Culture on Moral Reasoning 1

Running Head: CULTURE ON MORAL REASONING

The Influence of Culture on Moral Reasoning

Katherine E. Weber
Glen Allen High School

Culture on Moral Reasoning 2

Introduction
The most rudimentary conception of morality is the contrast between a perceptible right
and wrong. Despite certain connotations associated with the word, the morality of individuals,
albeit a nearly unquantifiable concept, is that which orchestrates war and altruism, violence and
kindness, dishonesty and honesty, and nearly every perceived good or bad choice or idea
witnessed by humanity. Yet the looming question remains, is morality something that is inborn?
Are certain individuals predisposed for violent tendencies? Or do individuals decide what is right
and wrong through the lens of cultural norms, values, religions? Especially in an increasingly
globalized society, it is crucial that finally a meaningful understanding of morality and how it
may be shaped is comprehensively composed. All of such reflections beg the question, is an
individuals morality influenced more strongly by biological characteristics or by culture?
Morality and the moral compass of humanity is not something to be passed over as an
inevitably unchangeable staple of societal trend. Despite natural tendencies of morality in
social/cultural settings, research reveals a largely individual and potentially biological
component to moral decision-making. Pervasive cultural norms likewise bear a heavy
influence on moral decision-making. However despite cross-cultural differences in moral
capacities, all individuals are born with a universal breed of morality that becomes shaped
by cultural factors such as religion and ideology.

Brains, Babies, and Biology

While it may seem at first glance that culture plays a predominant role in the way in which
we view the world and consequently how we behave, scholars reflect on how science may

Culture on Moral Reasoning 3

account for moral judgments. For example, a CNN article delves into the biological foundations
of an individuals morality, presenting study findings that demonstrate the differences between a
psychopath's brain structure and a non-psychopath's brain structure when pressed to decide in a
moral dilemma (Landau 2014). In the studies, functional magnetic resonance imaging scans
showed that there was less activation of the medial frontal and posterior cingulate cortices when
responding to moral dilemmas and likewise found impairment in the connections between
brain regions thought to be involved in morality (Landau 2014). These findings legitimized a
potential link between brain structure and moral reasoning, as the researchers consistently found
connections between specific brain regions and moral decision-making. In this respect, despite
relative cultural homogeneity of tested subjects, morality could be a substance malleable more by
biology rather than the influence of cultural factors.
In fact, ties between moral decision-making and parts of the human brain have been
supported by further comprehensive research. According to a study published by the National
Center for Biotechnology information, two types of moral dilemmas presented to test subjects
impersonal and personal moral dilemmaselicited functional magnetic resonance imaging scan
results that reveal that when making personal moral dilemmas, such as, for example, sacrificing
one mans life by pushing him off of a bridge in order to save five others, emotion-related
cerebral areas were activated to a higher extent than impersonal dilemmas (Caravita,
Giardino, Lenzi, Salvaterra, Antonietti 2012). This incongruity in brain activation between
personal and impersonal dilemmas emphasizes the possibility of a biological moral reasoning
linked directly to the brains structure.
Researchers have likewise uncovered compelling evidence of an inborn morality among
young children. In a CBS News broadcast that questioned whether babies were born good,

Culture on Moral Reasoning 4

research findings of Yale psychologist Karen Wynn validate that babies as young as three
months of age have a sense of what is right and wrong and that babies tend to prefer those of
good morals (Bloom 2012). These findings arose from an experimental situation in which
the experimenter had a baby acknowledge whether he or she preferred a snack of graham
crackers or beans. Upon choosing graham cracker, two puppets were subsequently
demonstrated to show separate preferences for either snack. In a new scenario, the puppet
that preferred beans, unlike the baby, was seen to be struggling opening a box. Then, the
puppet that preferred graham crackers, like the baby, went to the bean puppet and slammed
the box down rather than helping him. When asked which puppet the baby preferred, the
baby chose the graham cracker puppet who had mistreated the struggling bean puppet,
proving that the baby condoned the unethical actions against the outgroup (Bloom 2012).
This natural us and them mentality seen even in very young children serves as a
foundation for bigotry worldwide empowered by the polarization afforded by group
dynamics. Further research done on children of older ages expressed more selfless and
altruistic tendencies given that they had experienced education and exposure to the real
world; however, as one professor noted, adversity causes us to regress to our childlike selves
(Bloom 2012). That children are born with a kind of black-and-white universal moral
compass that fluctuates based on the experiences and education those children receive
speaks to both the potential biological and cultural basis of morality.
Finally it is crucial to address the possibility of an interconnection between ones
personality and ones moral predispositions. Researchers drew relationships between the
Big 5 personality traits (extraversion, conscientiousness, openness to experience,
agreeableness, and neuroticism) and the moral identity of such individuals. For example, the

Culture on Moral Reasoning 5

researchers cited that ones conscientiousness has been shown to predict honesty and
likelihood of engagement in prosocial activities, including volunteering with needy people
or organizations (McFerran, Aquino, Duffy 2010). If it is safe to perceive that personality
traits are inborn qualities of varying quantity in degree, then it could be concluded that even
something as natural as ones personality traits could influence his or her moral
integrity/predispositions.
With the possibilities of an inborn morality in mind, whether morality is biologically
predetermined or moreover, is universally consistent, researchers and scholars find several
points of controversy, many stemming from the belief that cultural factors, given their
impact on early life experiences, control morality more than biology.

Social Animal
While it is important to consider the very individual qualities of each person, such
qualities can be masked, overshadowed, or heightened when amongst other humans who either
share or conflict in such qualities. In other words, the tendencies associated with social
psychology are, in many ways, a studies of natural phenomena potentially outside of individual
control.
One particularly notable example of a natural predisposition that might overshadow
individual morality is a peculiar inclination of humans to obey authority so famously studied by
illustrious social psychologist Stanley Milgram. Milgrams experiments demonstrated a
seemingly inhuman capacity of ordinary humans (teachers) to deliver life-threatening shocks
to so-called learners (actors) when the learners answered questions wrong repeatedly. The
subjects, or teachers were consistently instructed that the experiment requires that that

Culture on Moral Reasoning 6

subject continue delivering the accompanying shock, even to the point where some of the actors
complained of potentially lethal heart failure (Encina 2004). Subjects seemed to display
discomfort as they delivered the shocks; some would laugh nervously or appear cold,
hopeless, somber or arrogant, yet despite these sings of discomfort, a startling 65% of
participants delivered the maximum voltage level (Encina 2004). A majority of these apparently
ordinary individuals somehow were risen to the extent of cold-blooded killers simply given the
authority of a disembodied prompter. Presumably, the tendency of humans to obey authority is
somewhat beyond the individual control of one being strictly ordered. Milgrams studies,
bolstered by the philosophical reflections of scholar Hannah Arendt in the so-called banality of
evil, would attempt to shed light on one of the most inhumane events of humankind: the
Holocaust, in which seemingly ordinary German men became orchestrators of one of the most
systematic and brutal genocides of mankind. In this vein, it is possible that there is some inborn
or at least natural element of existence that shapes morality beyond a level of individual control.

Cross-Cultural Inconsistencies
When reflecting on the possibility of a universal morality, it is crucial to understand the
contrarian perspective that reveals varying morals across several cultures. Pew Research
Center conducted a Global Attitudes survey that asked respondents from forty different
countries of their views on certain moral issues, such as extramarital affairs, gambling, and
homosexuality. While consistencies can be seen across some cultures from the data,
immense variation is apparent between African and Muslim countries, who found most of
the activities morally unacceptable as compared to Westernized countries and Japan, who
tended to find the activities more acceptable (Global Views on Morality 2013). For example,

Culture on Moral Reasoning 7

alcohol use was one moral issue asked about in the survey, yielding a spectrum of results.
85% of the individuals surveyed of Jordan believed alcohol was morally unacceptable, while
only a mere 6% of Japanese individuals found this activity morally unacceptable (Global
Views 2013). We are all humans of similar biological functions and modes of cognition.
What could account for this discrepancy in attitude? Mohammed Khazer al-Majali, a
professor of Islamic studies at the University of Jordan said that Ifyou want to drink, it is
not accepted in Jordan, adding that in general, those who drink are not respected in this
country (Teich 2012). The taboo against alcohol is propagated by Islamic society, which
teaches that alcohol consumption is a disgraceful, disrespectful act (Teich 2012). On the
other hand, in Japan, alcohol is glorified for being an integral part of Japanese culture (Ito
2014). In fact, traditional celebrations in Japan are oftentimes characterized by alcohol
consumption, such as, for example, Shinto ceremonies like a newborns first visit to a shrine
or a wedding (Ito 2014). In this respect, that alcohol is particularly valued and accepted by
Japanese tradition and popular culture would likewise increase the likelihood of individuals
feeling comfortable with drinking alcohol. However, a person living in Jordan might feel
obligated to abstain from alcohol in order to preserve respectability and reputation in the
Islamic community. Overall, the clear discrepancies across cultures demonstrated by the
survey results reveal that opinions of these activities are subject to alter depending on the
country or culture in which one is immersed.
Further research corroborates this idea. One study focused on students immersed in
different cultural, social, and educational settings (kibbutz and non-kibbutz communities)
and tested their moral decision-making by quantifying their choices based on Lawrence
Kohlbergs stages of moral development. Results revealed hiatuses between Christian and

Culture on Moral Reasoning 8

Muslim students, kibbutz and non-kibbutz, social classes, and genders (Bar-Yam, Kohlberg,
Naame 1980). The researchers conclude their findings under a speculation reflecting on
these contrasting results of moral aptitude:
Hence, it seems that research lends support to the view that differences in levels of
moral reasoning could be related to differences in cultural background and
educational experiences. Perhaps, the greater degree of social justice, equal rights,
and democratic participation in a society, the more stimulating that society can be for
the moral development of its members (360-361).
From these results and reflections, it can be understood that environmental factors could
account for differences in moral decision-making.

Religion
When referring to cross-cultural discrepancy and to morality in general, the subject of
religion ultimately finds its way to supplement discourse. That religion and morality are
intertwined is a common understanding of humanity yet simultaneously, there are yet
individuals who find that religion need not be a precondition for good moral character.
A mixture of these mindsets is supported in another study conducted by Pew Research
Center that evaluated whether individuals across the world in 39 countries found a belief in
God essential to morality (Worldwide, Many See Belief in God as Essential to Morality
2014). Of these 39 countries, 22 yielded a majority that believed faith in God necessary for
good moral character, most prevalent among Africa and the Middle East and also
dominantly in Asian/Pacific and Latin American regions (Worldwide 2014). However, in
Australia, North America, and Europe, far fewer uphold this same standard; the data
supports that individuals who reside in wealthier nations place less emphasis on the need to
believe in God to have good values than do the more impoverished nations (Worldwide

Culture on Moral Reasoning 9

2014). That being said, the United States yet stands as an exception to this observation
(Worldwide 2014). From this data it is clear that religion heavily influences individual
perception of moral character. Moral issues in a country such as Indonesia that showed 99%
of people who found it necessary to believe in God for moral integrity will ultimately be
viewed through the lens of religion whereas in other countries such as France, wherein 85%
do not find that faith essential to upright character, religion is not likely to be that which
influence one attempting to make a moral decision (Worldwide 2014). In this vein, religion
may possibly play a central role in shaping an individuals view on morality and moral
issues depending on its pervasiveness of importance in respective cultures.
Researchers cite one of the Big Four religious dimensions as behaving which can be
described as subscribing to certain moral norms, and exerting self-control to behave in
accordance with these norms (McKay, Whitehouse 2015). That this action of behaving is a
keystone religious dimension speaks to the influence of religion on ones moral decisionmaking. The phrase exerting self-control reflects a certain expectation to shape oneself to
match the mold of a larger following in accordance withnorms, an idea reminiscent of a
culture factor influential to overshadow an individuals morality (McKay, Whitehouse 2015).

Money and Status

As aforementioned, a correlation exists between religion, the wealth of a particular
nation, and individual morals. Similarly, socioeconomic status may influence an individuals
moral inclinations. Researchers explored moral decision-making in the context of varying
demographics, uncovering a relationship between socio-economic status and moral decisionmaking (Caravita et. al 2012). The research compared socio-conventional decisions with

Culture on Moral Reasoning 10

moral decisions as well as personal and impersonal moral dilemmas, and the results
expressed variation across socioeconomic groupings. For example, children and
adolescents in rural areas perceived rules less breakable than urban peers did and that rural
youngsters were more likely to justify their moral decisions mainly in the norm-following,
showing that simply the context of a certain social class influences moral decision-making
(Caravita et al. 2012). The research overall reveals how morality may be influenced simply
by ones social/economic class.

Supremacy of Nurturing
In babies researchers discover an inborn tendency to trust adultsa tendency that
permits malleability of values and morals by external factors. Powerless of inquiry and
unconscious of dishonesty, babies generally believe what they are told, a claim corroborated
by a study in which children were given the task of finding a sticker under a cup. The
children watched the researcher place the sticker under a yellow cup, for example, but then
the researcher said that the sticker was under the red cup. The children repeatedly trusted the
testimony of the researcher rather than going with what they had seen or the additional
arrow placed on the cup with the sticker. This study attests to how children at this young age
(about three years old) will trust their authority figures over their own intuition (Jaswal,
Croft, Cole 2010). Therefore, a child's moral development may be largely influenced by a
parent's values and teaching, or to draw further conclusions, a childs education. If a threeyear-old child was told by a presiding adult that Adolf Hitler was the wisest ruler of a nation
(as might a child of the Hitler Youth), would this young child question the adult or otherwise
unconditionally believe the adult? As this study shows, the immense inclination of a child to

Culture on Moral Reasoning 11

trust the testimony and the general lack of mental autonomy afforded by children of such an
age likely promulgate malleability of morals.
Likewise, it is possible that religious, ideological, and social values bestowed on a
child from a young age have the power to influence moral perceptions and behaviors given
the high capacity of a child to trust testimony.

Conclusion
As visible in the plethora of research examples listed in this analysis as well as
visible in moral situations witnessed oftentimes disseminated through mass media and even
in our immediate surroundings, morality is largely unquantifiable yet particularly influential
to society. In keeping with an objective to finally uncover what truly shapes a moral
compass, the research reveals that individuals are born with a somewhat similar standard of
morality across groupings; however this inborn morality will ultimately and inevitably be
influenced by the environment in which one is nurtured.
What does this mean for the future of humanity? Is all hope of correcting morality
(an endlessly relative quest, as one study cites, one mans terrorist is anothers freedom
fighter) heading for eternal despair (McKay, Whitehouse 2015)? Is there a way by which a
universal morality be created for the sake of undermining beliefs that condone unethical
behavior?
Unfortunately, these crucial questions are nearly impossible to answer with utter
certainty. However, in the spirit of optimism and hopeful progress, perhaps a promulgation of
youthful independence in belief, further education about internal dispositions capable of immoral
behavior (in other words, an attempt to inform humanity about a heart of darkness rather than

Culture on Moral Reasoning 12

attempt to eradicate what will inevitably remain), human rights advocates to promote moral
character, and continued concentrated study focusing on defining the undefinable will be that
which proliferates a moral progress so terribly lacking in globalized modern society.

Reference List
(2013). Global Views on Morality. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from
http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/04/15/global-morality/.
(2014). Worldwide, Many See Belief in God as Essential to Morality. Pew Research Center.
Retrieved from http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/03/13/worldwide-many-see-belief-ingod-as-essential-to-morality/.
Bar-Yam, M., Kohlberg, L., & Naame, A.. (1980). Moral Reasoning of Students in Different
Cultural, Social, and Educational Settings. American Journal of Education, 88(3),
345362. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1085057.
Bloom, Paul. Wynn, Karen. "Babies Help Unlock the Origins of Morality." 60 Minutes.
CBS. WCBS, New York: 18 Nov 2012. Television. Retrieved from
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/babies-help-unlock-the-origins-of-morality/.
Caravita, S. C. S., Giardino, S., Lenzi, L., Salvaterra, M., & Antonietti, A. (2012). Socioeconomic factors related to moral reasoning in childhood and adolescence: the missing
link between brain and behavior. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 262.
http://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00262

Culture on Moral Reasoning 13

Encina, G. B. (2004). Milgrams Experiment on Obedience to Authority. University of
California. Retrieved from https://nature.berkeley.edu/ucce50/aglabor/7article/article35.htm.
Ito, M. (2014). Dealing with addiction: Japans drinking problem. The Japan Times. Retrieved
from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2014/08/30/lifestyle/dealing-addiction-japansdrinking-problem/#.VxhXbfkrLIV.
Jaswal, V. K., Croft, A. C., Setia, A. R., & Cole, C. A. (2010). Young Children Have a Specific,
Highly Robust Bias to Trust Testimony. Psychological Science, 21(10), 15411547.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610383438.
Landau, E. (2014, March 27). How your brain makes moral judgments. CNN. Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/26/health/brain-moral-judgments/.
McFerran, B., Aquino, K., & Duffy, M. (2010). How personality and moral identity relate to
individuals ethical ideology. Business Ethics Quarterly,20(01), 35-56.
McKay, R., & Whitehouse, H. (2015). Religion and Morality. Psychological Bulletin, 141(2),
447473. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0038455.
Teich, J. (2012). Viewed by many as a disgrace, a drinking culture is developing in Amman.
Northeastern University Journalism Abroad 2012. Retrieved from
https://northeasternuniversityjournalism2012.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/viewed-bymany-as-a-disgrace-a-drinking-culture-is-emerging-in-amman/.