Introduction

Ethical behavior, family values, and their foundation in the various faith communities and national cultures lie at the center of public discussion in our time. A better understanding of the nature of ethical thought and behavior should contribute to a more fruitful discussion.

Let us define “ethical” behavior of an individual as behavior that applies the individual’s own resources or that is perceived as reducing the individual’s benefit for the perceived benefit of other individuals or society at large.

Ethical thought, along with decision-making, takes place in the brain. How does the brain do it? What can the brain do, and what can it not do? The answers to these questions would have to come from those branches of science that study this type of phenomena - neurophysiology and cognitive psychology. What can those sciences say to these questions? How are their findings correlated with moral philosophy and theology?

Science has shown that genetically based proto-ethical behavior in animals has evolved into human ethical thought and behavior. Science has also shown that, among higher animals, a growing body of learning is necessary for the full development of such behavior. Among humans, learning is not only perception-related but increasingly related to own thought - resulting in synaptic brain connectivity, valuation of thought associations, and the resultant thought patterns, decision-making, and behavior. Science also indicates patterns of conflict resolution between different genetically based, or preconditioned, behaviors. Thus, there are limits to ethical behavior in competition with mainly two other priorities - survival, or self-fulfillment, and enjoyment of life or cultural pursuits.

Recent neurophysiological research has opened some interesting perspectives. Edward O. Wilson’s New Synthesis (1975) and On Human Nature (1978) indicate some correlation between evolutionary biology and ethics. An attempt to derive descriptive or prescriptive normative concepts from such considerations for the ethical questions of our time failed, in accordance with Hume’s Law.

More important are the findings of biologists regarding proto-ethical behavior among animals, mainly mammals. Such research concludes that nature provides three categories of genetically controlled, spontaneous ethical behavior among animals:

• Caring for offspring and for genetically related individuals, decreasing with genetic distance and in an inter-generationally forward-tilted direction
• Reciprocity in caring for and sharing with some related individuals and, sometimes, resentment of cheating in such reciprocity relations
• Loyalty to a group of related individuals to the degree of self-exposure, even self-sacrifice, as in defense situations (combined with predatory or adversarial behavior toward other groups and their members.

The degree of such behavior varies among species and among individuals within a species. Obviously, the control of such behavior is located in the brain.

Human nature is seen as being different from animal nature in the former’s capabilities regarding consciousness, thought, learning, and free-will decisions. Ethical thought and decision-making are related to these capabilities. Recent research provides increasing knowledge about these capabilities of the brain and is discussed in this essay. This, in turn, sheds light on some old discussions among philosophers regarding the question whether ethical behavior is, and should be, based on rational thought; or whether it is based on emotion; whether there are absolute, nature-given standards of ethical behavior as in conscience; or whether all ethical behavior is relative and results from conditioning by circumstances and learning.