Are we born with a moral code?

[pacer]

Are we born with a moral core? The Baby Lab says 'yes'

By Susan Chun, CNN
updated 9:40 PM EST, Fri February 14, 2014

New Haven, Connecticut (CNN) -- It is one of life's biggest questions: Are we born knowing the difference between good and evil? Or are we taught our moral beliefs by parents and society?

Philosophers and psychologists have long believed that babies are born "blank slates," and that it is the role of parents and society to teach babies the difference between right and wrong; good and bad; mean and nice.

But a growing number of researchers now believe differently. They believe babies are in fact born with an innate sense of morality, and while parents and society can help develop a belief system in babies, they don't create one. A team of researchers at Yale University's Infant Cognition Center, known as The Baby Lab, showed us just how they came to that conclusion.

Dr. Karen Wynn runs the Baby Lab, and she and her team have been studying the minds and behaviors of babies for decades. About eight years ago they began running a series of studies on babies under 24 months to see how much these babies understand about good and bad behavior.

The first test is the simplest. Show a baby an example of good behavior, and then an example of bad behavior, then let the baby decide what she likes.

They begin with a puppet show. In this show, a gray cat is seen trying to open a big plastic box. The cat tries repeatedly, but he just can't open the lid all the way. A bunny in a green T-shirt comes along and helps open the box. Then the scenario is repeated, but this time a bunny in an orange T-shirt comes along and slams the box shut before running away. The green bunny is nice and helpful. The orange bunny is mean and unhelpful.

The baby is then presented with the two bunnies from the show. A staff member who doesn't know which bunny was mean and which bunny was nice will offer both bunnies at the same time to the baby. The baby's mother, who is usually present during the study, closes her eyes so as not to influence the baby in any way.

Which bunny do the babies choose? More than 80% of the babies in the study showed their preference for the good bunny, either by reaching for the good bunny or staring at it. And with 3-month-olds, that number goes higher, to 87%.

So what does this tell us? Paul Bloom, author of "Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil" and a professor of psychology at Yale, says these studies show that even before babies can speak or walk, they judge good and bad in the actions of others because they are born with a rudimentary sense of justice.

He writes: "We are by nature indifferent, even hostile to strangers; we are prone towards parochialism and bigotry. Some of our instinctive emotional responses, most notably disgust, spur us to do terrible things, including acts of genocide." And the role of parents and society is to overcome these limitations and further develop the innate moral beliefs that already exist in those baby minds.

Skeptics of the studies say babies are not capable of making intelligent choices, and perhaps babies are drawn to a certain color, or they choose according to where the puppets are placed.

The team at the Baby Lab has been very careful in their studies to change the puppets, shirt colors and placement of the animals before presenting them to various babies, and they feel confident their published research is sound.

The Baby Lab has developed a series of studies based on the simple premise that babies have this simple understanding of good and bad. The other studies explore reward and punishment, compromise and the roots of bias.

Are we born with a moral core? The Baby Lab says 'yes' - CNN.com

 

[pacer]

Editor's note: Paul Bloom, the Brooks and Suzanne Ragen professor of psychology at Yale University is the author of the new book, "Just Babies" and his work will be featured on "Anderson Cooper360˚" Wednesday through Friday at 8 p.m. ET on CNN. Follow him on Twitter.

(CNN) -- As someone who studies the morality of babies, I am sometimes asked "Are we naturally good or naturally evil?" My answer is yes.

Most adults have a sense of right and wrong. With the intriguing exception of some psychopaths, people are appalled by acts of cruelty, such as the rape of a child, and uplifted by acts of kindness, such as those heroes who jump onto subways tracks to rescue fallen strangers from oncoming trains.

There is a universal urge to help those in need and to punish wrongdoers and there are universal emotional responses that revolve around morality—anger when we are wronged, pride when we do the right thing and guilt when we transgress.

In "Just Babies," I argue that much of this is the product of biological evolution. Humans are born with a hard-wired morality, a sense of good and evil is bred in the bone. I know this claim might sound outlandish, but it's supported now by research in several laboratories. Babies and toddlers can judge the goodness and badness of others' actions; they want to reward the good and punish the bad; they act to help those in distress; they feel compassion, guilt and righteous anger.

In my own research at Yale, done in collaboration with my colleague (and wife), Karen Wynn, we show babies one-act plays—puppets shows in which one puppet acts kindly toward a character (helping it up a hill, or opening a box for it, or passing it a ball) and the other puppet acts in a cruel way (pushing it down a hill, or slamming the box shut, or stealing the ball).

Babies can't speak, but we can learn about their judgments and preferences from their behavior—where they look, what they reach for, and, for older babies, who they will give a treat to and who they will take a treat from.

We find that even 3-month-olds prefer the good guy to the bad guy, and that older babies and toddlers will reward the good guy and punish the bad guy. Babies also prefer other characters that do the same; they prefer a just puppet who rewards the good and punishes the bad over an unjust puppet who does the opposite.

The existence of a universal moral sense is the good news. But we are, as the anthropologist Robert Ardrey put it, risen apes, not fallen angels. Our brains are the products of natural selection and so one would expect our innate morality to have certain limits. Indeed, studies find that babies start off as little bigots, eagerly dividing the world into us versus them and strongly favoring their own group over everyone else.

Although the baby's capacity for moral judgment applies broadly, when it comes to kindness and compassion, we start off indifferent—or worse—toward strangers. The biologist Richard Dawkins was right, then, when he said at the start of "The Selfish Gene," "Be warned that if you wish, as I do, to build a society in which individuals cooperate generously and unselfishly toward a common good, you can expect little help from biological nature." Or, as a character in a Kingsley Amis novel put it: "It was no wonder that people were so horrible when they started life as children."

Fortunately, we can transcend our limited biological natures. Modern humans possess abstract moral notions of equality and freedom for all; we see racism and sexism as evil; we reject slavery and genocide; we try to love our enemies.

Of course, our actions typically fall short, often way short, of our moral principles, but these principles do shape, in a substantial way, the world that we live in. And being exposed as a child to these moral ideals—and interacting with people who exemplify these ideals—is an essential part of growing up to be a good person.

Why does this research matter? For one thing, these findings can change the way parents think of their own babies and children. Many people believe we are born selfish and amoral—that we start off as pint-sized psychopaths. Others think that genes are destiny, and that some babies are bad seeds, unredeemable souls from the very start. Both these cynical views are mistaken.

We are naturally moral beings, but our environments can enhance—or, sadly, degrade—this innate moral sense.

Finally, an understanding of moral psychology can help us make the world a better place. If you're interested in reducing racism and bigotry, for instance, it is critical to understand the inborn proclivity to favor one's own group over others; if you want to create a just society, you'll want to learn about how we naturally think about fairness and equity.

Good social policy is informed by an understanding of human nature at its best and its worst, and this is what the science of baby morality is all about.

Opinion: Do babies know right from wrong? - CNN.com

 

[PostmodernProph]

They begin with a puppet show. In this show, a gray cat is seen trying to open a big plastic box. The cat tries repeatedly, but he just can't open the lid all the way. A bunny in a green T-shirt comes along and helps open the box. Then the scenario is repeated, but this time a bunny in an orange T-shirt comes along and slams the box shut before running away. The green bunny is nice and helpful. The orange bunny is mean and unhelpful.

lol.....they claim the knowledge is innate, then demonstrate how they taught the baby which to choose.....scientists used to be smarter...

 

[pacer]

They begin with a puppet show. In this show, a gray cat is seen trying to open a big plastic box. The cat tries repeatedly, but he just can't open the lid all the way. A bunny in a green T-shirt comes along and helps open the box. Then the scenario is repeated, but this time a bunny in an orange T-shirt comes along and slams the box shut before running away. The green bunny is nice and helpful. The orange bunny is mean and unhelpful.

lol.....they claim the knowledge is innate, then demonstrate how they taught the baby which to choose.....scientists used to be smarter...

They did not teach the baby which bunny was mean. One bunny helped the cat and the other slammed the box. The baby showed a preference for the good bunny when presented with both bunnies.

"The baby is then presented with the two bunnies from the show. A staff member who doesn't know which bunny was mean and which bunny was nice will offer both bunnies at the same time to the baby. The baby's mother, who is usually present during the study, closes her eyes so as not to influence the baby in any way.

Which bunny do the babies choose? More than 80% of the babies in the study showed their preference for the good bunny, either by reaching for the good bunny or staring at it. And with 3-month-olds, that number goes higher, to 87%."

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mean bunnies?

Simply eat them.

As for natural law and intrinsic morality, that may be true.

But that is not the charter of what governs this country.

 

[PostmodernProph]

They did not teach the baby which bunny was mean. One bunny helped the cat and the other slammed the box. The baby showed a preference for the good bunny when presented with both bunnies.

lol.....I find it interesting that the baby could figure it out and you and the scientists couldn't.......

personally, I would recommend early counseling for the 20% of babies who chose the bunny who slammed the box....

 

[Mojo2]

Are we born with a moral core? The Baby Lab says 'yes'

By Susan Chun, CNN
updated 9:40 PM EST, Fri February 14, 2014

New Haven, Connecticut (CNN) -- It is one of life's biggest questions: Are we born knowing the difference between good and evil? Or are we taught our moral beliefs by parents and society?

Philosophers and psychologists have long believed that babies are born "blank slates," and that it is the role of parents and society to teach babies the difference between right and wrong; good and bad; mean and nice.

But a growing number of researchers now believe differently. They believe babies are in fact born with an innate sense of morality, and while parents and society can help develop a belief system in babies, they don't create one. A team of researchers at Yale University's Infant Cognition Center, known as The Baby Lab, showed us just how they came to that conclusion.

Dr. Karen Wynn runs the Baby Lab, and she and her team have been studying the minds and behaviors of babies for decades. About eight years ago they began running a series of studies on babies under 24 months to see how much these babies understand about good and bad behavior.

The first test is the simplest. Show a baby an example of good behavior, and then an example of bad behavior, then let the baby decide what she likes.

They begin with a puppet show. In this show, a gray cat is seen trying to open a big plastic box. The cat tries repeatedly, but he just can't open the lid all the way. A bunny in a green T-shirt comes along and helps open the box. Then the scenario is repeated, but this time a bunny in an orange T-shirt comes along and slams the box shut before running away. The green bunny is nice and helpful. The orange bunny is mean and unhelpful.

The baby is then presented with the two bunnies from the show. A staff member who doesn't know which bunny was mean and which bunny was nice will offer both bunnies at the same time to the baby. The baby's mother, who is usually present during the study, closes her eyes so as not to influence the baby in any way.

Which bunny do the babies choose? More than 80% of the babies in the study showed their preference for the good bunny, either by reaching for the good bunny or staring at it. And with 3-month-olds, that number goes higher, to 87%.

So what does this tell us? Paul Bloom, author of "Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil" and a professor of psychology at Yale, says these studies show that even before babies can speak or walk, they judge good and bad in the actions of others because they are born with a rudimentary sense of justice.

He writes: "We are by nature indifferent, even hostile to strangers; we are prone towards parochialism and bigotry. Some of our instinctive emotional responses, most notably disgust, spur us to do terrible things, including acts of genocide." And the role of parents and society is to overcome these limitations and further develop the innate moral beliefs that already exist in those baby minds.

Skeptics of the studies say babies are not capable of making intelligent choices, and perhaps babies are drawn to a certain color, or they choose according to where the puppets are placed.

The team at the Baby Lab has been very careful in their studies to change the puppets, shirt colors and placement of the animals before presenting them to various babies, and they feel confident their published research is sound.

The Baby Lab has developed a series of studies based on the simple premise that babies have this simple understanding of good and bad. The other studies explore reward and punishment, compromise and the roots of bias.

Are we born with a moral core? The Baby Lab says 'yes' - CNN.com

Lord of the Flies said, "no."

Morality, or the code we all accept, comes from religion.

 

[Jazzper]

Pseudo science posing as the real thing. Humans differ from other animals in one important sense. Humans do NOT possess instincts, they are born with a blank slate. And everything they know is learned. Look at human life and how it progresses. It's not an accident that humans cannot take care of themselves until they have grown into young adults, For arguments sake, let's say their twelfth year. Other animals, with varying degrees, can take care of themselves at a much younger age. These facts are due the instinctual nature of animals, and the conceptual nature of humans. This conceptual nature can lead to great things. But if ignored, can also lead to terrible things. In essence, we all have the choice to understand or not. The degree to which we decide to use our rational faculty is the degree of success we can expect to achieve in our lives. We are not automatons or "conditioned", but creatures possessing free will.

 

[percysunshine]

I think a lot of psychiatrists and psychologists have to make something up in order to justify the grant money they are getting.

 

[pacer]

Pseudo science posing as the real thing. Humans differ from other animals in one important sense. Humans do NOT possess instincts, they are born with a blank slate. And everything they know is learned. Look at human life and how it progresses. It's not an accident that humans cannot take care of themselves until they have grown into young adults, For arguments sake, let's say their twelfth year. Other animals, with varying degrees, can take care of themselves at a much younger age. These facts are due the instinctual nature of animals, and the conceptual nature of humans. This conceptual nature can lead to great things. But if ignored, can also lead to terrible things. In essence, we all have the choice to understand or not. The degree to which we decide to use our rational faculty is the degree of success we can expect to achieve in our lives. We are not automatons or "conditioned", but creatures possessing free will.

The study showed babies are NOT born 'blank slates' with respect to morality. The babies were presented with the two bunnies and 'instinctively' chose the good bunny. Humans do indeed possess 'instincts'. We are born with 'instincts'. We are born to survive. Instincts are not learned. Instincts are 'a way of behaving, thinking, feeling that is not learned: a natural desire or tendency that makes you want to act in a particular way' (Merriam). Babies instinctively know to hold their breath in water; babies instinctively will not crawl over a ledge, as examples. Humans are quite capable of looking after themself at an early age depending on maturity level. In some cultures, children are required to look after their parents and siblings.

 

[pacer]

Morality, or the code we all accept, comes from religion.

Morality had to exist before religion because it took moral sense to develop it.

 

[Darkwind]

Morality, or the code we all accept, comes from religion.

Morality had to exist before religion because it took moral sense to develop it.

No...it was taught....I'll give you one guess as to by whom.

BTW...I'll acknowledge that the same people who are responsible for teaching us morality, are also guilty of the worst moral offensives in history.

 

[pacer]

Morality, or the code we all accept, comes from religion.

Morality had to exist before religion because it took moral sense to develop it.

No...it was taught....I'll give you one guess as to by whom.

I understand. But in order for it to be taught, someone had to have the moral sense to develop it and teach it.