Are we born with a sense of morality?

[amirm]

It seems we are! Fascinating story in last Sunday's US 60 Minutes News program. Studies at the "baby lab" show that we are born with many social traits. And that as we live and grow, we learn to repress them. This even includes a sense of liking people who are more like us than not!

The program is not yet online. But two fragments are. Here is a snippet from the program itself:

And the behind the scenes/extras not shown in the program but in the same theme: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-57551552-10391709/is-your-child-fair-when-no-one-is-watching/

It is one of the most fascinating studies of human behavior I have seen. Super worthwhile to watch the original.

 

[GaryProtein]

I'm skeptical to say the least, and I admit to generally being a cynic.

The five month old and three month old babies don't know the "mean" puppet was actually preventing the anthrax infected toy from escaping the box which would have killed them.

Babies might know what they like, but don't know what they need.


Also, the "nice" puppet had slow smooth movements while the "mean" puppet moved in a rapid and jolting manner. We know babies like smooth motions.

Their demonstration does not prove anything about morality.

 

[rockitman]

I'm skeptical to say the least, and I admit to generally being a cynic.

.

+1..I felt the study was self-serving in the sense to justify funding for Baby Lab..with shaky evidence (based on sample size of their tests). The baby has a 50/50 chance to pick th desired outcome (2 choices).

 

[amirm]

Did you guys watch the linked video with older children?

 

[GaryProtein]

Yes I did, and some of the older children did what they thought was expected because morality had been previously taught to them. Morality breeds guilt.

I'm not saying morality is bad, but it is a set of learned, not innate actions. Morality actually goes against "survival of the fittest." Morality works for a civilized society, but does NOT work in the wild when you must fight to survive.

Regarding sharing, it is perfectly fine for a child to NOT share with others. All they have know is that others may not want to share with them if they do not reciprocate. Knowing that makes it easy for them to decide of they want to share. Some will, some won't.

Regarding the girl who BROKE THE CONFIDENCE with the second woman who told her not to tell she had an extra chocolate bar, I thought that was despicable. That girl could never be my friend. One does not break confidence or rat on ones friends. Keeping an expected confidence with someone is more important than "being fair." Besides, the child getting two chocolate bars would not have known the other child had three.

 

[Mosin]

I actually discussed this at some length with a Psychiatrist friend of mine. There is strong evidence that certain social traits are bred in by ancestral environments, or somehow otherwise instilled genetically. Studies were done on the Hatfields and McCoys, for example. Their strong sense of "clan" seemed to track all the way back to their European ancestry. I think there is something to it, but I don't believe anyone has a clear picture of it.

 

[amirm]

I actually discussed this at some length with a Psychiatrist friend of mine. There is strong evidence that certain social traits are bred in by ancestral environments, or somehow otherwise instilled genetically. Studies were done on the Hatfields and McCoys, for example. Their strong sense of "clan" seemed to track all the way back to their European ancestry. I think there is something to it, but I don't believe anyone has a clear picture of it.

That was also the theory put forward in the piece. For example, the reason the kids tended to like others like them was because of the ancient man trusting its clan more than others. In a startling demo, they managed to turn the kid votes 100% around by showing them that the "bad" character liked the same cereal as them. The babies now liked them because they had the same taste in food!

The actual program is much longer than the snippets above.

What I also liked about it is techniques developed to get to the data when at first it seems impossible. I kept thinking of how smart thinking could be applied to audio testing to extract what we may be hearing rather than what we say we are hearing. Perhaps we should start testing babies.

 

[Keith_W]

Amir, other research has shown that tribes of baboons identify more closely with members of their own tribe than others. Also, bonobo monkeys have a sense of fairness. There was a recent experiment where an experimenter gave a caged bonobo a slice of cucumber in exchange for a stone. When one bonobo was given a piece of fruit instead of a cucumber in full view of the other bonobo, the other monkey refused to accept his cucumber reward and threw a tantrum.

As is usual, what is found in a rudimentary form in animals are in a much higher state of development in humans. Even stone age tribes have rules that govern what is "right" and what is "wrong", even if they judge things that we consider evil (like human sacrifice, incest, rape, slavery, and paedophilia) to be acceptable. As a minimum, they would consider stealing, adultery, and murder to be punishable. It would be unreasonable to expect them to have the same beliefs as us regarding morality, though. Even we can not reconcile our differences - see gay marriage, drug legalization, and abortion as a couple of hot topics in the USA right now. Rather, I see it as a whole spectrum of moral development based on enlightenment and education.

I would have liked to view that video, but alas ... "this content is not available in your country"

 

[amirm]

That's interesting Keith. I am hoping that someone puts the whole segment on Youtube and then it would lack restriction. Might not happen though as CBS is pretty strict about policing its network content....

 

[Mosin]

This is all extremely interesting to me possibly because I strongly believe it. It puts me at odds with Keith, however. He credits education and enlightenment, and I discount them as being artifacts of a greater cause. I happen to believe that good and evil are inherent, not learned, for instance.

Keith,
I am prepared to argue the case in an enlightened and educated manner.

 

[Keith_W]

More than happy to entertain you, Win Perhaps we could start by defining what is "good" and what is "evil", before we go on to argue whether such things are inherent or not. For example, do you believe in an absolute morality, or do you believe that morality is derived?

 

[jazdoc]

Great topic. I'm taking action on the over/under for when this thread goes into "lockdown"

 

[cjfrbw]

...over the cliff. BEEP, BEEP cries the roadrunner as Wylie E. Coyote plunges towards the rocks.

 

[GaryProtein]

One does not always know what is good and what is evil. We think we do, but we don't always. Remember, the mean puppet was preventing the anthrax infected toy in the box from coming in contact with and killing the baby. The "mean" puppet was a lifesaver, but the ignorant baby doesn't know that.

We unfortunately have people (like the baby who liked the "good" puppet) who believe "perception is reality," which of course is a tremendous fallacy. Reality is reality, and if your perception isn't what really exists, you are either wrong or just plain deluding yourself.

 

[amirm]

One does not always know what is good and what is evil. We think we do, but we don't always. Remember, the mean puppet was preventing the anthrax infected toy in the box from coming in contact with and killing the baby. The "mean" puppet was a lifesaver, but the ignorant baby doesn't know that.

We unfortunately have people (like the baby who liked the "good" puppet) who believe "perception is reality," which of course is a tremendous fallacy. Reality is reality, and if your perception isn't what really exists, you are either wrong or just plain deluding yourself.

That seems to jump a few steps ahead. What I like to understand is how 70% of babies vote one way vs the other. If we agree that they are agreeing on something, even though they can't even speak or hold their head up straight, then we can talk about what it means next .

 

[GaryProtein]

I also previously mentioned that the facilitator of death, "good" puppet that allowed the anthrax infected puppet to kill the baby moved in a slow, smooth manner, while the protector "mean" puppet that saved the baby's life acted in a fast, jerky motion. We know babies like smooth gentle motions. One cannot make the transfer that the facilitator of death puppet was acting morally and the protector puppet was acting immorally. The babies made their choice based on how the puppets moved, not what their actual agendas were.

 

[amirm]

I also previously mentioned that the facilitator of death, "good" puppet that allowed the anthrax infected puppet to kill the baby moved in a slow, smooth manner, while the protector "mean" puppet that saved the baby's life acted in a fast, jerky motion. We know babies like smooth gentle motions. One cannot make the transfer that the facilitator of death puppet was acting morally and the protector puppet was acting immorally. The babies made their choice based on how the puppets moved, not what their actual agendas were.

So babies at that age are able to build up lasting preferences?

And what explains 80% of them changing their vote for the puppet that liked the same food they liked?

 

[amirm]

For those in US, here is the full length version of the video: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50135408n

 

[amirm]

Here is the research lab publications for the infants: http://pantheon.yale.edu/~kw77/Publications.html

 

[GaryProtein]

I never said babies at that age or any age are able to form lasting preferences. Babies (and many adults) make decisions based on what gives them pleasure, not what will necessarily give them the best outcome. They change their minds a lot because they make decisions, but don't really know what they are doing--they make decisions out of their perceptions, which are not necessarily based in reality. Adults do that, too, usually with more significant, longer lasting consequences.

I refer you back to the first line in my first post. "I am a cynic." When good things happen to me or people I like, I am happy but I don't go through life expecting that because if I did I would experience episodes of disappointment that could have been prevented.


While these psychologists have interesting videos, they, like many types of researchers, often make conclusions that have nothing to do with their observations or experimental results.