Draft 1: Are we as good as we say we are?

This topic submitted by Rob Dolan, Rick Dsida, Angie Hagely ( dolanre@muohio.edu ) on 2/17/06. [ Human Nature Team: Rob Dolan, Rick Dsida, Angie Hagely-Section: Cummins/Wolfe]

I. INTRODUCTION
The basic structure of society is supported by laws and codes of behavior, creating a system around what is "generally accepted as good". What is generally "accepted as good" is based on a foundation of basic morals of society Ð don't steal, don't kill, etc. While these laws are all generally conducive to the continuance and maintenance of society, there remains a disconnect between the actions of individuals and the general moral values of society. While society may have determined particular actions are "wrong", this does not necessarily entail all actions as evil if one examines the situation. Similarly, because an individual believes certain actions may be morally wrong does not mean they will always adhere to this code of behavior. In this study, we wish to examine the dissonance between those moral codes of society and the moral framework of an individual. What is it that makes the actions of individuals more justifiable than the actions of a particular society as a whole? Through literary study, examination, and comparison of past books, research, and court cases we hope to analyze the ways in which a society creates and justifies laws based upon the morals of those individuals within a society, and whether or not these laws can be accurately applied to individual situations. This research will draw on moral philosophy, ethics, law, psychology, and religion. As a secondary question, we asked if the individual always adheres to their own moral framework. Through empirical research and survey, we hope to determine the basic morals of an individual. Then by asking questions about what actions an individual would take in a particular situation, we hope to see to what extent an individual will adhere to that framework when placed in such situations. This survey will aid in our research because the morals of individuals of a society are the basis of that society's laws, and the laws of society are which "should" determine an individual's actions in particular situations. We predict in our research we will see that society will pay much more attention to the fact of a crime or other immoral action, and less attention to situational evidence. On the other hand, we believe we will see that individuals will pay much more attention to situation, and merely use laws and morals as guidelines for how they will act in a situation.

II. RELEVANCE

As society progresses, we continue to become increasingly social beings. However, there is still a solitary and independent nature prominent within many individuals. While past research has shown ancestral humans to have clan-like tendencies, to what extent does that hold true today. Are we better suited to individual lifestyles, or is man more of a social creature? Whatever the case may be, due to today's society we are now all forced to interact with other humans in order to survive. Through our research, we hope to further examine this disconnect between the social and individualistic nature of humans. Opinions and morals vary, and one's values may not be entirely aligned to that of the society one lives in. Our primary research question examines this dissonance, as well as the formation of this difference between separate people's values. Our secondary question analyzes the individual's personal values, how they are constructed, and how they are employed. Because society has an effect on how an individual's morals are formed, we are interested in examining whether an individual will always uphold those values, or whether they will work towards what they perceive as beneficial to themselves.

III. LITERARY REVIEW

Barmash, Pamela. Homicide in the Biblical World. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2005.

This shows the different places where the Bible discusses the topic of homicide, from Cain and Able to the Ten Commandments. These different situations will show the different views that the Bible has on homicide.

Bjšrklund, Fredrik. Intuition and Ex-Post Facto Reasoning in Moral Judgment: Some Experimental Findings. Department of Psychology, Lund University [URL: http://www.fil.lu.se/files/prodok89.pdf]

This article presents an experiment similar to our own, in which participants were presented with specific, morally questionable scenarios and asked to determine if they morally objected to the scenario. This will be very useful in forming our own survey scenarios.

Callahan, Daniel, and Tristram Enghardt, eds. The Roots of Ethics: Science, Religion, and Values. New York: Plenum P, 1976.

This book examines the roots of ethics through scientific research, and examination of religion and individual values. It gives important insights into the foundations of ethics and morals in society.

Carstairs, Catherine. Jailed for Possession: Illegal Drug Use, Regulation. Toronto: University of Toronto P, 2006.

This book will get us a better understanding of minimum sentencing laws, and the treatment of criminals. This will show society's views of different crimes based on minimum sentences.

McCormick, Richard A., and Paul Ramsey. Doing Evil to Achieve Good: Moral Choice in Conflict Situations. Chicago: Loyola UP, 1978.

This book will be one of our focal points when examining the responses of survey participants to our "scenario" questions. It examines the rationalization of individuals in morally questionable conflicts, as well as discussing the tendencies of society to follow a higher moral ground, while the individual is not necessarily so inclined to do so depending upon the situation.

Morrow, Lance. Evil: An Investigation. New York: Basic Books, 2003.

This book takes a look at the actual definition of evil. It poses the question, if evil becomes mainstream, is it still "evil", as well as asking if doing evil for the common good is acceptable. This is a facet of Good vs. Evil that is highly debated, the idea of killing killers or revenge killing, and something we hope to address in our project.

Nielsen, Kai. Ethics without God: Revised Edition. Buffalo: Pemberton Books, 1990.

This book analyzes the ways atheists form morals. It examines the idea of the "common good" and addresses the question of why we have morals, and their various foundations in society other than religion.

Quinsey, Vernon, Grant T. Harris, Marnie E. Rice, and Catherine A. Carnion. Violent Offender: Appraising and Managing Risk. Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 1998.

This talks about the different forms of violent crimes. It also analyzes different ways to manage the risk of namely repeat crimes and the violent tendencies these different criminals tend to show. It questions the three-strike laws in a pro-con manner, and offers various solutions and ideas the authors find more attractive than the current laws.

Slote, Michael. Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism. Boston: Ron Hedge & Kegan Paul, 1985.

This book examines the common sense decision making process, and how morals play into this. It particularly analyzes consequentialism, and what actions an individual will take simply based upon the consequences that action will bring about.

Taylor, Richard. Ethics, Faith, and Reasons. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, INC, 1985.

In this book, the human reasoning process is examined through ethics and religion. It questions the "commonly accepted as good" concept, and the foundations of morals in religion. This is a good book from the "devil's advocate" perspective, and will help in deconstructing the religious foundations of ethics.

Taylor, Richard. Good and Evil. Amherst: Premetheus Books, 2000.

This book discusses the different distinctions between good and evil. It examines the two objectively, and asks from a psychological standpoint if what we call "good and evil" is truly one or the other, or simply what we call the consequences of an action (i.e., assault is not evil because it causes harm, but rather because of the intent to cause harm).

Troy, Neil. What Makes Us Moral?: Crossing the Boundries of Biology. Oxford: One World, 2004.

This book discusses the nature vs. nurture argument, and examines whether humans are capable of overcoming a biological predisposition, or if we are geared to whatever actions we perform. This book is essential to questioning whether we are really moral creatures, or whether we have simply been biologically programmed a certain way, and society demands the continuance of that structure.

Wald, Gordon P., ed. Career Criminals. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1983.

This book will give us an excellent idea of the different situations of the "career criminals". This will allow us to analyze the different factors that cause a person to turn to a career in crime. It is important to our analysis of moral and situational crime and justice, and how an individual rationalizes a life of crime.

WEB SITES

http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html

This website allows us to search through the court decicions of Supreme Court Trials, and the various laws they apply to.

http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/
http://www.abolition.org/
http://www.naral.org/
http://www.nrlc.org/

Pro-Death Penalty, Anti-Death Penalty, Pro-Choice, and Pro-Life websites, which will give us examples of moral reasoning used in today's society.

IV. INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH

Morals, ethics, the individual, and society are each gargantuan terms to throw about, and difficult to narrow to a single definition. Our research seeks to analyze not the many aspects of each, but rather how each interact in particular manners. Through literary study we will examine the formation of an individual's morals, by examining works which address the cultural, religious, and environmental factors which mold an individual's moral framework. We will then investigate how society creates laws based upon the commonly accepted "good". To do so we will investigate cultural norms within society, as well as previous court cases and their interpretation of particular laws. Questions which our literary research must address are what is the influence of religion and culture on the ideas of a particular time and how these effect law, how an individual's morals are shaped by society, and how society's laws are shaped by the individual. These questions are critical to our study, and each interlocked in their answers. The society and culture an individual is raised in have a central influence on the ideas of that individual, while ideas of individuals can change the shape of society from generation to generation. Sociological studies will be used to examine how these influence each other. Psychological studies will be used to examine the formation and application of morals and values in individuals. Overarching both will be religious studies, which have a much broader impact on morals, values, ethics, and cultural ideals.

V. RESEARCH DESIGN

Through literary study of biological, psychological, sociological, ethical, and religious writings we intend to gain an understanding of how society creates laws. This research will entail the reading of various books, past research articles, and journals. Through this research we wish to theorize an answer our primary question: What is the cause of the dissonance between society and an individual of that society's moral values? While this is our primary question, it is our belief that no "true" answer to this question exists Ð it is simply too broad a question. Thus as a secondary question Ð yet still important to the idea of a dissonance between society and individuals Ð we have asked to what extent will an individual adhere to their own stated morals.
Through survey, we will first pose a series of crimes, and ask an individual how severe they believe that crime is on a scale of 1 - 5, 5 being the most severe form of crime. After this, we will ask the individual to define each of these forms of crime by providing a number of choices for each crime, and asking the individual to circle each that they believe is considered that form of crime. This preliminary questioning will allow us to understand the basic moral framework of an individual, and relates directly to a later part of the study.
After finding the basic beliefs of an individual, we will then pose several situations pertaining to each crime in which the individual is hypothetically placed within a situation, and asked whether or not they would commit the related crime. For example, for the murder crime, we would present the following situation:

Your (best friend/close relative) has recently been murdered in a violent crime, for no apparent reason. The murderer has not been caught, although you are absolutely certain of their identity. While you are walking one day, you see the murderer pass. You have the means to kill the murderer and avenge your (friend/relative). Do you take revenge? Yes No

A scenario will be given for each of the crimes presented in the preliminary section of the survey. By comparing the degree to which an individual ranks a crime, and their responses to the scenarios presented, we will analyze the degree to which an individual will adhere to their own moral code. At this stage we have found no way to actually quantify this form of study beyond percentages of answers given, and thus we plan to analyze each individual survey.
After completing the scenario portion of the survey, participants will be asked to fill in an optional comments section, in which it is hope respondents will argue or justify their decisions in the given scenarios. As the formation of morals is a central idea of this study, we hope to see as many actual professed beliefs and rationalizations as possible.
Participants will be informed prior to beginning the survey that the survey is an anonymous survey, and that they are free to cease taking the survey at any time for whatever reason. They will be informed that the study is a questionnaire, and that some questions may make them uncomfortable, and if that is the case they are free to either mark the question as so, or cease taking the survey. Finally, participants will be asked to sign an informed consent form prior to participating in the study.

VI. PRELIMINARY SURVEY CONCEPT

Part I
Identify the following acts according to how wrong they are, 5 being the most severe, and 1 being the least.

Murder 1 2 3 4 5

Rape 1 2 3 4 5

Manslaughter 1 2 3 4 5

Armed Robbery 1 2 3 4 5

Thievery 1 2 3 4 5

Burglary 1 2 3 4 5

"Light" drug use 1 2 3 4 5

"Heavy" drug use 1 2 3 4 5

"Light" Drug Possession 1 2 3 4 5

"Heavy" drug possession 1 2 3 4 5

Driving while under the influence (any drug) 1 2 3 4 5

Running a stop sign/light 1 2 3 4 5

Speeding 1 2 3 4 5

J-walking 1 2 3 4 5

Part II
For each of the following acts, circle each phrase below it that you consider a fair definition or description of such an act. More than one definition can be circled for each.

Murder
a) any incidence that leads to the death of any individual through the direct result of another's actions
b) the accidental death of an individual as a direct result of another's unintentional actions
c) the death of an individual as a result of protecting another individual
d) the death of an individual as a result of jealousy or greed
e) the death of an individual to avenge the death of another
f) the death of an individual with no apparent motive

Rape
a) obtaining sexual acts by means of physical force
b) obtaining sexual acts by means of coercion
c) obtaining sexual acts by means of invoking fear
d) obtaining sexual acts while one or more of those involved are under the influence of drugs or alcohol
e) obtaining sexual acts with someone who might not be considered able to make their own decisions (i.e. "underage")

Theft
a) any acquiring of goods without payment
b) acquiring of goods without payment by means of breaking in
c) any acquiring of large and expensive goods without payment by means of forcing another to give it (car-jacking, armed robbery)
d) receiving stolen goods
e) stealing stolen goods

Burglary
f) any acquiring of goods without payment
g) acquiring of goods without payment by means of breaking in
h) any acquiring of large and expensive goods without payment by means of forcing another to give it (car-jacking, armed robbery)
i) receiving stolen goods
j) stealing stolen goods

Drugs (circle each word that you would consider a potentially harmful drug, circle whether you think the substance is light or heavy)

a) caffeine heavy light
b) tobacco products heavy light
c) marijuana heavy light
d) cocaine heavy light
e) heroine heavy light
f) ecstasy heavy light
g) speed heavy light
h) prescription narcotics heavy light
i) mushrooms heavy light
j) alcohol heavy light

Drug Possession
a) possessing drugs on one's person
b) possessing drugs on one's property
c) possessing drugs unknowingly on one's person
d) possessing drugs unknowingly on one's property

Part III

For each of the following acts, circle the corresponding reasons you would consider committing them. More than one reason can be selected for each act. In the space provided, you may add your own instance. If there are no instances in which you would commit the act, circle none.

Murder
a) Self defense
b) To protect a friend
c) To protect a relative
d) Drafted in war
e) to avenge the death of friend
f) to avenge the death of a relative
g) no apparent reason

Rape
a) One consented but was younger than the age
b) One consented but was under the influence of a drug
c) You were married to the victim

Theft
a) to feed a family
b) you are a kleptomaniac
c) someone else took it and gave it to you
d) you steal a good from someone who previously stole the same good
e) from a dead body

Drug Use
a) due to an addiction
b) to self-medicate
c) recreational use

Drug Possession
a) to keep a friend out of trouble
b) intention to use
c) to sell

Driving under the influence
a) you were the closest to sober of all your friends
b) you were by yourself
c) under "heavy" drug influence
d) under "light" drug influence
e) under a combination of heavy and light drug influence

Running a stop sign
a) there is no heavy traffic
b) you are being chased
c) you are in a hurry

Running a stop light
d) there is no heavy traffic
e) you are being chased
f) you are in a hurry

Speeding
a) you are on the crowded highway
b) on a highway with little or no traffic
c) in a neighborhood
d) you are in a hurry

Jaywalking
a) when no cars are around
b) when others are jaywalking too

Part IV

This will be the scenario section of survey, in which participants are given specific scenarios and asked to tell their actions. At this time this section is incomplete, as it will require further analysis of past studies, such as those by Bjšrklund.

VII. TIMELINE

Proposal Feb. 12-18
Editing (research design and survey) Feb. 19-24
Data collection Feb. 25-April 1
Literary research Feb. 25-April 20
Data analysis April 2-9
Compiling completed project April 10-21

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu