What does the functioning of the human brain mean to moral philosophy?

9.1. Absolute or relative validity of moral values

A recurring theme of moral philosophy is the question, whether moral values are absolutely valid, or whether moral values are relative to circumstances, cultures, and individuals.

As explained above, there is an absolute (commonly valid) basis in proto-ethical ethical behavior in caring for kin, in reciprocity, and in loyalty to the group. However, as also indicated, there are the following variables:

Thus, there are men and women who leave their offspring behind. There were parents in alien cultures who sacrificed their children. The degree of reciprocal integrity and group loyalty varies, not only among individuals, but also as habits among various cultures. Some religious and ethnic groups rank group loyalty higher than loyalty and fairness to society at large. Others subordinate their demands to the expectations of society at large. The neurophysiological perspective explains how such variations in judgment and behavior occur and what can or cannot be done to modify such behavior.

9.2. Is ethical judgment based on reason or in emotions?

One can attempt to construe practical benefit as the root of ethical emotions. But this may not work, since some basic ethical emotions are related to the naturally unselfish proto-ethical behaviors. These behaviors bring benefit to the group or species but are a burden to the respective individual (caring for kin, reciprocity, loyalty). Behavior in modern intellectual societies shows this dichotomy where such proto-ethical behavior is reduced through intellectual reasoning, and results in new, often destructive cultural habits.

One may attempt to construe emotion as the root of rational decisions (as in the assessment of benefit in cost-benefit analysis). This may not work either, since many of life’s benefits are related to the satisfaction of natural drives and not emotions.

Ethical decisions - by definition, related to unselfishness - are commonly supported by emotions and have a genetic base, thereby becoming similar to drives. Rational thought may then help in finding strategies to maximize the results of such behavior. In real-life conflict situations, decision making is a triangular combination of emotions, drives, and reason.

9.3. Is there freedom of will?

Freedom mostly implies lack of foreign dominance. Here, it would imply that one can discard external dogma or expectation and follow only personal thought, value assessment, or habit. However, few can free themselves in their lifetime from their cultural environment, common thought habits, and common value assessments. That would have to be done through creative thought in new directions or through new perceptions accepted in consciousness with positive valuations, or, possibly, through a new focus.

The outcome of uninfluenced personal decision-making would still be predetermined by who one is, with all one’s genetic predisposition, prior experience, and self-established values. Is that freedom of will, in the pure sense?

There is one more factor to be considered - personal thought. As indicated above, one’s own thought enters memory (and synaptic formation), just as experience does. Thought enters into value assessment of associations and, consequently, course of thought. In other words, there is a specific influence of personal thought on who one is and how one thinks and judges in the future. Such closed circles of cause and effect between thought and personality can spiral off into extremes (from Jesus to Hitler). They can taper off into nothing or they can be meaningful in normal life. These circles can remain connected to reality through intervening perceptions, if those are not blurred. In sum, there is a remaining mystery regarding who one is, and how free one is to influence one’s own course in thought and action.

Freedom of will is sometimes meant to imply the freedom to be arbitrary. The mind can decide to be arbitrary and willfully reject the proper solutions to whatever problems it faces. However, this leads back to the question of how the initial decision to be arbitrary was arrived at in the first place. Thereby, one returns to the discussion of the preceding paragraph.

There is another aspect of will: ethical decisions are not yet ethical actions. The translation of judgment into action is a major problem for many individuals - the dreamers, the phlegmatics, the procrastinators, and those who have to “find themselves” first. The initiation of action, while often seen as genetically preconditioned, is somewhat related to mid-brain functions and the endocrine system (for example, adrenaline, possibly also the pituitary and thyroid glands). Thus, it can be influenced by thought, learning (habit), diet, pharmaceutical products, drugs, exercise, and other environmental factors.