, I'd go crazy too chasing a rainbow. You won't find too many people who agree with you.

Answer 3

If your looking for an interesting debate on morality, look into the book 'The Monk And The Philosopher' by Jean-Francois Revel and Mathieu Ricard. The whole book is a debate between a skeptical philosopher and a Buddhist monk who are father and son. I never finished the book but I remember them discussing a possible genetic link to morality that could help your arguement.

Good luck.

Answer 4

Can't help you, i believe morality is taught/learned. That will be a hard point to prove. You must be going by the thought that people are naturally good. Backing that up will be tough because it is an opinion. Good luck!

Answer 5

each and every physique could desire to have a reference factor for his or her ethical gadget. otherwise what's stable and what's evil is relative. notwithstanding, certainty isn't relative. 2+2=4 not 5. 2+2 by no skill equals 5, no remember what my opinion is. If murderers theory homicide became stable. How could all persons oppose that concept ? might all of it come all the way down to a favorite vote ? If we respected their ethical code as being authentic for them, then we could all finally end up contained in the arms of a growing to be inhabitants of murderers. clean lines could desire to be drawn in some unspecified time contained sooner or later. and features are continuously being drawn. final three hundred and sixty 5 days (2009) we placed 40,000 new rules into result contained in the united states of a while the hot three hundred and sixty 5 days rolled around. the worldwide loves making rules and curtailing human habit for despite motives. what's certainly ethical is printed in the inhabitants. each and every physique does be responsive to that homicide is faulty. that is written on guy's coronary heart. that is talked approximately as organic regulation. And that is an theory that is even contemplated contained in the announcement of Independence. those recommendations are actually not talked approximately in those present day days. yet each and every physique knows stealing is faulty, telling lies is faulty, etc. there is not any could desire to confuse the issue. the fundamental attitude to handling ethical issues in our society is compromise and pragmatism. that's a basic flaw in our present day training philosophy. particularly, our public training gadget is lacking plenty contained in the portion of epistemology. We lack a theory technique that a brilliant style of the ancients excelled in. that isn't any coincidence that philosophers spoke approximately geometry. the two issues are related. that is a factor of the concern in this placed up-medical revolution, placed up enlightenment, pragmatic, healing, age. no one can think of approximately certainty without resorting to empiricism. not each and every thing is resolved on a petri dish.