The Wrong and the Bad

2021 ◽  
pp. 25-46
Author(s):  
Shaun Nichols

The fundamental element of a cognitive account of moral judgment will be some form of representation. Two kinds of value representations need to be distinguished: value representations and rule representations. Value representations register valence for particular courses of action. For instance an organism might represent touching a certain wire as a bad thing. Such representations feed directly into behavior. Rule representations involve more than registering a bad value. They can involve complex representations composed of abstract concepts like impermissible, harm, and knowledge. This chapter argues that value representations cannot provide an adequate account of moral judgment, and that we must invoke rule representations to explain key features of moral judgment. In particular, it is difficult to capture the distinctive nature and specificity of wrongness judgments without adverting to structured rules.

Author(s):  
Jean-Frédéric Morin ◽  
Christian Olsson ◽  
Ece Özlem Atikcan

This chapter explores variables, which are measurable representations. As such, they are located at the interface between theoretical constructs and empirical observations. Deductive research identifies variables by operationalizing abstract concepts, while inductive research typically constructs variables from the observation of units. Irrespective of whether the research is deductive and theory-driven or inductive and empirically driven, variables occupy a central position in research methodology. One of the key features of variables is that they vary across units; any variable can have at least two distinct values (also called attributes). The chapter distinguishes dependent and independent variables before introducing other types of variables and presenting different types of values. It also discusses the epistemological assumptions underlying the notion of variables.


2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 208-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Sayre-McCord

AbstractDavid Hume and Adam Smith are usually, and understandably, seen as developing very similar sentimentalist accounts of moral thought and practice. As similar as Hume's and Smith's accounts of moral thought are, they differ in telling ways. This essay is an attempt primarily to get clear on the important differences. They are worth identifying and exploring, in part, because of the great extent to which Hume and Smith share not just an overall approach to moral theory but also a conception of what the key components of an adequate account of moral thought will be. In the process, I hope to bring out the extent to which they both worked to make sense of the fact that we do not merely have affective reactions but also, importantly, make moral judgments.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie Kurth

Abstract Recent work by emotion researchers indicates that emotions have a multilevel structure. Sophisticated sentimentalists should take note of this work – for it better enables them to defend a substantive role for emotion in moral cognition. Contra May's rationalist criticisms, emotions are not only able to carry morally relevant information, but can also substantially influence moral judgment and reasoning.


2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Gong ◽  
Douglas L. Medin ◽  
Tal Eyal ◽  
Nira Liberman ◽  
Yaacov Trope ◽  
...  

In the hope to resolve the two sets of opposing results concerning the effects of psychological distance and construal levels on moral judgment, Žeželj and Jokić (2014) conducted a series of four direct replications, which yielded divergent patterns of results. In our commentary, we first revisit the consistent findings that lower-level construals induced by How/Why manipulation lead to harsher moral condemnation than higher-level construals. We then speculate on the puzzling patterns of results regarding the role of temporal distance in shaping moral judgment. And we conclude by discussing the complexity of morality and propose that it may be important to incorporate cultural systems into the study of moral cognition.


2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris L. Žeželj ◽  
Biljana R. Jokić

Eyal, Liberman, and Trope (2008) established that people judged moral transgressions more harshly and virtuous acts more positively when the acts were psychologically distant than close. In a series of conceptual and direct replications, Gong and Medin (2012) came to the opposite conclusion. Attempting to resolve these inconsistencies, we conducted four high-powered replication studies in which we varied temporal distance (Studies 1 and 3), social distance (Study 2) or construal level (Study 4), and registered their impact on moral judgment. We found no systematic effect of temporal distance, the effect of social distance consistent with Eyal et al., and the reversed effect of direct construal level manipulation, consistent with Gong and Medin. Possible explanations for the incompatible results are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document