Moral
or amoral – are we born one or the other? This seems a strange question at
first sight, but maybe people have been assuming one or the other for years.
Ask a psychologist and they will rush off and design an experiment and check
out a handy group of infants who are just a few months old.
Scarf
et al from U Otago have carried out
some experiments to check if the results of Hamlin et al were correct (1, 2). The earlier work with very young infants
concluded that a moral compass was built in as a biological adaption. The
infants watched toys climbing a hill and in some cases they bumped into another
toy that helped them get to the top. In other events, the colliding toy
hindered the climb. The observation was that the infants wanted the helper toy
as a playmate.
Scarf
et al re-did the experiments with
rather more laconic toys (no bouncing with excitement when reaching the summit)
and threw into the mix a neutral toy that minded its own business. What was the
result this time? The 10-month old infants wanted the neutral toy as a
playmate. They didn’t like collisions.
So
it seems that there was no moral reasoning involved, but they were averse to
confrontational collisions whatever the outcome and were opting for the
uncomplicated peaceful life without unnecessary complications.
Interesting
how many of us have retained this trait as we grow up as a way of avoiding
trouble. We stay as simple creatures that
prefer to leave the wrestling with huge moral choices to characters in the
movies.
- http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0042698
- J.K Hamlin, K Wynn, and P. Bloom, Nature, 450, 557, (2007).
