This study makes a big mistake

This study makes a big mistake. It mixes up two very different things: moral feelings and moral thinking. Then it treats people who rely more on thinking instead of feelings as if they are less moral. But from the view of Natural Law, that is wrong and even dangerous.

Natural Law is a way of understanding what is right and wrong based on things that are always true, like fairness (which we call reciprocity), truthfulness, and treating others with the same respect and care that we expect for ourselves. In Natural Law, morality means doing what is right in a way that others can trust, agree is fair, and that works the same for everyone. It is not just about how we feel in the moment.

The researchers in this study used something called “Moral Foundations Theory.” This is a way to measure how people respond to feelings about things like care, fairness, loyalty, authority, purity, and freedom. But those are just emotional reactions, not solid actions or reasoning. This kind of measurement is more like checking how someone feels about right and wrong, not how they think through it, whether they can explain their choices, or whether their choices are even moral.

So, what did the study really find? That people who are better at thinking do not rely as much on their feelings when deciding what is moral. That does not mean they are less moral. It means they are using reason to work through questions of right and wrong. This is called disambiguation, which means they are sorting out messy or unclear ideas to make better decisions.

In Natural Law, we want people to act based on truth, fairness, and what we call reciprocity, the idea that if you would not want something done to you, you should not do it to others. This kind of moral thinking works in every place and every situation. It can be tested, explained, and trusted, not just felt.

The problem with the study is that it mixes up feelings with principles. It says, “This person does not show strong emotional reactions, so they must be less moral.” But what if the person has learned not to just go by emotions? What if they have learned to ask, “Is this fair?” or “Is this true?” That is not a weakness. That is wisdom.

So, this study is not really measuring morality. It is measuring how emotional people are about moral topics. That is not the same thing. And when experts talk like this, it causes big problems. People start to think that morality is just about feelings. But how can we expect everyday people to understand morality if even the experts are confused?

How are parents, teachers, and leaders supposed to teach kids what is right and wrong, what is moral or immoral, if all we have are feelings to guide us?

That is why I have written a book for kids around ten years old. It teaches them how to think about ethics from the ground up, using Natural Law and reason instead of just emotions. The book will be available by the end of the summer. It is made for parents, teachers, pastors, and anyone else who wants to help children learn how to think clearly and fairly. Follow me to see it released in the coming weeks.