New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Moral Animal

A sense of right and wrong starts with innate brain circuitry

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

THE ROOTS OF MODERN MORALITY have long been a point of contention among psychologists, philosophers and neuroscientists. Do our ethical foundations arise from our relatively recent ability to reason or from our ancient emotions? Studies have recently lent support to the notion that we owe much of our sense of right and wrong to our animal ancestors.

Evidence that morality comes before reason is supported by primate studies. A chimpanzee, for instance, will sometimes drown to save its peers and refuse food if doing so prevents others from injury. That's not to say they are morally sophisticated beings, but “it's not as if morality and our moral rules are just a pure invention of the religious or philosophical mind,” explains Frans de Waal, a primatologist and psychologist at Emory University. De Waal's work suggests that our morality is an outgrowth of our ancestors’ social tendencies, an indication that it is at least in part an evolved trait (an idea Charles Darwin shared). Dogs, too, seem to have a keen sense of “wild justice,” says Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He has observed a sense of morality among dogs at play. “Animals know right from wrong,” he notes.

If morality is innate rather than learned, then it should have left biological traces. Studies suggest that moral decisions involve certain parts of the brain associated with prosocial tendencies and emotional regulation, such as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. In brain scans, this region lights up when subjects choose to donate money to charity, and those with damage to this region make unexpected moral judgments. Some ethical dilemmas also activate brain regions involved in rational decision making, such as one called the anterior cingulate cortex—a finding that implies that higher-order brain functions may also contribute to our morality, even if it's rooted in emotions.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Ultimately, de Waal says, we need to thank our evolutionary ancestors for far more than just bestial urges. “When humans kill each other or commit genocide, we say we're acting like animals,” he says. But “you can see the same sort of thing with regard to our positive behavior.”

Melinda Wenner Moyer, a contributing editor at Scientific American, is author of Hello, Cruel World! Science-Based Strategies for Raising Terrific Kids in Terrifying Times (G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 2025).

More by Melinda Wenner Moyer
Scientific American Magazine Vol 303 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Moral Animal” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 303 No. 2 (), p. 51
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0810-51a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe