Recently, I just finish D.W. Pfaff's "The Neuroscience of Fair Play: Why we (usually) follow the Golden Rule".
The book says that our sense of morality comes from our genetics.
The four steps of Pfaff's theory on our moral behavior (pg 62)
1st - contemplate act towards other
2nd - envision target
3rd - blur difference between self & other
4th - lose mental/emotional difference between self and target
So, by losing a piece of information in our minds, (that we are different than the target) we then treat them how we want to be treated. I'm still not sure how this is going to be tested.
"It is tempting to imagine that primitive man's reasons to chill out were usually obvious and straightforward, but that, in evolving, we created innumerable scenarios that cast ambiguity on whether to agress and obliged us to stop and think." (pg 142) Hmmm...I'm not sure if evolution works like that. There had to be a distinct advantage for the "chill-out / stop and think" gene to come out to a single generation. If you have two choices, between suffer now and ten generations hence prosper, or live the good life now - evolution will dictate that you live the good life now. Evolution isn't for the benefit of our grandchildren, it's for passing on as many fertile offspring to the next generation.
It seemed to me, whilst reading, that there were a lot of inductive leaps. They will point to a study of the effects of one hormone on mice...and imply like-wise in humans. Now, I am reminded, that Sir Isaac Newton was able to take a few studies, and some math...and come up with gravity.
There was a lot of endocrinology in this book. So I didn't really follow it.
There were examples on the interaction between genes and the environment.
He points to a "thrill seeking" gene (pg 171) which reminded me of a part from "Next" .
(Which might be my issue with Crichton, I kept wondering what were the fiction parts, what parts were real.) "A particular genetic variation that tends to leave lots of serotonin in the synaptic cleft seems to contribute to thrill-seeking."
If we are wired for the Golden Rule...then what about war? Pfaff points out that humans show a lot of loyalty to their group, and so, the non-group would be defined as other, and thus not mistaken as self. (pg 148)
As for individuals that break the Golden Rule...chemical imbalances.
Pfaff believes we are wired for the Golden Rule. Things that we are wired for, talking, sucking, walking, smiling. Usually, no one has to teach a baby how to suck...and they naturally smile, ...they want to talk and practice it before they know how. But I'm sure that all parents would say that they needed to teach their children "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." That says to me, that we aren't wired with the Golden Rule, but we have to be taught it. Much like we are taught how to drive a car.
Sorry, Dr. Pfaff...I just didn't follow your reasoning.
glad I read it, but Grade C
things that need to be done
(pg 90) cross-fostering experiments, where one strain of mice is raised by another, to see if good maternal behavior is learned from the mother, or is genetically driven. I am surprised no one has done this.
(pg 174) "Although Caspi's study still needs to be followed up and replicated..." Hey, who does that? Who's in charge of replicating the results of all the studies in all the journals? BTW, Caspi says in Science , that there are two types of serotonin transporter genes, and those with the shorter version seem to be predisposed to depression.
Suggestions to reduce youth violence (pg 155)
1 - reduce extreme socioeconomic disparities and their effects
2 - encourage smaller school sizes
3 - promote rituals that offer youth positive vision of their adult roles
4 - redue the consequences of impulsive aggressive behavior
See also, Pfaff's Brain Arousal & Information Theory .
And pro'lly I should read some Chomsky, on how we are wired for language.