Science topic

Moral Psychology - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Moral Psychology, and find Moral Psychology experts.
Questions related to Moral Psychology
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
51 answers
Education is important.
What is your opinion about education? about higher education?
What do you expect?
Relevant answer
Answer
Education is the way of learning humanity, solution of problem, direction to right path as well as build up of the society.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
421 answers
Here is a small challenge:
In a research community (e.g., uni faculty, conferences) consisting of researchers (e.g., professors, etc), every researcher knows each other. There are good researchers and a corrupt one. Each researcher knows about some other researchers and whether each of them is good or corrupt, but s/he doesn't know whether her/himself is corrupt or not. One day, a queen who has the power to know everything about all communities, came to the research community and told that "there is one corrupt researcher in this community. You should not exchange with each other what you already know about the corruption. I ask any of you to leave in the midnight of the day once you know that yourself is corrupt."
Edit: Readers may find the definition of 'corrupt': https://www.dictionary.com/browse/corrupt
=======
Corruption detection in Distributed Network
In computer science, if a 'good entity' doesn't act under the rule nor communicate their knowledge, it is said malfunctioned, compromised or corrupted. Theoretically, those entities actually become no different from the corrupt ones who actually targets the network. Mathematically, if many such 'good' entities existed, the whole network is compromised, it can no longer distinguish what is good or not. When the network comes to that state, it is irreversible. Detected corruption is as important as the knowledge, and sharing detected corruption must be part of the rules.
Only computer science is given in this example, readers may get their own intuition in the matters they are concerned.
========
Conjecture 1:
Given: there are rules (law) for every good entity to follow, and assume they all follow.
Conjecture: If all good entities still act (do, follow, obey) based on the common rules (law) and share knowledge (truth, facts) via communication, then corruption can be uncovered if not dominant.
========
Truth, Majority, Transparency and Education
For any sample of population and any person in the sample has an equal chance to access to or deduce the truth, then majority is likely to get closer to the truth than the remainder. In practice, the chances vary and truths sometimes are restricted to only a small portion. That's why majority may not work in such setting. Transparency and education help.
========
Summary of discussions
Knowledge and communication may be not sufficient to stop corruption. It needs rules and transparency.
----
Version 2: In a committee of n researchers, each researcher interacts with exactly k other researchers each day and finds out whether any of the k is corrupt. The researcher then gossips the new finding with 1 other research on that day. Note that, the corrupt researcher can also gossip, but his/her message can be true/wrong each time. If the queen comes and tells that there is one corrupt researcher, can the committee spot it out? in how many days? if there is no such queen, can the committee still find it out?
Relevant answer
Answer
In my opinion, the main cause of corruption is the morality.
Regards.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
49 answers
Today, we are living in a world where technological advances are happening in a pace which has been unprecedented in the entire history. Various technologies and industrial innovations are transforming how humans interact with their environment and with each other.
So, How do you define morality in today's world? What role does it play in our interactions with these new advancements in technology? And most importantly, will it be forgotten in the future or will it be salvational?
Relevant answer
Answer
Morality is an attitude of always doing what is right.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
3 answers
I am looking for papers that examine the associations between the Dark Triad and values of the Moral Foundations Theory.
If you're doing research on this, have any published or unpublished manuscript or data, I would love to hear from you!
Alternatively, please comment on our project below with a link to your paper.
Thank you!
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Velvetina,
I suggest that you might consider the Dark Tetrad which adds "everyday-sadism to the Triad see Buckles, Jones, & Paulhus, 2013
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
Hi, I´m looking for a face database for my research on the link between aesthetic and moral evaluations. Therefore, it would be very usefull to find a face database that includes aesthetics ratings (e.g., pretty/neutral/ugly faces).
Thanks!
Antonio
Relevant answer
Answer
This Meta-Database by Cliff Workman might help you find what you need:
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
7 answers
If one accepts the broad truths of ethical error theory, what comes next in figuring out how to live? What still matters (pace Parfit), and how much ? Are we simply left with a subjective 'desirism' to pursue our own goals and pleasure...? with widely shared, if non-objective, values we pursue as we choose? Can we sign on, without contradiction, to a pragmatic utilitarianism that seems to promote mostly common goals...and, if so, how do we reckon with the exceptions we may desire, e.g., not torturing one to save many? How much of this is a matter of psychology vs philosophical principles we may choose (and how does that sit with a deterministic or at most compatabilist view of free will)...? And what about change? What changes would it make sense to work towards given what we decide does or doesn't matter? This includes both societal change and individual change. Should I work to modify my presumably innate and sometimes satisfactory vengeful implulses? How about competitiveness...or excessive self-interest (but what is excessive)...? What about sex and love? Camus has sometimes been flatteringly described as a rakish womanizer who told a woman he loves her before going on to the next and professing the same, and meaning both. Deception was presumably part of this. What philosophical or psychological judgments should we apply to someone acting that way? [Note: I have started a similar discussion group at philpapers.org. We can decide later if one or the other should be merged/eliminated.]
Relevant answer
Answer
It is always repeating the same in different way
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
10 answers
My research is on the needs of rural parents that have a son/daughter born with disability.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you Beatrice for this interesting article. It is a very confronting scenario that needs appropriate attention.
Kind regards,
Kerre
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
8 answers
With "better person" I mean better in moral terms as opposed to, for example, competency. All papers I've come across use behavioural measures to measure this, but I really want a direct measure of this motivation/desire. In an experiment that I am setting up I'm hypothesising this construct to be one of the mechanisms of the effect I'm trying to gauge.
Hoping for your insightful responses – thanks!
Relevant answer
If you found a meaning in life it may make you a better person. If you use positive coping scales you may feel better. You can read hos people who are subject to severe trauma can react and adapt to that. You can look at the scales we used in our papers:
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
6 answers
A fellow grad student and I are designing a study to investigate how responses on the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ, a self-report scale assessing people's perceived relevance of various moral domains to their basic moral judgments) relate to or predict differential responding to items on another clinical measure. There are 5 subscales within the MFQ, representing the different moral domains (harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, purity/sanctity). Our prediction is that scores on some of these subscales (but not all of them) will be related to scores on the items of the clinical measure.
We've been reading about differential item functioning and multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) SEM models, and it appears that these models might be the best fit for asking this sort of question. However, MIMIC models only seem to use categorical indicators. Will testing these hypotheses require SEM? It seems as though it would, since we are relating scores on measure with scores on items of another measure, including a latent factor to represent total scores on the later measure.
Any help would be much appreciated! Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Seems like your clinical outcome is your dependent x. I supppose your dependent x is a continous variable? As said by @Beatrice, the simplest way is to do a correlation between the mean score of each sub scale and the dependent x. You could also do linear regression.
If you use SEM you can do a more advanced examination of the MFQ in a second order CFA and whether MFQ predicts the clinical factor.
Best
John Kåre
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
9 answers
Why or why wouldn't you find the psychological egoist's explanation plausible?
Relevant answer
Answer
An egoist will look and treat an altruist wrong. Egoist and altruist , if not diametrically opposite personalities, are completely in different spectrum of behaviors and therefore their value systems and truth to them are completely different.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
24 answers
Why or why not? If so, who are some of these exemplars?
Relevant answer
Answer
1.In Sanskrit Text : You first obey the rules and religions, then try to teach others.
2.In Arabic Story : Sultan Haru al Rashid was not giving advise to a child to eat lesser amount of sugar even after repeated request from a poor mother for six months. Afterwards he gave the advice. He explained that he himself took six months to bring down the quantity of sugar in his daily meals after trying for six months. He gave advice after attaining the qualification only.
3. In English (Proverb): Charity begins at home.
Nothing more to say.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
Hi everyone, 
I am searching for a specific kind of material assessing empathetic processes. I would like to measure empathetic decision taking, where the participant might choose between the interests of a collectivity (to the detriment of an individual); or the interests of an individual (to the detriment of a collectivity). 
Therefore, it is a kind of material mixing the public goods and the trolley dilemma: an ecological situation assessing empathetic behaviours without involving money.
If this material does not exist, does any collaborator would be interested to develop this kind of material with me?
Many thanks in advance,
Julian
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Julian,
I agree on the use of empathy scales such as the 60-item empathy quotient available on Cambridge website. I thought from what you described that you were also interested in moral judgement.
For this, I would recommend the moral judgement task:
Or the moral dilemmas developed by Patil and colleagues. The authors are available on RG.
Best regards,
Moussa 
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
10 answers
The outputs of public decision-making, please, imagine as intended and unintended results of: public discussion, selection of decision makers, selection of decision method, decision itself, implementation of decision, later effects.
How would you construct variable god_# ?
Let us call the variables god_# , where # is number.
Please, do not tell us that goodness does not exist, is too complicated, relative, etc. just do your best guess at what may work. Send me as message if you cannot. Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Have a look at Binmore: Natural Justice.  Rawls's reflective Equilibrium or Paul Edwards The Logic of Moral Discourse are both accounts of how we can arrive at some 'objective' measure of the good.  
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
14 answers
It is approximation, a rule of thumb, it should be simple like 22/7 not 3.14159265.. Something quite simple so e.g. 20% population  could understand it after 1 hour of cozy chat.
Did it somebody before?
You may approximate it after the decision and its effects.
Future effects may be discounted for uncertainty and transfer of responsibility, saying that moral responsibility is gradually more and more falling to new relevant decisions or non-decisions.
Small rare cases may be ignored. Catastrophic rare cases may be very important.
First suggestion is good/bad survey after the most significant effects. (Cost, respondents forget, need for results)
As there is no complete definition of morality, extensive knowledge of ethics and little bit of intuition may be needed, but only use will show how the approximation works. Opinions are welcome too.
Relevant answer
Answer
Given that there are a variety of normative moral theories, a justifiable decision-making progress avoids absolutizing any of them, whilst recognizing that any of them may address conditions to some extent. The process of reaching a justifiable judgement is thus one of accepting approximation, whilst self-consciously avoiding the absolute acceptance or rejection of any of the potential moral approaches. Which approaches we may be inclined to absolutise (whether positively or negatively) will depend on the context, and thus how we avoid them is also contextual. The contextual factors include exactly which person or persons is making the decision and which absolutized theories they might otherwise be likely to fall into.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
A man who abused a women usually does not have a love on it and cannot love others
Relevant answer
Answer
In my opinion I believe that No, in the moment that there is an aggression both physical and psychology there is no love, but quite the opposite.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
3 answers
Has anyone have the reference material on netnography and ethics combination. It would be very helpful for my new project. Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
Everything you want to know about Netnography is in "NETNOGRAPHY" by Robert V. Kozinets 2010. He is the father of Netnography. You will also find all the references you need. Good luck!
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
11 answers
Dear Colleague,
I am searching for a theory linking violence with moral thinking and/or critical reasoning.  My subjects are from extremist group.  If you came across an article or a book about this issue I appreciate your help by providing me with such link.
Thank you
Othman
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear colleague,
there is no single theory for that. Evolutionary sciences, neurosciences, developmental psychology, psychiatry, sociology, criminology, etc. offer many theories, hypotheses, and empirical findings for several types of violence. Moral thinking and critical reasoning are surely not the primary factors motivating violence. For an interdisciplinary approach I recommend (unfortunately in German):
Klaus Wahll: Aggression und Gewalt. Ein biologischer, psychologischer und sozialwissenschaftlicher Überblick. Heidelberg: Springer Spektrum Akademischer Verlag 2013
Best,
Klaus
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
19 answers
I am seeking references for any primary literature sources that describe the conceptual relationship between free will and moral responsibility. I am open to a broad array of disciplinary perspectives and methods, and I will particularly appreciate papers using conceptual analysis, ethnography, and/or psychometric instruments to explore this topic.
It is important to emphasize my interest in descriptive work because the literature I have read thus far primarily relies upon shared intuitions about the connection between free will and moral responsibility rather than explicit argumentation. For example, philosophers or scientists often attempt to demonstrate that free will exists/does not exist and then begin making normative ethical claims about moral responsibility without explicitly addressing why these conclusions should follow (i.e., why the ontological status of free will has implications for moral responsibility). Social psychological research on the behavioral effects of believing/not believing in free will also tends to rely upon the assumption that participants will draw similar normative conclusions, but rarely is a descriptive account provided as to why this should be so (i.e. what aspects of the participants' cultural background and worldview[s] lead them to draw such conclusions).
Thank you for your assistance.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Jordan,
I am currently developing a framework that, among other things, uncouples free will from moral responsibility by showing how the latter can exist where the former does not.
Regards,
Kevin
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
3 answers
Also adopted by:-
"A Matter of Reputation and Pride: Associations between Perceived External Reputation, Pride in Membership, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions" Helm (2013)
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Ayesha.
I think a deeper investigation into the nature of organizational pride is needed here. Tracy and Robbins have suggested that pride has two distinct facets: authentic pride which is associated with pro-social behavior,  and hubristic pride which is related to socially unfavorable behavior like hostility and aggressiveness. Meanwhile, in management literature, several authors have proposed two dimensions of organizational pride (emotional organizational pride and attitudinal organizational pride) that also have different behavioral consequences, even though still remain unexplored (I am sure you have already familiar with Gouthier and Rhein's (2012) paper). If we want to trace the relationship between organizational pride and organizational morality, then we have to make sure which dimensions/facets of organizational pride that is more likely to strengthen (or maybe destruct/dampen) organizational morality. And it might be useful if we remain open to the possibility that there maybe a dyadic relationship here, because, based on the comments/observations above, poor organizational morality  might weakens employee's pride in membership.  
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
76 answers
What comes to mind for me here is the debate on the use of arguably (?) life-saving medical data collected by Nazi doctors in concentration camps.
Relevant answer
Answer
No (although there is not a consensus among scientists or lawyers).
First, unethical research should, to the best of our ability, be banned.
Second, persons who do unethical research have an agenda (eg, Nazi doctors like Mengele, Rüdin, others used data to bolster their a priori assumptions re: race and the superiority of "Aryans"--they were not interested in proving or not proving the null hypothesis).
Third, how generalizeable is data on tortured incarcerated persecuted hopeless concentration camp prisoners to the general population? It is not.
So unethical research by biased "researchers" on a persecuted subgroup is wrong and confounded by selection bias.
Lewis A Opler, MD, PhD
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
8 answers
I am looking into morality or moral values and how that as a factor affects bullying behaviour. I have found one, the MFQ-20, but it's still too long for my project. Thank you in advance for your suggestions.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Calli,
You ask if anyone have a short scale that measures morality.
Any answer to your question greatly depends on many issues. Age of individuals whose moral behavior/thinking you want to assess, and the type of morality (e.g., justice-oriented a la Kohlberg, or care-oriented a la Gilligan) you are interested in, are but two examples of such issues. 
I know of several scales that try to evaluate the individual's moral reasoning. I say to evaluate or assess, not to measure, because, I think, no psychological instrument measures the individual's competence in any psychological domain. To measure means to attain a degree of rigor that it is not possible in psychology whatever. This rigor only exists in the so called "hard" sciences, as is the case of physics, geometry, mathematics, and the like. Note, for example, that psychology is pervaded by many Likert-scales, which are generally based on self-reports. The results obtained are often treated as if they were, say, interval, not categorical or ordinal, results. Note also that in a Likert-scale, a given score, 30, for example, can be obtained by answering differently to the several items of such a scale. This clearly shows that such a scale does not really give us interval data, even though such data are often subject to parametric statistical analyses, such as ANOVAS, MANCOVAS, and the like. This statistical procedure gives us an illusion of rigor that does not exist in psychology (see, for example, Paul Meehl, 1978). As Wittgenstein once remarked in his famous Philosophical Investigations, in psychological there are experimental methods, but conceptual confusion
With these caveats in mind, I turn to your question. Kohlberg's interview and scoring system is perhaps the most known and deep tool to assess the individual's moral reasoning/behavior. I say behavior, and not only reasoning, because no behavior can be considered moral or immoral when we do not take into account the moral reasons underlying such a behavior. Kohlberg's verbal interview and scoring system is, for instance, only at the reach of Kohlbergian experts and consumes much time and effort. Because of this, James Rest put forth his Defining Issues Test (i.e., DIT), which is relatively easy to apply and is an objective, and group-administered  questionnaire .The DIT 1 (and now the DIT2)  is, nowadays, the most used tool to assess one's moral reasoning. Note that Kohlberg's method is difficult to apply to individuals under 10-11 years of age, and Rest's test, to individuals under 12-13 years of age. Neither Kohlberg's method nor Rest's test are, as it were, short "scales". In addition to this, both tools are mainly justice-oriented and appeal to hypothetical moral dilemmas.  Because of this, Carol Gilligan (1982) advanced a care- oriented tool. This tool is not either, so to say, a short "scale", nor is it suitable for children under adolescence. However, it deals with real-life, instead of hypothetical, moral conflicts, choices and dilemmas.
The Piagetian moral stories (see Piaget, 1932, The moral judgment of the child) may be considered a short "scale" of children's moral heteronomy and moral autonomy, a "scale” suitable for children aged between 4 and 12 years.
To assess children's sense of justice you can employ the following scale: The moral development scale by W. Kurtines and J. Pimm (1983). The moral development scale: A Piagetian measure of moral judgment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 89-105. See also Pimm, J., Kurtines, W., & Ruffy, M. (1982). Moral development in contemporary American and Swiss children. Archives de Psychologie, 50, 225-235, and Kurtines, W., and Pimm, J. (1983): The moral development scale: Unpublished Manual. As its title shows, this scale is a Piagetian-oriented scale. It is suitable for children aged between 3-4/9-10 years and allows you to easily classify a child as oriented to moral autonomy or to moral heteronomous.  Although being a Piagetian-oriented scale, the scale is standardized, and hence, it also allows you to attribute a numeric score (from 0 to 30) having to do with the child's sense of justice. In Pimm, Kurtines, and Ruffy's words, the scale allows us to see "... to what extent [the child being interviewed] gave up of his/her moral realism and acquired a sense of justice" (1982, p. 226). More importantly, the moral development scale is, say, referred to a criterion, not to a norm. Note that the majority of mental tests are referred to a norm, not to a criterion. Developmental tasks, such as Piagetian tasks are always referred to a developmental criterion, not to a norm
Other RG researchers could suggest the moral-conventional transgression task by Turiel and his colleagues. This task, however, assesses the child's distinction between morality and social convention. As this distinction appears even in children as young as 3-year-olds, and such a distinction does not change over time, I do not see such task as a suitable task to assess the subject's sense of morality.
Nancy Eisenberg (1982) has developed a questionnaire to assess the individual’s prosocial reasoning. Contrary to moral reasoning a la Kohlberg or perfect and negative duties a la Kant,  for example, Eisenberg’s questionnaire deals with positive moral reasoning and behavior (e.g., sharing, helping, donating, comforting), not with negative immoral behavior such as hitting, lying, stealing and the like.  Eisenberg has distinguished among several categories of prosocial reasoning, such as hedonistic reasoning, others’ needs-oriented reasoning, social approval- oriented reasoning, and so forth.
A way of assessing one’s moral reasoning can also be found in the literature on the “happy-unhappy victimizer phenomenon”. In studies on this phenomenon, there are a victimizer who gets some tangible outcomes after committing an immoral act (e.g., to steal a chocolate bar from another individual) and an innocent victim, who is deprived of some of his/her goods (e.g., a chocolate bar).  Participants in such studies are asked to attribute positive (immoral) emotions (e.g, the victimizer feels good and happy because s/he got what s/he wanted) or negative (and moral) emotions (e.g., the victimizer feels bad and unhappy because s/he committed an immoral act) to the transgressor at hand. Findings have generally found that young children (under 5 years, for instance) tend to attribute positive emotions to the victimizer, whereas older children tend to attribute negative emotions to the victimizer at hand.
Of course, there are many other ways to assess one’s moral thinking and behavior. I am fully aware that I only pointed to some of them. Even so, I hope that my considerations are of help to you.   
Best regards.   
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
First, I intend to use the Student Moral and Performance Character Scale (MORC & PERC) in Culture of Excellence & Ethics Assessment (CEEA). However, I figured out that it is a school assessment rather than an individual assessment. So, I wonder is there any other instruments that are more suitable for this age group (aged 6-8) on assessment their moral character after character education? If possible, I would like to have the student and teacher test forms. Thanks so much!
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Yee  Shek,
I would suggest the following scale: The moral development  scale by W. Kurtines & J. Pimm (1983). The moral development scale: A Piagetian measure of moral judgment . Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 89-105. See also Pimm, J., Kurtines, W., & Ruffy, M. (1982). Moral development in contemporary American and Swiss children. Archives de Psychologie, 50, 225-235, and Kurtines, W. & Pimm, J. (1983): The moral development scale: Unpublished Manual. May be you can asked Kurtines or Pimm to send you a cope of such scale and manual.  
As its title shows, such scale is a Piagetian-oriented scale. It is suitable for the ages you indicates, and allows you to easily classify  a child as oriented to moral autonomy or to moral heteronomous.  Although being a Piagetian-oriented scale, the scale is standardized, and hence, it also allows you to attribute a numeric score (from 0 to 30)  having to do with child's sense of justice. In Pimm, Kurtines, and Ruffy's words, the scale allows us to see "... to what extent [the child being interviewed] gave up of his/her moral realism and acquired a sense of justice" (1982, p. 226). More importantly, the moral development scale is, say, referred to a criterion, not to a norm. Note that the majority of mental tests are referred to a norm, not to a criterion. Developmental tasks, such as Piagetian tasks are always referred to a developmental criterion, not to a norm
Samantha suggests the moral-conventional transgression task by Turiel and his colleagues. This task, however, assesses the child's distinction  between morality and social convention.  As this distinction appears even in children as young as 3-year-olds, and such a distinction does not change over time, I do not see such  task as a suitable task  to assess the subject's sense morality.
In your question you mention a " instrument to measure the moral performance of children (aged 6-8) after a character education". Note that both an overt immoral behavior (to hit, lie, steal, and the like) and a covert moral behavior (to argue that it is moral to steal or to lie to save a human  life) are immoral/ moral performances. The scale I suggested has to do with the child's moral thinking and, hence, with the child's covert moral performance. In your  question, I wonder whether you are thinking of a  overt or a covert moral performance.
I  Hope that I  have got your question and that my answer to it is helpful to you.
Best regards, 
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
6 answers
Has anyone used the Moral Foundation Scale (MFQ/20 - SHORT VERSION)?
It suits my project but i cannot find any articles about it or any authors that used it.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Calli, 
we've actually piloted a study about bullying (measured by a variant of the classical Salmivalli procedure) with a translated version of the MFQ30. The test is not easy to translate and to adapt to a different cultural context, however. As pilot results were not clearly promising, we we haven't followed up on this project with a refined translation so far. (I'm still interested in this project; please contact me, if you're interested in more details.) Generally, I would agree with Caleb: there may be more suitable measures, especially if you're interest is focussed on single aspects of morality, not on the full profile, which the MFQ measures. 
There is a considerable amount of research on bullying and morality. Several studies focus on moral disengagement. You might also be interested in our research on bullying and moral reasoning (see attachment). 
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
23 answers
I'm looking for cases of justified deception. If you see anything reported in the news, would you kindly provide a link? If you have a story to tell or an opinion to share, I'd also be very curious.
Is it always (morally) wrong to lie?
An example may include an episode on This American Life "In Defense of Ignorance" in which "
Lulu Wang tells the story of an elaborate attempt to keep someone ignorant — her grandmother — and how her family pulled it off". The grandmother (who lived in China) was not told of her terminal illness. One important fact was concealed from her: she had cancer and her doctor predicted she only had 6 months to live. This morally debatable act of withholding the diagnosis (at least in the North American context of the 21st century) is apparently customary in China, and some other parts of the world (Russia, for instance). Apparently it was common in patience care in Canada in 1950s as well. The lies is told as justifiable since the Chinese grandmother lived another 3 years after the diagnosis but who knows how the knowledge of her terminal illness would have impacted her, had she been told the prognosis. This is just one example.
Another one is found in the Guardian  by an American philosopher (based in the UK), James Garvey in his article "Peter Gleick lied, but was it justified by the wider good?" (Feb., 27, 2012).
I'm aware of the philosophical debate on whether lies are justifiable (e.g., the murderer at the doorstep question: would you lie about your family members sleeping in the house?). But what's I'm looking for is recent examples documented in the press in which lying may be acceptable for a reason. I would much appreciate the help of the ResearchGate community to trace them down. Thank you very much!
VR.
Relevant answer
Answer
I think the example you gave about the Chinese grandma was not told about her remaining lifespan is beyond the call for definition of deception. The core characteristics of deception is 'intentionality' that means a lie is told knowingly and intentionally. Therefore, genuinely forgotten information is not equal information concealment (of course, the task lies in how we can truly tell if a memory is gone, also rests in the presumption you made in empirical study: whether you assume the memory is still here but hard/unable to extract). Back to the grandma case, it is about how culture shapes the universal definition of deception. in On the ethics of deception in negotiation' by Alan Strudler, you can read about how deception is justified in terms of self-defensive mechanism when information is uncertain.
deception is also grounded in contexts and situations where sometimes, deception in other settings might not necessarily defined as lies. These situations could be negotiation when agents are well aware of the rules and how deception is lured to be used as a communication strategy. Thus, deception in these cases should be examined carefully and specifically to the types (concealment or falsification or fabrication). This leads to the nature of deception, because you can only judge on the basis of ground truth. Philosophically, if one is not aware of the ground truth, does it man he is still lying or simply being uncertain? Again, all these are grounded in communication specified in corresponding cultures. 
Hope this gives you a bit of insights :) all the best!
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
8 answers
I know that Kohlberg`theory is well- known. But there are others that continue the Kohlberg`s work (like Carol Gilligan), and other that were unuseful. What do you consider is the most logical?
Relevant answer
Answer
The question should not be "which theory is most logical" but rather "which theory or theories are most compatible with what we know about children's moral knowledge, motivations, emotions and behavior over the course of development?"  And also "which theory or theories guide us best in learning more about these things?" 
Recent research and theorizing in morality and moral development have expanded the field far beyond Kohlberg's theory, which focused mostly on the development of moral reasoning but paid little attention to emotions or behavior, or to the evolutionary and social bases and functions of morality. 
You might want to read some summaries of the recent history of moral psychology, such as:
Haidt, J. (2008). Morality. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 65-72;
Sunar, D.  (2009). Suggestions for a new integration in the psychology of morality.  Personality and Social Psychology Compass, 3/4 447–474, 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00191.x;
or something lighter like the article in Scientific American,  November 12, 2013, by Gareth Cook, on Paul Bloom's "The Moral Life of Babies". 
Happy reading!
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
5 answers
For my thesis project I am diving into the subject of morality, more specifically: moral values. Fist of all, I am wondering to what extent people think the moral values they hold are universal.
Secondly, I am wondering when deviations from the morals we hold are acceptable. 
Some good answers were provided already on Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_there_any_universal_moral_values/1
However, any additional contributions are more than welcome! 
Relevant answer
Answer
It is well known, but the last two paragraphs of the book of Michael S. Gazzaniga, The Ethical Brain, seem very encouraging.
“I believe, therefore, that we should look not for a universal ethics comprising hard-and-fast truths, but for the universal ethics that arises from being human, which is clearly contextual, emotion influenced, and designed to increase our survival. This is why it is hard to arrive at absolute rules to live by that we can all agree on. But knowing that morals are contextual and social, and based on neural mechanisms, can help us determine certain ways to deal with ethical issues. This is the mandate for neuroethics: to use our understanding that the brain reacts to things on the basis of its hardwiring to contextualize and debate the gut instincts that serve the greatest good — or the most logical solutions — given specific contexts.
I am convinced that we must commit ourselves to the view that a universal ethics is possible, and that we ought to seek to understand it and define it. It is a staggering idea, and one that on casual thought seems preposterous. Yet there is no way out. We now understand how tendentious our beliefs about the world and the nature of human experience truly are, and how dependent we have become on tales from the past. At some level we all know this. At the same time, our species wants to believe in something, some natural order, and it is the job of modern science to help figure out how that order should be characterized.”
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
32 answers
I take it that values (moral value, aesthetic value, etc.) are only knowable by ostensive definition (viz. by direct experience with the types of properties that any particular value is understood to be a token of). Now if true, I think that it is a mistake to suppose that they are merely the residue of the subjective states that they purport to be an experience of (a mere 'projection', as Mackie seems to suppose). Is it not equally true that 'objectivity' might be also coextensive with a property being "there in the world" even though the scale by which we measure it is a human construct? In other words, although the world does not come 'pre-sliced' into evaluative schemes, does it not still objectively 'answer' to the evaluative predicates we apply to it?
Relevant answer
Answer
To Lilliana's question, I'd say "not necessarily", though I'd not want to exclude the possibility that thee are some things that are common to values of all types.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
3 answers
i need scale for measuring parent's moral behavior
Relevant answer
Answer
You might be interested in Claudia Pap Mangel's discussion of the “Child Abuse Potential Inventory” and the “Family Stress Checklist” in her “Licensing Parents: How Feasible?” (Family Law Quarterly Vol. 22, No. 1, Spring 1988: 17-39, esp. 26 ff). But see also a challenge to  Mangel’s arguments in Michael Sandmire and Michael Wald's “Licensing Parents—A Response to Claudia Mangel’s Proposal” (Family Law Quarterly Volume 24 #1, 1990: 53-76).  Also of interest: Rebecca Peters and Jane Barlow (“Systematic Review of Instruments Designed to Predict Child Maltreatment During the Antenatal and Postnatal Periods,” Child Abuse Review Volume 12, 2003: 416-439) 
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
3 answers
I would like to use a experimental design pretest-postest with control group, to test the efffects of read moral dilemmas (Lind, 2003/2007), on natural semantic networks (Figueroa, González, & Solis, 1981), whit a successive sistematic randomization  assignation of the subjectos to groups.
Lind, G. (2007). La moral puede enseñarse. (Traduc.: M. Mejia Casas et al.). México: Trillas. (Original work published 2003).
Figueroa, J.G., González, E.G. & Solis, V.M. (1981). Una aproximacion al problema del significado. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 13 (3),447-458.
Relevant answer
Answer
 Here are three articles that might interest you:
1- The Neural Bases of Cognitive Conflict and Control in Moral Judgment
Joshua D. Greene , Leigh E. Nystrom, Andrew D. Engell1,, John M. Darley, Jonathan D. Cohen
2-Selective deficit in personal moral judgment following damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex
Elisa Ciaramelli1,2,
Michela Muccioli2,
Elisabetta Làdavas1,2 and
Giuseppe di Pellegrino1,2
-Author Affiliations
1Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy, and 2Centro Studi e Ricerche di Neuroscienze Cognitive, Cesena, Italy
Correspondence should be addressed to Giuseppe di Pellegrino, Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università di Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 5 – 40127 Bologna, Italy. E-mail: g.dipellegrino@unibo.it.
Received January 23, 2007.
Accepted February 5, 2007
3-TMS affects moral judgment, showing the role of DLPFC and TPJ in cognitive and emotional processing
Danique Jeurissen, Alexander T. Sack, Alard Roebroeck, Brian E. Russ, and Alvaro Pascual-Leone1
Front Neurosci. 2014; 8: 18.
Published online 2014 Feb 13. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00018
I found one more book:
Innocenti, A. (2013). Neuroscience and the Economics of Decision Making (Vol. 5). Routledge.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
2 answers
I am planning to do a content analysis of anti-vaccinaiton rhetoric and liberty seems important.
Relevant answer
Answer
I don't know of the existence of contemporary dictionary for moral meanings of words, probably could be more fruitful to approach the matter with an analysis of the textes and descouses you ara planning to enquire. A lot of anti-somethyng use the freedom/liberty of choise as an reason to oppose to a procedure, or at least, seem common to me, considering my experiences.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
If you have a scale or if anyone knows where could it be obtained, please share me the ideas.
Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks a lot Micheal.......
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
8 answers
Dear All:
Thank you in advance for your help.
I am doing my report (systematic review) on this topic, but I would like to centre it in medical and dental postgraduate students. Most of the studies I have found is about nurses and undergraduates.
My background is an orofacial pain specialist (dentist) and therefore my belief that empathy and compassion are crucial for this kind of field.
If you have any information about studies or authors in this field, I would really appreciate it.
Thanks
Relevant answer
Answer
Empathy is different from compassion, sensitiveness and sympathy.
One of the mostly used definitions of Physician Empathy (PE) is that of Mercer and Reynolds. They took, on the other hand, an integrative approach to defining empathy, considering it both a multidimensional and skills-based construct. They describe four components of a multidimensional conception of the empathy construct based on an extensive review of literature conducted by Morse et al. These include the following:
"Emotive: The ability to subjectively experience and share in another’s psychological state or intrinsic feelings.
Moral: An internal altruistic force that motivates the practice of empathy;
Cognitive: The helper’s intellectual ability to identify and understand another person’s feelings and perspective from an objective stance;
Behavioural: Communicative response to convey understanding of another’s perspective.” 
By taking this multidimensional approach, Mercer and Reynolds intentionally distance themselves from the purely emotional aspect usually associated with the term empathy. At the same time, they use Morse’s concept of empathy to delimit it from the term “sympathy”, which implies strong emotional involvement in the needs and concerns of the patient and, for this reason, is often seen as a danger by medical personnel. By contrast, Mercer and Reynolds define empathy more as a learnable, professional (communication) skill and less as a purely subjective emotional experience or an innate, unalterable personality trait. 
Physician empathy: definition, outcome-relevance and its measurement in patient care and medical education.
Neumann M, Scheffer C, Tauschel D, Lutz G, Wirtz M, Edelhäuser F.
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2012;29(1):Doc11. doi: 10.3205/zma000781. Epub 2012 Feb 15. English, German.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
7 answers
Dear colleagues,
I am conducting a research project in the field of environmental psychology.
In this respect I am searching for a construct, which captures one's dispositional willingness to bear or accept environmental resp. ecologocal risks, i.e. one's risk-propensity regarding risks for the environment (as opposed to risk perception, which is one's perception of risk).
Research suggests that a person's risk propensity is domain-specific (for instance finance, social, ethics, etc.) and although there are some validated scales that measure one's risk-taking tendency for multiple domains - for instance the DOSPERT Scale - I did not find any scale that specifically measures risk-taking tendency or attitude in an environmental context.
I have considered taking the ETHICS-Subscale of the DOSPERT Scale, however, not a single item on the subscale comes even close to the field of enviromental or ecological risks. So, I think, this attempt would not be very promising.
I am thankful for any cues, how to solve this problem.
Thanks so much for your insights.
Kind regards,
C. Neumann
Relevant answer
Answer
As you are looking for any clues:
You might want to consider if risk taking propensities apply to all environmental risks, or, to sub-sets, etc.
For example, some decisions might not be processed in terms of risk per se, and some might not be processed in terms of risk to the environment.
Examples:
A person might change their car's oil, and decide to dump it into the nearby storm sewer at his curb rather than store it for later recycling.  Was doing that potentially based on their propensity for taking risks that could harm the environment, or, on their propensity to take risks regarding getting caught polluting?  Etc.  (Short term/own actions/risk/benefit issues/variables regarding political leanings, etc)
A person might vote to preserve green areas and not to allow development in an area.  Is that potentially because they have a propensity to not take risks with the environment?  Is a vote not to preserve the land, and to allow development potentially due to a propensity to take risks towards the environment?  Are the votes more aligned with their political leanings than an actual risk taking propensity? (Long term/other's actions, etc.)
Are the propensities above truly tied to risk taking disposition, or, to simple pro/con environmental biases?  You may need to establish that their actual conceptualization is actually processed in terms of environmental risks.
IE: IS THERE a risk based PROCESS that applies to environmental risks, that can BE modeled...and which would not simply be an overlay of political/socioeconomic factors, etc.
THAT might be the primary issue to resolve, teasing out a disposition that is not in line with those other factors, and which can be unique to the environment...or, at least potentially, to a sub-set of environmental issues.  Finding sub-sets with usable data may be job #1.
Does that help?
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
I am really interested to study entitle moral practice and moral sensitivity in nursing / nursing's students. I will be delighted if anyone could sen me a fit questionnaire about it.
Thanks
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Mohammad Ali
if you want full texts articles that MARY mentiend above, I proud to find these article for you.
Have a good time
Morteza
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
Hi everyone,
Research has demonstrated that it is possible to motivate behaviour through anticipated positive impact on self-concept (see linked paper as example).
What would happen though, if the subject was in a state of reduced concern for that particular self-schema?
For example, if in Bolderdijk's study people had been manipulated to show reduced regard for a pro-environmentalist self-concept schema - would an anticipated positive impact on this schema still motive them (to any extent) to behave pro-environmentally?
Generally speaking, are self-schemas robust enough to withstand temporal manipulations, thus intrinsically and consistently motivating behaviour?
Thank you in advance for any thoughts or comments!
Atar 
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Atar,
conceiving of self-concepts as related to identity goals (e.g., the goal of being green), there is research suggesting that behaviors related to this goal (e.g., switching off the lights when leaving a room) are less likely to be performed in a state of goal completeness (e.g., after having performed a respective behavior already). See:
Longoni, C., Gollwitzer. P. M., & Oettingen, G. (2014). A green paradox: Validating green choices has ironic effects on behavior, cognition, and perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 158-165.
Maybe this strand of research helps answering your question.
Best, Maik
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
42 answers
Even in modern times myth has served as a fundamental ingredient of politics: idealization of leaders, of historical events, of the origins of a community or a nation, are some of the most common. Myth and structured mythologies have played several essential functions in human life: 1) cognitive: myth explains the origin of all things, the reason of their existence, why is life as it is; 2) ontological: it roots human life in a cosmos and its archetypical order; 3) moral and psychological: it presents the conflicts inherent to human existence, the relation between interior conscience and the external world, offering harmonious solutions to those conflicts; 4) social and political: it creates the codes of collective identity, unifies the beliefs of social groups and legitimates social and political institutions.
However, we should distinguish between traditional myths that have a religious character and modern myths, which are predominantly profane.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you all for your really interesting answers. I agree with most of them. The importance of myth in human life is a fundamental theme and has been studied by many authors that have a profound vision. It is very difficult to present adequately such a theme in so few words. Even though, I want to make a clearer statement about the question.
First of all, I want to say that myth is a live experience and not a static structure. Each person and each society experiences myth, in a very specific way. Either personally or collectively our actions and our imagination are working with myth. In traditional societies, as well as in modern ones, from a personal point of view, we create myths in childhood, in adolescence, and in adulthood: our lives move around them. Jung has demonstrated that.
With human history we have the same: all societies have created their myths and use them in very specific forms, as Joseph Campbell has shown. When I refer to functions, I am speaking of something creative, an experience that is unique, from a personal or an anthropological point of view. Not something static, as Jean Duvignaud has demonstrated when he criticizes Lévi-Strauss. I’m sure that the main focus of psychology and of ethnography should be centered in the particular, the different, the unique and, from there, part to find common patterns, not the other way.
For people who believe, I mean, those who have a deep religious experience, myth is something alive and ever present in their lives.
I agree with Werner and Alison, we, human beings need narratives, as much as we need to breathe and eat. The first human expression of narrative is myth, that’s why language and myth are so deeply interwoven since the beginnings, as Cassirer demonstrated long ago. As Paul Ricoeur has explained, human beings live in time and narratives are the human expression of our experience of time, of life and of action.
The human mind is mythic-poetic, it creates myths as a normal function of our symbolic thinking. That’s one of the reasons there are modern myths, like in literature: Faustus; in cinema: Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings; or in science: the Big Bang Theory. In that sense, Rollo May’s book, The Cry for Myth explores the importance of myth in contemporary American life.
Ernst Cassirer, Gilbert Durand, have demonstrated that myth cannot be understood from a pure rational point of view, it is much more complex and has its own logic, which goes beyond rationalist, functionalist and structural explanations. Myth is embedded in the deep mental layers of human mind. That’s why it is so powerful. Mythical patterns use rhythm, sound, phantasy, images to get into those deep layer of the human mind.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
2 answers
Although it gives quite clear description on the mechanism of empathy,
I didn't ever see the visualization directly deals with the model.
Has anyone visualized the Perception-action model of empathy (Preston & de Waal, 2002, Preston, 2007) in flow-chart-like diagram as a 'process'?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello,
Essi Viding and I have done something like that - available (for free) here https://sites.google.com/site/geoffbirdlab/papers
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
41 answers
Psychology is developing with dizzying pace. Almost every day psychologists discover a new fact about human cognition, emotion, behavior etc. Can we ask questions about rule-following behavior without any reference to psychological studies? Can legal theorists study law and do not take a psychological perspective (among others, I agree)? Can we discuss a relation between law and morality and at the same time ignore studies conducted in moral or evolutionary psychology?
Is this development of psychology a chance for legal studies or a threat to the very nature of research on law?
Relevant answer
Answer
Though trained in traditional philosophy of law, I find your question to be perfectly appropriate.  The explosion in studies of brain function have identified the ability of humans to think in an "as-if" mode, which in effect gives them the ability to postulate alternative realities.  If that is what happens when humans create legal systems, the findings of psychology in this realm may turn out to be of great importance, and traditional legal philosophy may have to rethink itself.  Your previous question about anthropological studies may not go far enough. 
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
10 answers
Schematically, we might propose it as follows:
1.  An object, act, inaction, or state of affairs (X) has moral value (V) if and only if normal human beings are disposed, under the appropriate conditions (C), to respond to it (R) with feelings of moral approval or censure
I add the "normal" qualifer to indicate “non-idealized.” This distinction is made to contrast the view being described here from an “ideal observer” theory.
So does "1" entail circularity?
Relevant answer
Answer
Without going thru the derivation let me say that every person is sovereign of himself/herself. That implies that he/she may choose his/her morality. The circularity or not of morality is therefore relevant only to the individual's evaluations. Where chosen moralities are similar people have something in common and may join together in a club, organization or country. However, when the governance of everybody is involved morality is not a good base because it results in imposition of the most popular morality onto everybody. Instead, the rules governing every body should be objective.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
3 answers
I'm working on a research project that examines different types of judgments from social conservatives and social liberals. In one study I show that priming liberals with purity concerns make their judgments look more like conservatives' judgments. In a follow up, I want to test if the converse is true: can tamping down purity concerns make conservatives' judgments look more like liberals' judgments? Thanks for the help!
Relevant answer
Answer
Andrew,
Maybe, if you want conservatives look more like liberals, you should try to make them dirty? 
Konrad
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
15 answers
An incentive is something that motivates an individual to perform an action. As a leader of an organization, which one you preferred and more efficient tahn other, moral or material?
Relevant answer
Answer
Good point Pierre, yes, you have to convince them that their work is highly useful or has a high ethical value.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
2 answers
Does anyone happen to know literature on how people react to anger towards moral and non-moral violations? For example, why people are more tolerant of other's anger towards moral violations (dishonesty), while less tolerant of other's anger towards non-moral violations (incompetence)?
Relevant answer
Answer
I am currently working with colleagues at Bath Spa University carrying out research into promoting children's emotional self-regulation, through the training of educational and community practitioners in Emotion Coaching. We have two projects that adopt an interpersonal neurobiological approach and combine current neuroscientific findings, attachment and relationship theory and educational practice to better understand the physiological and behavioural cues and responses to emotions, such as anger.
Hope this is helpful
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
67 answers
I'm currently compiling a list of cross-cultural research that investigates whether and to what extent different cultures find different things morally good & bad (see bit.ly/1pxecxk). Are there any studies that I've overlooked? If so, I'd be very grateful if you could point them out to me. Ideally, I'm looking for empirical / quantitative studies that compare multiple (ie more than two) cultures, but any / all suggestions would be welcome. Any contributions will be acknowledged in the eventual paper. Thank you in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
A moral value is a universally accepted principle that governs the day to day living of life. These principles are important in maintaining unity, harmony and honor between people. Moral values are usually communal and shared by the public in general, thus if there is no agreement among community members no moral values will be established.
The universal moral values are those accepted by the international community. These are:
•Peace;
• Freedom;
•Social progress;
•Equal rights;
•Human dignity.
Other moral and ethical values are:
•Accept responsibility for personal actions and for the consequences of these actions;
•Accept a duty of care;
•Affirm the individual's right to self-determination;
•Put the truth first;
•Never use a person as merely an unconsenting means to an end, even if the end benefits others;
•Be honest;
•Honor agreements;
•Conduct relationships with integrity;
•Leave a positive legacy to future generations.
With respect to ethics the following are the principles to be considered:
Principles of Personal Ethics
Personal ethics might also be called morality, since they reflect general expectations of any person in any society, acting in any capacity. These are the principles:
Principles of Personal Ethics include:
•Concern for the well-being of others;
•Respect for the autonomy of others;
•Trustworthiness and honesty;
•Willing compliance with the law (with the exception of civil disobedience);
•Basic justice; being fair;
•Refusing to take unfair advantage;
•Benevolence: doing good;
•Preventing harm
Principles of Professional Ethics
Individuals acting in a professional capacity take on an additional burden of ethical responsibility. For example, professional associations have codes of ethics that prescribe required behavior within the context of a professional practice such as medicine, law, accounting, or engineering. These written codes provide rules of conduct and standards of behavior based on the principles of Professional Ethics, which include:
• Impartiality; objectivity; openness; full disclosure;
• Confidentiality;
• Due diligence / duty of care;
• Fidelity to professional responsibilities;
• Avoiding potential or apparent conflict of interest
Even when not written into a code, principles of professional ethics are usually expected of people in business, employees, volunteers, elected representatives and so on.
Principles of Global Ethics
Global ethics are the most controversial of the three categories, and the least understood. Open to wide interpretation as to how or whether they should be applied, these principles can sometimes generate emotional response and heated debate.
Principles of Global Ethics include:
•Global justice (as reflected in international laws);
•Society before self / social responsibility;
•Environmental stewardship;
•Interdependence and responsibility for the ‘whole’;
•Reverence for place
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
7 answers
Converging evidence from the fields of moral psychology, anthropology, and cognitive neuroscience favors the notion that moral judgment is primarily a product of intuition, a cognitive process thought to be grounded primarily in affect and emotion. If true, does this imply that some moral emotions (such as guilt or remorse) are irreducible moral categories?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Jim,
It is odd to answer a question by saying "I don't know", but I don't know. Hume famously states that facts alone are morally inert, and require sentiment in order for them to provide moral motivation. This is the supposed is/ought divide or the fact/value distinction, which is sometimes referred to as "Hume's Guillotine". I say "supposed" because Hume never divorced fact and value or is and ought. He simply said we cannot get to values from facts alone or to oughts from ises alone. He says a third ingredient (sentiment or emotion) must enter the picture for us to arrive at a value or an ought.
William James was of the opinion that logic itself was dependent upon properly functioning emotions. This seemed far-fetched at the time, but in recent years Antonio Damasio's work dealing with the brain's inability to make simple decisions without using emotions (primarily addressed in terms of the amygdala) would seem to indicate that our emotions are much more necessary for thought and judgment than we previously thought.
Robert Solomon has engaged this topic in more than one of his books. It is his Not Passion's Slave which really sets forth his notion of emotions as judgments. He has a little thought experiment in the book where he invites the reader to imagine themselves to have heard a report about someone they trusted having said disparaging things about them. He then invites the reader to imagine what sorts of feelings they would have after hearing such a report. Then, when you (the reader) are in the middle of feeling those feelings he asks you to imagine that you have now discovered that the report you had been given about this friend was false. They never said those things about you. He then poses a question: what happened to those feelings you had toward that friend? Presumably they dissipated. Thus, feelings are based upon judgments.
This whole area is a fascinating one Jim. You have stated above, "moral judgment is primarily a product of intuition, a cognitive process thought to be grounded primarily in affect and emotion." I am unaware of the converging evidence which you say points to this conclusion. Were you to say that "moral judgment requires intuition, affect, and emotion" I would readily agree. However, I don't believe we can remove reasoning and cognition from this process any more than we can remove feeling. So, I am not ready to say that it is "grounded" in emotion, but I am more than willing to say that it "necessitates" emotion. Thus, I would have to say that I do not believe that moral emotions are actually irreducible moral categories.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
1 answer
For a current project I am looking for a questionnaire that is suitable for high school students (age 11-17). Can anyone recommend a test?
Relevant answer
Answer
Howard Curzer of Texas Tech University has a good instrument called the SMARTS test (Sphere-Specific Moral Reasoning and Theory Survey). I don't know if he would be interested in getting involved with middle school and high school testing inasmuch as he usually deals with college students, but you could contact him for some suggestions. He may be aware of an age-appropriate questionnaire of the sort for which you are looking.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
34 answers
In his book Ethics Without God, atheist philosopher Kai Nielsen states the following:
"God or no God, the torturing of innocents is evil; God or no God, wife beating or child molesting is vile. More generally, even if we can make nothing of the concept of God, we can readily come to appreciate, if we would but reflect and take the matter to heart, that, if anything is evil, inflicting or tolerating unnecessary and pointless suffering is evil, especially when something can be done about it. If that isn’t evil, I ask, what is evil? Can’t we be more confident about this than we can about any abstract or general philosophical point we might make in ethical theory?...perhaps we cannot demonstrate or in any way prove that anything is evil. But we can say, quite unequivocally, that it is more reasonable to believe such elemental things to be evil than to believe either any skeptical theory that tells us we cannot know or even reasonably believe any of these things to be evil, or to believe some philosophical or theological theory that tells us we can only justifiably believe these things to be evil by coming to know God and His eternal moral law for humankind...I firmly believe that this is bedrock and right and that anyone who does not believe it cannot have probed deeply enough into the grounds of his moral beliefs."
What values would you hold to be "bedrock" values in the same way that Neilsen says that the condemnation of wife beating and child molesting are "bedrock" values from his perspective?
Relevant answer
Answer
Millions of years of human evolution incline us to survive. Remember that to be good is first to be. Discussions about universal values are pointless if we can't guarantee our survival. The conditions for survival are universal. Think of what you want more than anything else--unless your circumstances are unusual: your next breath! Here's the list in descending order of urgency: clean air, temperature control through clothing and shelter, potable water, nutritious food, basic health care and education. I call these the "seductive six."
Much more than survival, however, we want to flourish. In 5,000 years of writing, we've seen five basic definitions of the grounds for flourishing: rationality as the exercise of reason in pursuit of our goals (Plato and Aristotle); pleasure (hedonists, Bentham and Mill); community (Mo Ti in China, Stoics, Nagarjuna in India, Christ); freedom as creativity (Kant, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, existentialists); meditation as control of the attention (Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism). I call these the "fabulous five." All are critical to guarantee survival.
In our current circumstances, community is perhaps our most critical value. Unless we can view all seven billion humans as members of a single community, our survival will be jeopardized by the increasing power and threat of technology.
Given the brain's propensity for massive reduction, cultures may define themselves by commitment to one of the grounds for flourishing. Perhaps prompted by Plato and Aristotle, Western European and North American cultures fixated on the importance of rationality. The result? Enslavement, colonization and globalization of many parts of the world, with current threats to survival through global climate change, weapons of mass destruction, and the misery of billions in the Global South.
Ancient African ethics in both Egypt and Ethiopia presented more balanced views of flourishing.
My research team has published articles in the journal of Science and Engineering Ethics on these points, showing their practical consequences for engineering education and universities' ethical responsibilities..
Charles Verharen/Philosophy/Howard University
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
10 answers
What are good measures of immoral behavior / unethical decision making?
Relevant answer
Answer
I think they are basically the same concept, which goes back to
Sykes, G., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of Neutralization: a Theory of Delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664-670.
Some references foor SSCD are:
Barriga, A. Q., Hawkins, M. A., & Camelia, C. R. T. (2008). Specificity of cognitive distortions to antisocial behaviours. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 18(2), 104–116.
Chabrol, H., van Leeuwen, N., Rodgers, R. F., & Gibbs, J. C. (2011). Relations between selfserving cognitive distortions, psychopathic traits, and antisocial behavior in a nonclinical sample of adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 887-892.
Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2013). Measuring self-serving cognitive distortions: A meta-analysis of the psychometric properties of the How I Think Questionnaire (HIT). European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10, 510-517.
.
Nas, C., Brugman, D., & Koops, W. (2008). Measuring self-serving cognitive distortions with the "How I Think" questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24, 181-189.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
118 answers
In his "A Common Humanity", Raimond Gaita has written: “The secular philosophical tradition speaks of inalienable rights, inalienable dignity, and of persons as ends in themselves. These are, I believe, ways of whistling in the dark, ways of trying to make secure to reason what reason cannot finally underwrite. Religious traditions speak of the sacredness of each human being, but I doubt that sanctity is a concept that has a secure home outside of those traditions.” Is he correct?
Relevant answer
Answer
People can and do claim all kinds of freedoms from society's constraints (liberty rights) and material assistance from society (welfare rights) as human rights. My favorite example is the claim by rural members of our civil parish who claimed they had a right to bury garbage on their property and not to be required to have it picked up. To have a right recognized by others requires advancing an argument as to why that particular freedom or assistance qualifies as a right. A simple way to do this is to show that it is essential to a human being's dignity and self-worth. This can be done by example or empirical evidence of what people experience when denied this freedom or assistance. What happens to people denied an education, a job, or the other rights listed in the U.N.Declaration? Rights are a recognition of the worth of humans and if the audience does not recognize that worth, no argument will convince them. There are many freedoms and kinds of assistance that people want but others will not recognize them as a right unless I can show how important they are to living the kind of life that a human (or an animal or historical object) deserves. See www.ethicsops.com for a recipe for making that kind of argument and two case examples, along with other ethical principles translated into language that fits comfortably in business and professional as well as personal settings.
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
4 answers
Hume wrote in his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding: "In all determinations of morality, this circumstance of public utility is ever principally in view; and wherever disputes arise, either in philosophy or common life, concerning the bounds of duty, the question cannot, by any means, be decided with greater certainty, than by ascertaining, on any side, the true interests of mankind. If any false opinion, embraced from appearances, has been found to prevail; as soon as farther experience and sounder reasoning have given us juster notions of human affairs, we retract our first sentiment, and adjust anew the boundaries of moral good and evil."
This is clearly a different sort of utility than that of Bentham and Mills. It appears to square with Foot's claim that, “It is surely clear that moral virtues must be connected with human good and harm, and that it is quite impossible to call anything you like good or harm.”
I think that this notion of utility in the Enquiry does not get much attention in today's discussion of Hume's ethical thought.
Relevant answer
Answer
Utility is the value of something. Critically, however, what is of value depends upon either a goal or what other things you value (c.f. Hume's Is-Ought divide).
Many people these days disparage the "Utilitarians" for a variety of reasons including the fact that human morality "apparently" isn't utilitarian (for example - why can't you kidnap a person off the street to serve as an involuntary organ donor to save five people?).
This disparagement is unwittingly just another form of Hume's divide compounded by an overly simplistic/time-discounted view. You can't just kidnap a person off the street because that would lead to persons needing to protect themselves against such an eventuality, leading to an arms race, leading to an eventual loss of *all* of the advantages of "community".
Bentham and Mills make (what I would call) the error of focusing on "happiness". Humans have evolved both to have a moral sense and to be happy/enjoy those things which are good for us and have enabled us to survive and flourish. Of course, if you over-optimize that in the short-term you get wire-heading, sex, and drug addictions.
Personally, I favor Jonathan Haidt's *functional* approach to morality -- that morality's "goal" to to suppress selfishness and allow us to live together cooperatively. I am thoroughly a consequentialist but believe that deontology is also critically important in causing good consequences when we can't/won't take a long-term (enough) view (or over-estimate our ability to cheat and our gains from doing so).
So, yes -- Hume's utility/values is/are different from the "Utilitarians" in that they are focused in terms of happiness and what short-term goals/values they believe will lead to the long-term goals/values that the vast majority of humans hold (but can't explicate because, as MANY scientific studies show, we cannot reflect upon our moral "reasoning") -- while Hume is maintaining the focus on the long-term ("the true interests of mankind").
I'd also like to belabor the point that "utilitarianism" (as a GENERAL method of evaluation) really should be separated from the specifics of measuring happiness (or counting lives, or . . . . )
  • asked a question related to Moral Psychology
Question
1 answer
The different domains of analytical thinking (such as deductive reasoning, probabilistic reasoning, decision making, social cognition, moral cognition) draw on different dual-process model, that all share the idea of two distinct systems; one fast, intuitive, effortless, the other one being slow, deliberative and resource demanding. But on which model of resource (allocation, concept) do these different domains rely, respectively?
Relevant answer
Answer
resource allocation problems are usually ill-solved uising intuition (system I) as people tend to do first the actions which are able to add more value, however these also allocate most resources... so a better reasoning is to use a deliberative optimization model (as Knapsack) to allocate resources.