The “Moral Instinct” an essay written by Steven Pinker and published in The New York Times is an article which focuses on the Moral intuitions we value and base our reasoning on. He introduces many sub-topics in the morality of our beings such as rationalization, universal morals, and a variety of psychological states. He discusses the various aspects of moralization and questions further questions the reader on what they believe is right or wrong. Pinker also describes how people make judgments based on their morality and beliefs first, subsequently then working in reverse to try and rationalize what they said. Not only does he describe how people make judgement, but he also analyzes how our morality differs between our environment and the culture or religion we follow. For example, in the article he refers to the question of people who believe in god on whether it is just to torture another, if god tells them to do so?
What really interested me about Pinker’s article was his method in keeping the readers interest by testing them and challenging them. Constantly within his article he proposes questions to the reader in which test the audiences reasoning, and if what they believe is just, or right or wrong. I admire his informative style because, even though its leans more to a scientific article it fails to lose my interest, and the manner in which he brings to notice the unknown and how there’s still so much we are not aware of boggles my mind. He causes you to ponder on interesting situations such as the instance in which we attempt to do selfless acts for the benefit of others and why we do them, and what it is our reason for expecting the same of others. Although i do wish he provided more imagery, in which I would be able to picture the situations he provides for us more. I admire to, how he raises so many questions in which he doesn’t have all the answers to just boggle the readers mind even more. I enjoyed reading his piece undoubtedly, and truly admired how he was able to support all of his claims and even at times have supporting sources to back up his sources. His outside information made his ideas very credible, in which I was able to understand everything that he was saying and his reasons for saying them.