The Animal Inside

Can one always know the right thing to do in any given situation? Does it all rest upon the human actor or the action?  Is it a combination of both?  The problem with Wright's work as stated by many of you is that it lends itself to a sort of moral relativism while seemingly pushing humanity out of the equation.  It is from our sense of right and wrong that we judge the actions of others or even the character of other actors.  However, if one thing is wrong in one area and right in another country/tribe/what have you, where is the right and where is the wrong?  How does one fit humanity into this picture of "the moral animal"?  It is a constant regeneration of the question of how to be moral in every situation juxtaposed with the mess we find ourselves in: humans giving in to baser instincts and desires, acting out of only self-interestedness, and humans also acting for the good of the whole, for others rather than self and the list may go on.  It is a journey in what it means to be human as well as live the way we do each day, making decisions based on instinct or principle or even gut feeling.  It is fighting with the animal we know ourselves to be, the beast that hides in darkness ready to devour its prey.  There is a dark side to human nature that lets us know there is more to "being human" that what we had once thought.  It may be in the darkest instance we find the real answers to our quest of morality and the limits it may hold.