Response: Source of Conscience

In response to Andrew Bagley's post "Dostoevsky on Conscience" (April 28, 2012):

Relying on conscience to guide a society has more problems than simply the existence of psychopaths.  Conscience is, itself, largely a product of society; if one grows up in a society which condones cannibalism, for example, one is unlikely to find cannibalism ethically problematic unless one takes some time to think critically about the practice.  This may seem virtually irrelevant, as very few societies do support the idea of cannibalism (and therefore most people refrain from it due to their consciences), but subtler examples are far more widespread.  Many societies see no problem with homophobia, sexism, racism, torture, or child abuse.  As such, people who grow up in these cultures will not find these sorts of mindsets or practices unconscionable.  It may be true that humans are all born with the same innate rules of conscience; however, society bends and warps these rules far before humans mature enough to consciously decide to abide by these rules rather than those of their societies.