Published by CNN
After talking about moral decision making in class today, I was interested in finding an article that discussed it. It has been found that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex is involved in social emotions like empathy and guilt, and recent findings also show its role in making judgments in life-or-death situations. The study tested six people with brain damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, twelve with damage to other brain regions, and twelve who were healthy. The results showed that the brain lesion patients responded similarly to the others when having to decide between what’s right and wrong, but when death was involved, their answers changed.
People with brain lesions in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex were more likely to choose the option that killed one person in order to save a group of others. They even said they would kill their own child to save other people’s lives.
It seems like people with damage to this area are operating in a logical manner, based on what they think is better for the future. The fact that they would choose to give up their own child’s life to save another’s is an extremely interesting point. How can we test what goes on in their minds, leading them to make such decisions? I wonder if the same answers apply when someone is just being harmed, not necessarily killed.
That's really interesting that ventromedial prefrontal cortical damage can lead to the dominance of rational over emotional thought. I've seen studies where the framing of questions can alter the general response. For example, if an action is framed in the context of the number of people who would die, people are unwilling to take it. However, if it is framed in the context of the number of lives it will saved, people are more willing to take action. I wonder if people with ventromedial PFC damage would be able to overcome the emotionally arousing contextual effects and respond rationally regardless of framing.
ReplyDeleteI take a bit of an issue with the distinction the article produces between "rational" and "emotional" thought. While I agree that it is fascinating that VPFC damage appears to shift the spectrum between what I would call personal and impersonal judgment, it doesn’t seem correct to call personal judgment emotional and impersonal judgment rational. For instance, there are clear-cut evolutionary reasons as to why the sacrifice of one’s child, even to the benefit of a roomful of people, would not be logical. This is why, on an “emotional” level, such an act seems abhorrent. It is, in fact, abhorrent to many reasonable people.
ReplyDelete