Where morality as we think of it in modern society is widely interpreted through many schools of thought, each delving into different levels of detail. While many perspectives have moderate validity, I think evolutionary scientists, psychologists, and philosophers have the most credible and demonstrable theory about how we think about morality. They think of it in terms of how we have grown to develop higher thought processes and social awareness over billions of years. Furthermore, it is believed to have explained the way we react and judge why things are as good or bad as we think. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Psychologists and scientists have done research and experiments observing animals and humans and what they notice, or more appropriately what they don't notice is Most animals with smaller brains are that they tend not to make the morally right decisions when find themselves faced with a dilemma, as is the case with larger-brained mammals such as chimpanzees and humans. This is because in their branch of evolution, their genes had not changed that much from generation to generation in their species. Animal brains never arose until 250 million years ago. The human or “true” brain (more modern adaptation) did not evolve to its current sophistication until 200,000 years ago, and has not changed much since then. Along with the evolution of the sophistication of our brain, came the evolution of our ability to distinguish our emotions, the greater ability to learn and adapt, and to understand which actions lead to more or less pleasant outcomes. Our social skills have also probably improved due to climate change and the scarcity of fruits and vegetables. Humans had to learn to band together to hunt larger game for meat. The rules that followed began as a way for many individuals to get along without fighting. Although through many millennia of socialization and creation of our modern societies, we prefer to think of our rules as moral based on how we feel. As individuals, we label things as right and wrong based on our emotional response to whatever act we are judging. We have the initial emotional reaction (whether we loved or hated what happened) to the action, and then we try to account for it. the emotion. For example, if we learned that our dear friend's significant other cheated on him, we would have an unexpected reaction of anger or sadness that would make our life worse. We decided this was a bad thing before thinking about any logic or reasoning. So let's say that cheating is bad for certain reasons. A conscience is just a collection of all the prejudicial acts we have experienced or heard about, and we use our conscience to apply what we have already learned from similar past instances to whatever actions happen next. Our minds go through the entire process so quickly that some tend to think we innately know what is right and what is wrong when we don't know it objectively in every circumstance. We only know our feelings about a situation and the reasoning we give to those feelings. It is therefore logical to believe that our conscience or moral sense changes over time. It changes when we change as individuals and we change as a society. When I was 10 years old, my feelings on many commonly debated issues were very black and white due to my lack of experience to base my thinking on. For example, 150 years ago the popular opinion about blacks was to think that.