A study published in Cognitive Development explored children’s understanding of morality and divine power, delving into how young minds perceive God’s ability to alter moral norms.
Researchers Madeline Reinecke and Larisa Solomon anchored their investigation in four research areas, including the cognitive science of religion, authority independence, intuitive metaethics, and the psychology of possibility.
The cognitive science of religion suggests that children’s views of God and possibility are shaped by religious teachings. As they grow, children learn that God is omnipotent and the source of all moral authority. This learning could lead them to believe that God has the power to change even the fundamental aspects of morality.
However, the concept of authority independence challenges this idea. It posits that despite religious teachings, children might see certain moral norms as unchangeable, even by a supreme being like God. Previous studies have shown that children can differentiate moral norms from religious norms, viewing the former as independent of any authority figure, including God.
Intuitive metaethics deals with people’s innate perceptions about the nature of morality. Studies have shown that both adults and children often view moral propositions as objective truths, rather than subjective opinions. The perception of morality as an objective fact might influence beliefs about the possibility of changing moral norms.
The psychology of possibility examines how people conceptualize possibilities, including those that involve morality. Interestingly, immoral actions are often initially represented as impossible by both children and adults. This intertwinement of morality and possibility could impact their views on the changeability of moral norms.
The present study was conducted online via live Zoom video conferences. A total of 129 children, with an average age of 6.52 years, were recruited. In a within-subjects design, each child responded to six counterbalanced vignettes featuring widely shared morals (i.e., “This person thinks that it is okay to stomp on someone’s foot really hard. This person thinks that it is not okay to stomp on someone’s foot really hard. Which person do you agree with more?”), controversial morals (i.e., “This person thinks that it is okay to steal food to feed someone who is hungry. This person thinks that it is not okay to steal food to feed someone who is hungry. Which person do you agree with more?”), or physical content (i.e., “This person thinks that germs are smaller than people’s houses. This person thinks that germs are bigger than people’s houses. Which person do you agree with more?”).
Children indicated which character in the vignette they agreed with and their certainty about that character’s judgment. They also judged whether God could make the opposite of their choice true, followed by a second certainty judgment. Participants’ responses were then coded to create a continuous measure of their confidence in God’s ability to change or to not change a proposition.
Emerging at age 4, children consistently denied that God could alter fundamental moral norms, such as turning morally wrong actions into morally right ones. This belief persisted across different age groups, indicating that from an early age, children view certain moral norms as unchangeable, even by a supreme being like God. Interestingly, while children’s beliefs about the immutability of moral norms remained stable, their views on physical phenomena shifted with age; older children increasingly believed that God could alter physical realities.
These findings challenge the assumption that religious socialization leads children to believe that an all powerful God would be capable of changing any aspect of reality, including morality. Instead, the study found that even within a cultural context where belief in a higher power is prevalent, children maintained that certain moral principles were beyond even God’s ability to change. This suggests a deeper, perhaps innate, understanding of morality as a domain distinct from other norms, that is resistant to change and rooted in widely shared human consensus.
The study, “Children deny that God could change morality”, was authored by Madeline G. Reinecke and Larisa Heiphetz Solomon.
