For example, the legalization of abortion in some countries sparked a great debate. Peoples' instincts told them abortion is wrong and that is why it's only considered legal in presence of a convincing reason. Hence, instincts never depart. It's just that sometimes we choose reasons over instincts. However, a counter-argument may be that people indulge in immoral practices following environmental pressures because human nature is as bad. It was mentioned earlier that people can choose to ignore doing the right thing. The action doesn't mean that they are evil, but they are forcefully willing to go against all odds if they are to benefit. More so, the pressures don't change them instantly. It takes time. To some cases, second and third parties are involved in contributing towards the same through incitement like in many cases of abortions. This delay eliminates the involvement of intuitive mechanism, which means nature is out of question in this case and so do human nature. Such responses are reflection based. A person is aware of his evil deeds and the consequences. Hence, the person is unfair to human nature, not vice versa.
There is some hesitation involved whenever someone knows that he is about to engage in wrongdoing, especially for first-timers. However, there is a confidence that comes with someone settling for a good deed. That's why someone will commit murder and later try to battle out the resultant feeling by getting high or reacting abnormally. There is that guilty conscious and an inner voice speaking to someone. However, some can ignore and move on, especially if they have done it repeatedly or are ready to deal with the consequences. Two mechanisms, intuition and reflection, can explain the above scenario. Intuition is an automatic and effortless response that leads to the occurrence of certain actions without reasons or insights. It is natural. Reflection is connected to the conscious activity.
