Is ethics reducible to biology?
By Tim Andrews <tandrews@emeraldis.com>
Is ethics reducible to biology? This is a question that is similar to the nature vs. nurture argument. Is the concept of ethics something that is a result of experience, or it is it an idea that is imprinted on us biologically? It is understood that if a matter is of ethical concern, then it has the potential to help or harm an individual. One chooses to react in such a situation based on that individual’s awareness. For example, if I contemplated hitting somebody in the face (unless that person did something to deserve being hit), I would be inclined not to do so, not so much because I would get in trouble for it, but because that person did nothing to deserve a hit. I, knowing that a hit would inflict pain, would not strike that person, for I understand how pain works.
However, for those individuals that are lacking that inner awareness which is necessary for determining ethical situations, the concept of ethics can never be understood; it is only hoped that these individuals follow the rules that are layed down by a society. A sociopath is an example of one of these individuals. Sociopaths have no conscience, which results in these individuals committing crimes of murder, rape, etc. But a conscience is not something that can be learned, and obviously, the presence of laws are not enough to keep sociopaths from committing crimes. Could the ability to feel remorse be linked to the ability to feel pain? Perhaps. For example, some sociopaths are bed wetters, because they are unable to feel the abdominal pressure associated with a full bladder.To submit a comment, click here.
Gina Baker <daphine10@hotmail.com>Very good paper, You argued your point very well, I liked how you used a sociapath as an example.
Nichole Sanders <snk79@hotmail.com>Interesting paper!
Michael Tucker <tuckerm@greenwood.net>Good examples.
Chun Yeung <jane1227@yahoo.com>I agree with your position; it is a good paper.
jennifer lester <lesterjennifer@hotmail.com>interesting.
Matthew Knight <mknight_dsb@hotmail.com>Well written. Good use of the sociopath as an example.
Amy Young <bbfhyoung@yahoo.com>The paper was interesting, I like how you incorporated both conscience and pain as biological determinants of ethics.
Russell Martin <rangjung21@hotmail.com>very interesting paper.
Rachel Crowe <rcrowe@usa.net>I agree with your argument. It is scary, though, to think that some people are born without a conscience and therfore can never have one.
Tom Lundis <Kman26@hotmail.com> Well argued paper, good use of a sociopath as an example of how biology influences ethics.
Leah Patterson <coco_c_007@hotmail.com>Your paper was very interesting, but I have to admit that it took me a couple of readings to understand which side of the argument you were taking. And I didn't know that sociopaths are frequenly bed-wetters.
Brian W. Bearden <bbearden@student .lander.edu>Interesting paper. I agree that ethics is linked to biology, but ethics are also learned and internalized from outside commands.
Demetri <dandrews92@hotmail.com>Very insightful. You obviously put a great deal of thought into this. I especially liked the example of the sociopath's inability to feel pain.
Due Date <4-17-00>Formal Comments Due
Michelle Komski <michellekomski@hotmail.com>Very interesting paper. I'm not sure that I followed it the entire way through.