Duron, Jayvee V.

III-12
Reflection on the Science of Morality

The Science of Morality, an article written by Chris Palmer, starts by highlighting the challenges
that people go through when faced with moral dilemmas whose resolution is a difficult task.
Neuroimaging is a tool for our minds and hearts to influence decisions that we make. This
implies that there could be extensive work of observations to ensure how our brain advances in
terms of decision making thus creating an opportunity where not only the ones with brain
problems are involved but also non-crazy one to test how our brain works. In the realm of
morality, people have a natural tendency to distinguish between right and wrong in order for
them to easily understand ethical principles. One can get exposed to different concepts useful
for analysis and understanding by interacting with others.

In Professor Liane Young’s field of neuroscience and psychology, there are many different
opinions on moral dilemmas because everybody has their own perspectives. Which I absolutely
agree with. My experiences change from time to time as does my readiness for all these things.
When I look back at my most recent experiences, it is clear that I have been presented with
opportunities to face hardships and think critically about the choices I make. Handling some of
these ongoing issues is not an easy thing; these problems are still influencing my daily
experience and I don’t want to find myself in such a situation ever again. However, if we take a
different, more sensible approach towards others, I believe that things will get resolved. He
found out that as far as we determine between right and wrong our brains recruit the same
areas that help us understand what others are thinking and feeling. This ability is called “theory
of mind” and it usually develops around four or five years old. The purpose of this study was to
answer the following question: why would knowing someone’s thoughts in the past help us to
better understand their current point of view? They looked at a part of the brain known as
ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPC) which controls social emotions like empathy and guilt.
Some people who did not have brain damage choose from imaginary scenarios where they
would have to hurt their own kids for example in order to protect them.

With that, when they heard about an individual forced to choose between helping their own
family members or a stranger, it seemed as if rather than forgo the opportunity of helping the
stranger it would have been better to help out the family relative under such circumstances. In
another study, people thought that it was more appropriate to assist a stranger than a family
member when the person in question held some authority and had to be fair with resources to
be recognized. Thus, our notions of right and wrong may change depending on the situation at
hand. As McManus puts it, “It shows that our moral thinking could be influenced by many other
things we probably wouldn’t even think of.”