The Motivational Power of Moral Beliefs

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua May
Keyword(s):  
Moral Identity ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Difficult Case ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Normative Judgment ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Moral Hypocrisy ◽  
Moral Licensing ◽  
Self Interest

Even if we can rise above self-interest, we may just be slaves of our passions. But the motivational power of reason, via moral beliefs, has been understated, even in the difficult case of temptation. Experiments show that often when we succumb, it is due in part to a change in moral (or normative) judgment. We can see this by carefully examining a range of experiments on motivated reasoning, moral licensing, moral hypocrisy, and moral identity. Rationalization, perhaps paradoxically, reveals a deep regard for reason, to act in ways we can justify to ourselves and to others. The result is that we are very often morally motivated or exhibit moral integrity. Even when behaving badly, actions that often seem motivated by self-interest are actually ultimately driven by a concern to do what’s right.

scholarly journals College Major and Modern Racism: A Matter of Moral Hypocrisy?

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
David Bryan Oxendine
Keyword(s):  
College Major ◽  
Business Majors ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Modern Racism ◽  
Moral Hypocrisy ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
The World

Research has demonstrated a relationship between gender, race, and modern racism. Recent studies have revealed this relationship exists in college business majors as well as in the world of business. Moral hypocrisy appears as a possible explanation of why apparently normal moral individuals at times, do behave in a less than moral manner when their self-interests are threatened. This paper explores how self-interest often overpowers moral integrity.

Communicating moral reasoning in medicine as an expression of respect for patients and integrity among professionals

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauris Christopher Kaldjian
Keyword(s):  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Reasons ◽  
Moral Pluralism ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Beliefs And Values ◽  
Moral Frameworks ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Do So

The communication of moral reasoning in medicine can be understood as a means of showing respect for patients and colleagues through the giving of moral reasons for actions. This communication is especially important when disagreements arise. While moral reasoning should strive for impartiality, it also needs to acknowledge the individual moral beliefs and values that distinguish each person (moral particularity) and give rise to the challenge of contrasting moral frameworks (moral pluralism). Efforts to communicate moral reasoning should move beyond common approaches to principles-based reasoning in medical ethics by addressing the underlying beliefs and values that define our moral frameworks and guide our interpretations and applications of principles. Communicating about underlying beliefs and values requires a willingness to grapple with challenges of accessibility (the degree to which particular beliefs and values are intelligible between persons) and translatability (the degree to which particular beliefs and values can be transposed from one moral framework to another) as words and concepts are used to communicate beliefs and values. Moral dialogues between professionals and patients and among professionals themselves need to be handled carefully, and sometimes these dialogues invite reference to underlying beliefs and values. When professionals choose to articulate such beliefs and values, they can do so as an expression of respectful patient care and collaboration and as a means of promoting their own moral integrity by signalling the need for consistency between their own beliefs, words and actions.

Defending Virtuous Motivation

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua May
Keyword(s):  
Framing Effects ◽  
Moral Behavior ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Moral Hypocrisy ◽  
Debunking Arguments ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Mood Effects ◽  
The Right

This chapter considers remaining empirical challenges to the idea that we’re commonly motivated to do what’s right for the right reasons. Two key factors threaten to defeat claims to virtuous motivation, self-interest (egoism) and arbitrary situational factors (situationism). Both threats aim to identify defective influences on moral behavior that reveal us to be commonly motivated by the wrong reasons. However, there are limits to such wide-ranging skeptical arguments. Ultimately, like debunking arguments, defeater challenges succumb to a Defeater’s Dilemma: one can identify influences on many of our morally relevant behaviors that are either substantial or arbitrary, but not both. The science suggests a familiar trade-off in which substantial influences on many morally relevant actions are rarely defective. Arriving at this conclusion requires carefully scrutinizing a range of studies, including those on framing effects, dishonesty, implicit bias, mood effects, and moral hypocrisy (vs. integrity).

Normative Self-Interest or Moral Hypocrisy?: The Importance of Context

2007 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
George W. Watson ◽  
Farooq Sheikh
Keyword(s):  
Moral Hypocrisy ◽  
Self Interest

scholarly journals Moral Diversity and Efficient Breach

2019 ◽  
pp. 885
Author(s):  
Matthew Seligman
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Housing Crisis ◽  
Moral Obligations ◽  
Moral Choice ◽  
Moral Diversity ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Regulatory Interventions ◽  
Wealth Inequalities

Most people think it is morally wrong to breach a contract. But sophisticated commercial parties, like large corporations, have no objection to breaching contracts and paying the price in damages when doing so is in their self-interest. The literature has ignored the profound legal, economic, and normative implications of that asymmetry between individuals’ and firms’ approaches to breach. To individuals, a contract is a promise that cannot be broken regardless of the financial stakes. For example, millions of homeowners refused to breach their mortgage contracts in the aftermath of the housing crisis even though doing so could have saved them tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. Their moral beliefs led homeowners to forgo opportunities for efficient breach that firms would have seized, thus exacerbating al-ready swelling wealth inequalities. This Article explains this phenomenon, identifies its consequences and examines strategies to address it. Neither ex post judicial interventions (such as adjusting the remedies for breach) nor traditional ex ante regulatory interventions (such as disclosure requirements) will effectively address the problem. Instead, the most promising approach is a novel solution based on the framework of choice architecture: requiring contracts to include an express term creating an option to exit the contract and pay a fee equivalent to expectation damages. An express exit term elevates an implicit legal option into an explicit contractual option, reframing the moral choice so individuals would perceive exiting the contract as a morally permissible performance of their promise rather than a morally forbidden breaking of it. The presence of that exit term thereby aligns individuals’ perceptions of their moral obligations under the contract with sophisticated firms’ approaches to breach. The Article concludes with new empirical evidence that demonstrates the practical impact of an exit clause. It presents the results of two experimental studies I performed that demonstrate the effectiveness of a mandatory exit clause in reducing the effects of the asymmetry between individuals and firms. Those results show that exit clauses could have substantial practical implications for the regulation of contracts in contexts like consumer and mortgage contracts.

scholarly journals Self-enhancement in moral hypocrisy: Moral superiority and moral identity are about better appearances

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. e0219382
Author(s):  
Mengchen Dong ◽  
Jan-Willem van Prooijen ◽  
Paul A. M. van Lange
Keyword(s):  
Moral Identity ◽  
Moral Hypocrisy ◽  
Moral Superiority
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document