Obesity

Morality is defined as a system or code that we humans use to differentiate between right and wrong. This system could be derived from a number of factors: religion, culture, and upbringing. It is difficult enough to determine what an individual's morals are, but going further to determine how we came to possess those morals is even more ambitious. Still, regardless of its difficulty, this subject consumes many philosophers and psychologists. One such moral psychologists, Jonathan Haidt, is theorizing the possibility of evolution causing ones morality. Haidt is a moral psychologist at the Universtiy of Virgina further believes that complex social structures such as religion and politics as well as our need for social structures affect one's personal structure of morals. Haidt is serious about testing his theories, and has traveled across the planet to India to conduct further research. Personally, I have a great interest in philosophy and ethics, and the theory that evolution over time has affected morality today is one theory I have not read about at all.

One idea of great interest to Haidt that prompted much of his research was the concept of moral dumbfounding. Moral dumbfounding occurs when people feel a particular emotion towards something but do not know why they feel that way. To initiate his research on the idea of an evolutionary morality, he began experimenting with this concept of moral dumbfounding. Haidt would test individual's reactions to particular circumstances. For example, Haidt discovered people's instant reactions of disgust to the idea of a starving family forced to cook and consume their pet dog as a meal. Even as I ponder upon that thought, I cringe. Although I personally have some idea why I believe that to be upsetting, it is an instinctual reaction specifically prompted by morality.

Based on his experiments, Haidt came to a conclusion that morality is guided by two separate systems. One is the ancient system, a system that developed before humans could speak. This system drives our emotions. It is with this system that humans received their instinctual reactions to specific situations; it is these sorts of "gut reactions" that enabled human survival in ancient times. The other is a modern system, a system that initiated when language was invented. This system, he explains, is more associated with our ability to reason and judge. This system allows us to question our instinctual reactions and determine some explanation as to why we feel a particular way. However, he feels that these two complex systems are subconsciously active within the individual; he does not believe that people are aware of these concepts affecting their morality. These two systems are the key or answer to why moral dumbfounding occurs. It occurs when the two systems conflict--when reasoning cannot explain your initial reaction. Furthermore, Haidt believes that emotions are linked more to one's subconscious, while reasoning is linked to one's consciousness. He believes most philosophy focuses too much on the conscious while underestimating the power of the subconscious. In regards to his experiment testing one's disgust for eating one's pet, he believes this disgust originated in ancient times when people first began to eat meat. When beginning this tradition, people had to determine whether or not the meat contained bacteria, a idea not thought of before as this was no concern when eating plants. So the moral dumbfounding occurs because of an internal subconscious, emotional response that traces back to our pre-language selves.

While studying in India, Haidt took an anthropological approach by using holistic and comparative methods of research. In doing so, he was able to define five components of morality in regards to society that centralize most cultures: preventing harm, reciprocity and fairness, loyalty, respect for authority, and a sense of purity. Haidt came to understand that one's understanding of these concepts varies from culture to culture. He believes this is due to the fact that morality is something that is born within an individual at an early age. Children inherit their moral structure based on the virtues they are taught by their culture and family. Socially speaking, India and the United States vary enormously as Western culture contains more of a focus on the individual, while other cultures tend to encourage the group. From this, Haidt was able to really delve into this idea of morality from a cultural perspective.

Haidt also believes that religion highly influenced morality. He does not believe that religion is the sole source from where our morality is defined, but it is definitely important. He believes that religion provides strength to one's morals and provides cohesion to one's morals to another's within a society. Also, he believes religion is linked to purity--one of the five major components related to morality. When testing one's morals regarding purity, Haidt proposed a fictitious town where people are nude performing sexual acts out on the street and where people eat raw meat straight from an animal corpse. This obviously prompted major feelings of disgust among individuals. This disgust was directly associated with one's idea of being pure or clean, which is directly associated with one's religious ideals.

In regarding current Western society, Haidt feels morality is directly related to one's political stance. He sees a clear distinction of morals between liberals and conservatives. Liberals tend to stress importance of equality, but place less importance on loyalty