New study shows 6 month olds distinguish good and evil inherently - DFWstangs Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 4 (permalink) Old 05-10-2010, 03:12 PM Thread Starter
Rhabdomyolysis anyone?
 
flashstang04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,224
New study shows 6 month olds distinguish good and evil inherently

Not a product of environment.



[link to www.dailymail.co.uk]


At the age of six months babies can barely sit up - let along take their first tottering steps, crawl or talk.

But, according to psychologists, they have already developed a sense of moral code - and can tell the difference between good and evil.

An astonishing series of experiments is challenging the views of many psychologists and social scientists that human beings are born as 'blank slates' - and that our morality is shaped by our parents and experiences.

Instead, they suggest that the difference between good and bad may be hardwired into the brain at birth.

In one experiment involving puppets, babies aged six months old showed a strong preference to 'good' helpful characters - and rejected unhelpful, 'naughty' ones.

In another, they even acted as judge and jury. When asked to take away treats from a 'naughty' puppet, some babies went further - and dished out their own punishment with a smack on its head.
Professor Paul Bloom

Leading research: Professor Paul Bloom, of Yale University, said a series of morality tales featuring puppets were shown to babies of varying ages

Professor Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University in Connecticut, whose department has studied morality in babies for years, said: 'A growing body of evidence suggests that humans do have a rudimentary moral sense from the very start of life.

'With the help of well designed experiments, you can see glimmers of moral thought, moral judgment and moral feeling even in the first year of life.

'Some sense of good and evil seems to be bred in the bones.'

For one study, the Yale researchers got babies aged between six months and a year to watch a puppet show in which a simple, colourful wooden shape with eyes tries to climb a hill.

Sometimes the shape is helped up the hill by a second toy, while other times a third character pushes it down.

After watching the show several times, the babies were shown the helpful and unhelpful toys. They showed a clear preference for the helpful toys - spending far longer looking at the 'good' shapes than the 'bad' ones.

'In the end, we found that six- and ten-month-old infants overwhelmingly preferred the helpful individual to the hindering individual,' Prof Bloom told the New York Times.

'This wasn't a subtle statistical trend; just about all the babies reached for the good guy.'

Two more tests found the same moral sense.



In one, the researchers devised a 'one-act morality play', in which a toy dog tries to open a box. The dog is joined by a teddy bear who helps him lift the lid, and a teddy who stubbornly sits on the box.

They also made the babies watch a puppet cat play ball with two toy rabbits. When the cat rolled the ball to one rabbit, it rolled the ball straight back. But when the cat rolled it to the second rabbit, it picked up the ball and ran off.

'In both studies, five-month-old babies preferred the good guy - the one who helped to open the box; the one who rolled the ball back - to the bad guy,' said Professor Bloom.

When the same tests were repeated with 21-month-old babies, they were given a chance to dish out treats to the toys - or take treats away.

Most toddlers punished the 'naughty rabbit' by taking away treats. One even gave the miscreant a smack on the head as a punishment.

Although the studies appear to show that morality is hard-wired into babies brains, some psychologists urged caution.

Dr Nadja Reissland, of Durham University, said babies started to learn the difference between good and bad from birth.

'Everything hinges on who decides what is normal,' she said. 'By saying pushing the ball up the hill is helpful, the researchers are making a moral judgement. The babies might just prefer to see things go up rather than down.

'In the other test, perhaps the bear closes the box to prevent the dog from getting in there because there is something dangerous inside. It is like a mother keeping children out of an area where there is something harmful.'

Crossfit.com <--- no wimps allowed
flashstang04 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 4 (permalink) Old 05-10-2010, 09:22 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 860
Interesting. What's more interesting is that while these children could possibly be displaying moral judgements, or at least agreeing with behavior they like, babies, by-in-large, do the wrong, selfish thing. This could possibly point to "sin-nature" tendancies if the babies actually know right from wrong when they're outside of a situation, like with the puppet shows, but choose to do the wrong, selfish thing when the situation involved them specifically and things which affect them directly. You don't have to teach a kid to be bad. They know how to do that. Bending their will to want to do what's right is what's difficult.

- Brian
1992 Taurus SHO
BrianC is offline  
post #3 of 4 (permalink) Old 05-22-2010, 08:07 PM
not exclude
 
exlude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,838
Not very surprising, but still interesting.

There are many species out there that show preference to individuals who are willing to help the group.
exlude is offline  
 
post #4 of 4 (permalink) Old 05-26-2010, 10:00 AM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 860
Quote:
Originally Posted by exlude View Post
Not very surprising, but still interesting.

There are many species out there that show preference to individuals who are willing to help the group.
I agree. These kids may just be identifying with the things they see, and of course they would not like something being taken from them. I bet if the children were put in some similar situations themselves, though, they would act differently... probably immorally, because it benefited them personally.

That's why I wouldn't put much stock in the study's conclusions. Maybe if I knew more about the study I could see what they did to fix that possibility, though.

- Brian
1992 Taurus SHO
BrianC is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome