Is morality the result of nature of nurture?

Is it in our genes to have moral standards, or are they affected by our upbringing?

I personally think it's a bit of both... There are always going to be some things which are influenced by upbringing, and those around you, especially smaller things, like taking something without asking (and replacing!), but then I think bigger things, like murder, things which we wouldn't encounter in day to day things, that's something that some people are just born with a desire to hurt/kill... Obviously, if you've got parents who go on murder sprees, and get you involved from a young age, then that might make you want to do it when you're older, because you think it's acceptable or something.

Reply 2

Asolare

I would probably say I sway towards moral scepticism, and so unsurprisingly I think it's purely a social construction of nurture :tongue:

Comes from God.

Nurture. Innately human beings are selfish creatures

Reply 5

username2763536

Its at least partly genetics.Even chimps have taboos against incest and they did an experiment once proving that monkeys would rather go without food than shock other members of their species.

Reply 6

Steve82

Original post by tianshan

Is it in our genes to have moral standards, or are they affected by our upbringing?

Morality differs depending your perspective. It is not genetic and your morals will change over time depending on your environment and your perspective.

Morals are a strange thing, that only us as human beings have. They are defined by us and influenced by our environments.

Reply 7

999tigger

Most of it is nurture. 90% + imo.

Reply 8

viddy9

It depends on the individual, but for some individuals it is neither.

Evolution gave us moral intuitions, including caring for our families and those close to us, while being suspicious of people from an out-group.

Nurture also plays a role for most people, because our parents' values can be passed onto us: these values generally tell us what to do and what to think in today's world.*

However, some individuals can transcend both nature and nurture, which give us moral values that are unlikely to be true, as they would have come about whether or not they were true. These people can use reason to determine objectively true reasons for action and objectively true moral values.

The equal consideration of interests of all sentient beings - the realisation that the good of any one individual is of no more importance than the good of any other, is an example of a self-evident moral axiom that is knowable by reason, and which everyone would accept if they reflected on it long enough and were free of bias. This view would harm an individual in evolutionary terms, meaning that it is more likely to be true than to be a mere product of natural selection. Similarly, the realisation that the intrinsic nature of pleasure and pain gives us reasons to want to, respectively, seek and avoid them (regardless of the being experiencing them) is another example of a normative truth - a truth knowable by reason alone, and not influenced by nature or nurture, except insofar as nature gave us the capacity to reason as a by-product of evolution and nurture allowed us to develop into beings capable of reasoning.

Thus, there are moral truths just as there are logical and mathematical truths. Consider the following:

(1) If p, then q
(2) p
C: Therefore q

Premises 1 and 2 give us decisive reasons to believe the conclusion. These reasons exist independently of human opinion. Even if no one responded to or could recognise these reasons, they would still exist. So too for reasons about how we should act and what is ethical.*

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 9

limetang

Well, I'm a moral realist and ... I suppose more specifically I would say that morality is only a meaningful concept if it describes how I ought to act, live, behave etc. So on this question hmm, it's tricky. I would say morality exists and is an objective and real feature of reality so ... I can't really answer this question on an either or level, morality is a part of reality, so I wouldn't really say it's a result of either nature or nurture.

Reply 10

viddy9

Original post by limetang

Yay, another moral realist has been found on TSR.

Reply 11

nemomeimpunit1

Just for the hell of it, I put viddy9's post through an Elmer Fudd translator.

It depends on de individuaw, but fow some individuaws it is neidew.Evowution gave us mowaw intuitions, incwuding cawing fow ouw famiwies and dose cwose to us, whiwe being suspicious of peopwe fwom an out-gwoup.

Nuwtuwe awso pways a wowe fow most peopwe, because ouw pawents' vawues can be passed onto us: dese vawues genewawwy teww us what to do and what to dink in today's wowwd.*

Howevew, some individuaws can twanscend bof natuwe and nuwtuwe, which give us mowaw vawues dat awe unwikewy to be twue, as dey wouwd have come about whedew ow not dey wewe twue. Dese peopwe can use weason to detewmine objectivewy twue weasons fow action and objectivewy twue mowaw vawues.

De eqwaw considewation of intewests of aww sentient beings - de weawisation dat de good of any one individuaw is of no mowe impowtance dan de good of any odew, is an exampwe of a sewf-evident mowaw axiom dat is knowabwe by weason, and which evewyone wouwd accept if dey wefwected on it wong enough and wewe fwee of bias. Dis view wouwd hawm an individuaw in evowutionawy tewms, meaning dat it is mowe wikewy to be twue dan to be a mewe pwoduct of natuwaw sewection, uh-hah-ha-ha. Simiwawwy, de weawisation dat de intwinsic natuwe of pweasuwe and pain gives us weasons to want to, wespectivewy, seek and avoid dem (wegawdwess of de being expewiencing dem) is anodew exampwe of a nowmative twuf - a twuf knowabwe by weason awone, and not infwuenced by natuwe ow nuwtuwe, except insofaw as natuwe gave us de capacity to weason as a by-pwoduct of evowution and nuwtuwe awwowed us to devewop into beings capabwe of weasoning.

Dus, dewe awe mowaw twuds just as dewe awe wogicaw and madematicaw twuds. Considew de fowwowing :frown:

1) If p, den q
(2) p
C: Dewefowe q

Pwemises 1 and 2 give us decisive weasons to bewieve de concwusion, uh-hah-ha-ha. Dese weasons exist independentwy of human opinion, uh-hah-ha-ha. Even if no one wesponded to ow couwd wecognise dese weasons, dey wouwd stiww exist. So too fow weasons about how we shouwd act and what is edicaw.*

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 12

viddy9

Original post by nemomeimpunit1

Just for the hell of it, I put viddy9's post through an Elmer Fudd translator.

Thank you, I'm honoured.

Reply 13

skunkboy

Both. Some animals have moral standards too. They help each other. Sometimes they also help others.

Attachment not found

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 14

Rather_Cynical

viddy9 provided the most comprehensive response.

I like to do what Albert Einstein does when he comes across a difficult problem - consider a thought experiment. If we suppose that a species exists that had no instinctual avoidance of murder within its own community, is it possible for the species to continue to thrive and propagate? The answer tends to be "no", unless they happen to reproduce so quickly that it makes no difference, but mammalian species like us invest lots of energy in raising offspring.

Therefore, on some level we can say that some level of morality is intrinsic or otherwise innate due to necessity of stable populations.

But we developed agriculture, and managed to settle down in various places and allowed our populations to grow incredibly large. At this point, innate moral rules alone won't suffice - there are simply too many opportunities for conflicts to arise.

To avoid self-destruction, we needed to codify moral rules in various forms - whether the threat of a God punishing you for bad deeds even when no one is looking, or the ideas of karma and Buddhist teachings, or the more blunt axe of legislature and implicit threat of force/imprisonment should you fail to comply. Some branches of philosophy prefer utilitarian/consequentialistic versions, whereas other branches prefer moral duties.

There's a bit of nature, and a bit of nurture. The most important things are down to nature. The problem is, it can sometimes be subverted when other motivations are in play - especially the need for economic wealth in the world we currently live in. In some instances, deviance occurs when the cultural goal of success cannot be attained by conventional means (for whatever reason).