Is the conscience an instinct?

[LaughingAtlas]

I was thinking recently how a lot of people are willing to surrender to primal urges rather than do what may be considered right.
"Have money, blow it on drugs because it feels good!"
"This girl can't defend herself, take advantage of her because it feels good!"
"Beat this person's face in because it feels good!"
"Tell children I have magic and rape them in a graveyard because it feels good!" (can't seem to find the article, but it was on this site some weeks back)

It occurs to me that doing "right" or "wrong" is spurred on by the little shoulder angel and devil, (or however you like to imagine it) in this exercise the angel saying "give the money to a charity," and devil saying "purchase indulgences" in case you've never heard shoulder voice bit before. Aren't these voices also intrinsic to humans? "Help that poor person because it feels good"? If you're not hoping for a reward of some kind, I can't seem to think of a logical reason to go around being nice all the time whose benefits couldn't come from being a a selfish asshole. (there's possibility of people liking you for it, if not just as much hating you for being a better person than them by comparison, but it doesn't appear to be a logical reason as vox populi is a fickle *****) As such, isn't being "good" an instinct of some sort?

Short version: I can't tell if not giving in to one's desires can be judged as weakness in a person when resisting those desires is apparently just giving in to a different desire, even if one from the back of your mind. Thoughts/viewpoints please?

 

[LikeDustInTheWind]

There are arguments for and against whether or not it's an instinct.

For: Long ago when we were first starting out in huts and caves, we realized when we do something for someone they are prone to do something for you. This has continued for years and is ingrained into our minds. In my opinion it's also where we get our idea of karma. It's just basic reciprocity.

Against: Pretty much everything about being nice besides that first point goes against our basic survival instincts. Lions, for example, will not share food from a kill with another lion if it isn't part of their pack. If they give up their food, they have a smaller chance of surviving. In humans it is the same thing except switching food for money or other things. We are giving the things we worked for and getting nothing in return. In the wild that would be the most idiotic thing an animal could do.

This ended up being a longer than I thought it would so I'll just end it here. Humans struggle between being good and possibly getting something in return, or being more "greedy" and keeping their things to themselves. I think they are both technically instincts.

 

[toadtamer]

If you look at Machiavellian ideas, or to a more extreme extent, sociopathic behavior, you'll find that the conscience isn't an instinct. From a Freudian perspective this would be either the id controlled by the superego, or the superego itself; while the superego tells you that something is wrong, the id doesn't care. I once met a person who couldn't feel emotions, and his superego was pretty much dead, only kept alive by societal restraints (i.e. being punished because it is perceived as 'bad behavior'), he didn't have a conscience, only what was told to him a conscious should be. Via that colder look at life, he was a glib talker and manipulated people into doing what served his id best, thus avoiding punishment, and keeping his interests-- based strongly in hedonism-- primary, not secondary to a superego. While the conscious can be instilled into us at an early age, it is not instinct. Much like language. Humans have the capacity for language, but do not intrinsically know it. Or even human society, we are born into it, but it is not instinctual; it must be built first, and properly organized, else it becomes just another tool for survival: power in numbers.

 

[GodofCider]

Snip.

Strictly answering your thread question: No.

But then, that depends on how you define instinct.

What is right and wrong is an evolutionarily and culturally determined product.

 

[Timberwolf0924]

Doing wrong and right should never be spurred by 'on the shoulder' angels and devils. It all comes to how someone is raised, their abilty to comprehend things and also their own personal desire to preform a certian action. I do understand the desires of addiciton as well as fornication and violence, but I'll never mix them.
(Unless she wears something that says 'rape me')*

I choose to do good because I was raised in a house hold that was always crazy. Something going on, started drinking at age 14, stopped at 18, smoked weed from age 15 till 20. Now I don't have a problem with smoking weed, and I'll tell my 'Bible study' group that anytime they ask me, and I know I'm not the only one with that feeling towards it.

But when it comes down to it, humans natural instinct is, yes, to do what feels good because it's what we're made to do. But the difference what makes us different from animals is: 1-Laws, a pack of deer aren't going to hunt down and arrest a wolf after one of their own are eaten; 2-Free Will, all other animals are driven by some sort of nature mechinac that makes them do crazy things, from lemmings jumping to their death to birds migrating south during winter; and 3-Technology, that speaks for itself, no jack rabbit is going to get past my electric fence to eat my carrot, they can't use scissors..

 

[LaughingAtlas]

*snip*

Interesting... Come to think of it, parents have to tell their children repeatedly to play nice with other kids, don't they? I recall being told virtuousness was something to aspire to, not just having good will towards others pop into my head one day.

Strictly answering your thread question: No.
But then, that depends on how you define instinct.
What is right and wrong is an evolutionarily and culturally determined product.

Insticnt would be something that naturally exists within the mind, I suppose, but according to dictionary.com...

in·stinct
1    [in-stingkt]

?noun
1.
an inborn pattern of activity or tendency to action common to a given biological species.

2.
a natural or innate impulse, inclination, or tendency.

3.
a natural aptitude or gift.

On right and wrong, we are in agreement.