SCIENCE AND MORALITY

On Thursday 23rd August, 2007 Mr Graham Walker, a maxillofacial surgeon from the UK launched his new book  “The Science of Morality” published by the Royal College of Physicians UK, in March 2007 at the National Bahai Centre in Bel Air. The launch was attended by the Minister of Education, the Anglican Bishop and various members of the diplomatic corps amongst some 60 other dignitaries and invited guests. Mr Walker has sent a synopsis of his research to the Seychelles  Review. The book can be purchased at http://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/pubs/brochure.aspx?e=209

Science and Morality

Morals are the principles which guide personal behaviour. Morals may be derived from any combination of natural law, philosophy, altruism, utilitarianism, deontology and theology, so it is unsurprising that there is no universal moral system. It is this relativity which is the source of conflict.
How does science aid moral relativity?

Science can not only help in dispelling suspicion, misinterpretation and harmful dogma, but also provide some evidential basis of a non-denominational consistent morality founded on universal values.
 
A deeper understanding of the relation between science and morality has become possible because of rapid technological advances accelerating research in genetics and neurosciences. For example some dysfunctional behaviour is related to a particular gene, the intellectual disintegration associated with drug abuse is explicable by the neurological degradation diagnosed on brain scans.  Science makes the case for morality more believable. Science and morality both share relativity but where moral relativity is the cause of disagreement and even extreme violence, scientific relativity is accepted and statistically incorporated into thresholds of certainty. Science is objective and scientific methodology is a cohesive force that unites all scientists. It is also respected as a source of knowledge and unbiased opinion by the public at large. More importantly, it supports a common moral perspective for every culture, religion and race by helping to dispel superstition and fear. It may only explain small sectors of reality but contributes understanding of those aspects not explained by religion. Herein lies not only the compatibility of religion and science but more importantly, their mutual dependence.

Hard and Soft Science

Hard science is the irrefutable stuff of laboratories; it is the measurement which can be tested by others, anywhere in the world, allied to the accepted scientific and mathematical principles which are applied by all scientists. Soft science may be thought of as the observation which leads through interpretation to a more or less reliable conclusion. Its substrate is not scientific measurement but statistics that make the conclusions sound. For example, the incidence of sexually transmitted disease, illegitimacy, depression and suicide increased simultaneously with wealth. It is sound to conclude that material wealth does not buy health or happiness. This is a familiar theme in religious doctrines and borne out by sociology.
Survival advantage of morality.

This is soft science but nevertheless worthy of consideration. For example, an overtly material existence is related to a shorter life span. Conversely, the moral and spiritual being will be at less risk of sexually transmitted disease, diseases of addiction, accidents, depression, and obesity.

Neuroscience

Is there a brain centre for morality? Is it intelligence dependent? Is it inherited or inducible or both? This is the old question of whether nature or nurture predicates behavioural development.  We have a useful investigatory tool in medicine called a molecular resonance imaging scan, (MRI). It can be modified to show which areas of the brain are functioning. If functional MRI brain scans are taken of patients being anaesthetised, activity areas progressively close down in all areas of the brain as depth of anaesthesia increases. The loss of consciousness is not associated with inactivity in any particular area. Since moral deliberation relies on conscious thought, we conclude that morality is not related to a centre but to the whole network of neurones, (nerve fibres) and synapses, (junctions), it is spatially diffuse. We can also observe, using the same scanner, certain areas are active with certain thought processes. For example, an offensive or frightening image will light up a particular area called the amygdale, even if the images are shown too quickly to be recognised. This implies that there is an emotional reaction to offence, of which we are unaware, (instinctive), as well as the conscious reaction. This is probably the neurological basis of the ethical sentiments we all have in common, the universals of humanness. How does hard neuroscience sit with sociological and behavioural science? Professor Bill Hatcher, points out that the simple fact that all individuals react positively to love, acceptance and generosity proves the universality of these spiritual values. If we define emotional reaction in terms of the intellectual content, not the stimulus, all races and cultures will exhibit literally hundreds of common behaviours. Incidentally, many universals are found in children before acculturation. This indicates that we are not born with a ‘blank slate’ but with a beginners set of social reactions.
Moral impairment.

Morality thus clearly depends on brain capacity as well as experience and it may be impaired by damage to the social brain. Such damage may occur through physical injury, tumour growth, degenerative disease, for example Alzheimer’s disease, and substance abuse. Examination of functional MRI scans of children and adults, who had sustained damage to the brain, showed that personality disorders were clearly related to the damaged frontal lobes.

Genes and morals

Clearly the determinist view of one gene per character for humans cannot be correct with merely 30,000 genes, only twice as many as the fruit fly. Equally, the reductionist view that understanding the genome will allow complete understanding of human variability is wildly optimistic.  The explanation is that variability is conferred by combinations of genes on adjacent sites, variable penetrance, environment effect, subtle control genes, large numbers of minigenes or snips, (single nucleotide polymorphisms), which confer multi-functionality and whether it is inherited from the father or mother. The qualities of giftedness such as great musicianship, athleticism or leadership for example are emergenic, expressed only when there is a certain combination of genes and circumstantial factors.  The description of the human genome and thus the fundament of humanness can be written down as a formula which is common to all. This in itself has underpinned the oneness of mankind.

We have seen how science may explain our innate moral nature and how it might be evolved or compromised by experience, genes and brain damage.  As this ontology develops we may come to understand the causes and management of dysfunctional behaviour and human conflict and the veracity of unity of mankind.  The Bahai Faith teaches, “Put all your beliefs into harmony with science. There can be no opposition for truth is one. When religion, shorn of its superstitions, traditions and unintelligent dogmas, shows its conformity with science, then will there be a great unifying, cleansing force in the world which will sweep before it all wars, disagreements, discords and struggles and then will mankind be united in the power of the love of God.”  ~ Abdu’l baha ~