Draft 2: Are we as good as we say we are?

This topic submitted by Rob Dolan, Rick Dsida, Angie Hagely ( dolanre@muohio.edu ) on 3/9/06. [ 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 (don't steal, don't kill, etc.). While these laws are all generally conducive to the continuance and maintenance of society, there seems to remain 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 hold true in all situations. If one is offered a glass of champagne at a wedding to toast the newly weds, one may not consider it immoral of them to drink, even if they are underage. Similarly, just because an individual believes certain actions may be morally wrong does not mean they will always adhere to this code of behavior. The same underage individual may drink at a wedding, despite believing it to be immoral in other social situations.
In this study, we wish to examine the dissonance between those moral codes of society and the moral framework of an individual. Why do individuals hold themselves and society to different moral standards? An adult may believe that kids under the age of 17 should not be allowed to see a rated-R movie, while they allow their own kids to see the same movie. Perhaps this is because they feel that they are more accountable for their own children than society in general is. Whatever the case, through literary study, examination, and comparison of books, research, and court cases we hope to analyze the ways in which American society creates and justifies laws based upon the morals of those individuals within the 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 decisions an individual would make in a particular situation, we hope to see to what extent an individual will adhere to their own framework when placed in such situations. This survey will aid in our research because the morals of individuals within a society are the basis of that society's laws, and the laws of society are what "should" determine an individual's actions in particular situations. This means that, because laws are based on the general moral values of a society, an individual should ideally always adhere to those laws.
We predict our research will show 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. It is our hypothesis that in our survey, we will see that the individualÕs stated moral framework will mostly parallel that of society. However, when placed in morally ambiguous situations, their stated actions will deviate from that framework to some extent.
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. Our primary research question examines this dissonance, as well as the formation of the 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. We believe these questions are important because it will help lead to a better understanding of why peopleÕs actions do not always reflect their moral ideology.
III. BACKGROUND
Morals are defined as Òarising from conscience or the sense of right and wrongÓ, (dictionary.com). As individuals, we use morals to determine the proper course of action in situations where we are presented with a choice about whether or not to do something potentially harmful to another. Ethics, which are defined as Òa theory or a system of moral valuesÓ (dictionary.com), are thus the accepted cultural standard moral model. Both are systems which influence each other, as societal values help to shape an individualÕs values, while individualÕs morals are what are used to define a cultureÕs ethics. Both are shaped by a variety of things, including religion, science, and philosophy. In our study, we question how these morals and ethics are created, and how they are adhered to in specific situations. To better understand and answer these questions, we examined each individual field, and the various claims they make about morals and ethics.
While there are many forms of religion throughout the world, all with varying beliefs and ideals, the basic feature of all religions is a code of behavior, dictating those ethics which a certain religion claims to be right and true. In America, freedom of religion is a tenant of society, and has created a culture with a wide variety of religious beliefs and ethics. Whatever their prescribed values are, the key influence of religion in America and much of the world is ethics Ð the idea that there is a right and a wrong form of behavior. As written by Taylor (1985) in Ethics, Faith, and Reason, religion Ò[nourishes] the idea that there is a kind of obligation higher, more authoritative, and more demanding than the obligations that arise among persons,Ó (pg. 78). Thus religion has shaped ethics into the idea of Òlove they neighborÓ and Òdo unto othersÓ. Its basic claim is not that humans are moral and ethical because it is imperative to the continuance of society, but rather that we should act morally because it infringes the freedom of others.
This stance of religion Ð particularly Judeo-Christian religions Ð is a somewhat backwards one, assuming that man is an immoral creature, and must be held accountable to a higher power than himself. It is in science, and particularly sociobiology, in which we see the idea that we are moral creatures because it works to maintain biologically the human race. In The Moral Animal, Robert Wright (1994) claims that DNA is the driving function of any species, and that whatever social constructs have been created are there because they work to maintain that species. Thus, we are moral creatures because it is a necessity to the continuance of society. As social beings, humans are tied to this continuance, because we require one another for survival.
In moral philosophy, questions about ethics and morality are posed which challenge the beliefs of society. Many forms of moral philosophy exist, as we all have our own ideas and opinions. For example, if we are in a situation in which we are able to save either a group of people, or our own single child, what actions do we take? It is in this field of thought that our question Òto what extent do people adhere to their own stated moral framework?Ó arises. Ethics, and many religions, would claim that the right course of action would be to save the group of people, because it preserves the largest amount of life. However, is it wrong to act selfishly and save your own child in this situation? Sociobiologists may claim that it is irrelevant, for it is more likely that one will act to save their own child Ð it is the best course of action for the continuance of oneÕs genes. It is not whether this was the better course of action, but simply that an action took place that concerns these scientists. It is in this vein of thought that our first question arose: ÒWhy is there a dissonance between individual and societal values?Ó
Bjorklund, F. Intuition and Ex-Post Facto Reasoning in Moral Judgments; 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 the situation made them uncomfortable, or if they morally objected to particular actions. This will be very useful in forming our own survey scenarios.
Callahan, D. and Enghardt, T (editor). (1976). The Roots of Ethics: Science, Religion, and Values. Plenum Publishing, New York.
This book takes a look at the foundations of ethics, and claims that Òthe need to inquire about the foundations of ethics arisesÉ [at a] point of crisis for a cultureÓ (pg. 3). It claims that ethics are a cultural construct which addresses an Òimmediate crisisÓ of the time (pg. 3). Using religion, science, and sociobiology, the book claims that ethics seek to create a resolution between the various forms of human conduct, and that morals arise as socially constructed vehicles to account for the actions of individuals. This work is important to our study because it examines the construction of morals from many different standpoints Ð science, philosophy, etc. It also will play devilÕs advocate to our claim that morals arise as constructs of the individual to dictate the appropriate behavior of society.

DesAutels, W. P. (2004). Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory. Rowan & Littlefield Publishers. Lanham, Maryland.

This book examines certain feelings and aspects of what one might call a ÒmoralÓ framework. These feelings include trust, intimidation, self-respect, and sincerity, to name a few. Though these ideas seem abstract, they will be important things to consider when establishing the implications of what we shall call Òside-constraintsÓ that may or may not come into play when one is faced with a situation that challenges their morals.

Gibney, M. (2005). Five Uneasy Pieces. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Lanham, MD.

This book arose as an examination of American ethics, and responses to the September 11th attacks of 2001. It is five essays which examine not the geopolitical situation of America, but rather the ways in which America has and should respond to the attacks. A critique of the American ethical norms, it questions whether American values have given rise to the belief that America has a ÒlicenseÓ to do good, as well as questioning whether AmericaÕs notion of good holds true for the rest of the world. This book leans more towards a stance that ethics and morals arise as a result of society, and questions the current moral norm of America. It will be useful in identifying the ÒAmerican moral standardÓ and also as a counterpoint to the argument that individuals create ethics.

Linquist, J.H. (1988). Misdemeanor Crime: Trivial Criminal Pursuit. Sage Publications.

If we are to gain an understanding of what drives an individual to commit a ÒcrimeÓ in this country, this book will come in useful. Linquist outlines the difference between misdemeanor and felony offenses as stated by the law, summarizing seven Òinterrelated and overlapping principles.Ó Among myriad criminal statistics recorded by census, survey, and criminal records, Linquist also highlights facts that pertain to crimes otherwise unreported, stating that the majority of all crimes happen within the home. In cases where there was one form of abuse, there were often correlations to others. For example, in houses where child abuse was reported, there was a higher probability that a spouse was also reported. (109-131) Evidence of this nature, and others represented in the book are pertinent to our hypothesis, if we are to predict that individuals deviate from moral frameworks only for the purpose of serving self interests.

Quinsley, Harris, Marnie, Cormier. Violent Offenders:Appraising and Managing Risk. American Psychological Association, Washington D.C. 1998

This book examines aspects of the criminal mind through the investigation of certain places of rehabilitation, their effectiveness, and the rate at which an offender considered rehabilitated ends up breaking the law again. (Recidivism, 30) Furthermore, it reports the results and implications of certain studies examining violent criminals, their motivations, and assesses a number of variables that correlate to the crimes in question. Perhaps addressing these factors with some level of scrutiny will inform the curious soul who asks, ÒWhy do we do the things we do?Ó This book will be useful in examining the criminal mind, and what drives us to deviate from our moral framework. Not only will this provide useful situations for the survey, but it shall also provide us with a certain understanding of motive.

Radan, M., C. R. Law and Religion: God, The State, and Common Law Routledge. New York, NY. 2005.

This is a collection of articles that examine myriad issues involving religious ideologies, and their relationship to and influence on the laws of a particular society. Issues are covered from aspects of American culture as well as others. Though the studies specific to American culture, in which we base these arguments on, it will be useful consider this issue from a cross-cultural perspective and be able to compare ethics and morals in other societies, as well as how these are formed in different societies.

Slote, M. (1985). Common Sense Morality and Consequentialism. Routeledge & Kegan Paul plc. London.

Understanding how people construct a moral framework is important. In this book, Slote compares and contrasts two separate schools of moral philosophy; both of which are included in the title. He further critiques both of them, and argues that each are inherently flawed, in one way or another. He then questions if morals are dictated by the situation, or if situations are determined by oneÕs morals. This book will be important in referencing when considering how one develops their moral framework, and whether morals arise situationally, or are something constructed due to societal interaction.

Taylor, R. (1985). Ethics, Faith, and Reason. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
This book examines the source of ethics and reason in society, and how it has been shaped through religious influences. Its major claim is that morals and ethics are a force arising from the individual acting in a manner they see fit, rather than one dictated by the norms of society. Drawing on ancient philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates, it analyzes the origins of moral philosophy and ethics, and the various religious ideas of the time. It then frames the ideas posed by these ancient philosophers in modern times, and questions whether todayÕs idea of ethics matches that of the past. This book is influential to our study, as it provides a groundwork for which to approach the idea of ethics as a process of the individual, rather than a consequence of 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 our society creates laws based upon the commonly accepted "good". To do so we will investigate cultural norms within our society, as well as previous court cases and their interpretation of particular laws. Questions which our literary research must address are 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 broad 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, 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; it is simply too broad a question. Thus as a secondary question, yet still important to the idea of a dissonance between society and individuals, 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. Following each contextual situation, participants will be asked to briefly explain their responses.

VI. PRELIMINARY SURVEY CONCEPT
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.
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
In each of the following scenarios, describe what actions you might take.
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 kill the murder and take revenge?
Yes No
You are starving to death, and you have no means of obtaining nutrition except to steal it. Would you steal to stay alive?
Yes No
You have been struck by a drunk driver while jaywalking. Would you prosecute?
Yes No
You have found a signed collectorÕs copy vintage album of your favorite band. You strongly suspect that the goods are stolen; however the price is nearly one tenth what you would expect to pay. Do you purchase the album?
Yes No
You are traveling on a highway where the drivers around you are all driving 15 MPH over the speed limit. Do you maintain the flow of traffic, or do you slow down?
Maintain Slow down
You approach a stop sign semi-populated area. You can clearly see that there are no cars coming from the other directions. Do you run the stop sign?
Yes No
You approach a stop light semi-populated area. You can clearly see that there are no cars coming from the other directions. Do you run the stop light?
Yes No
You and your friends have been out drinking for awhile, and you believe that none of you are under the legal limit. You are certain that you are the most sober of your friends. Do you drive you and your friends home?
Yes No

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