You are accessing PhilPapers from Open University (UK), an institution that is not subscribed to PhilPapers. Starting on July 1, 2014, we ask institutions that grant philosophy degrees and are based in high-GDP countries to contribute to PhilPapers' maintenance and development through a subscription. See this page for details. Please show your support by contacting your librarian.
4 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Miguel Farias [3]Miguel Farías Farías [1]
  1. Claudio Araya Seguel & Miguel Farías Farías (2014). El movimiento estudiantil chileno del 2011 en intervenciones discursivas del Presidente Piñera. Logos: Revista de Lingüística, Filosofía y Literatura 24 (1):51-65.
    Este artículo muestra evidencia lingüístico-discursiva del intento del Presidente Piñera por acallar las influencias sociales del movimiento estudiantil chileno del año 2011. Desde una mirada crítica se da cuenta del comportamiento discursivo de este hablante en el marco del primer conflicto social que enfrentó el nuevo gobierno de derecha en Chile. El valor teórico-metodológico de este estudio radica en la mirada triangular a las intervenciones discursivas. A través del análisis de un corpus de cuatro intervenciones presidenciales desde las perspectivas de (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Miguel Farias (2013). The Psychology of Atheism. In Stephen Bullivant & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Atheism. Oxford University Press. 468.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Katja Wiech, Guy Kahane, Nicholas Shackel, Miguel Farias, Julian Savulescu & Irene Tracey (2013). Cold or Calculating? Reduced Activity in the Subgenual Cingulate Cortex Reflects Decreased Emotional Aversion to Harming in Counterintuitive Utilitarian Judgment. Cognition 126 (3):364-372.
    Recent research on moral decision-making has suggested that many common moral judgments are based on immediate intuitions. However, some individuals arrive at highly counterintuitive utilitarian conclusions about when it is permissible to harm other individuals. Such utilitarian judgments have been attributed to effortful reasoning that has overcome our natural emotional aversion to harming others. Recent studies, however, suggest that such utilitarian judgments might also result from a decreased aversion to harming others, due to a deficit in empathic concern and social (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Guy Kahane, Katja Wiech, Nicholas Shackel, Miguel Farias, Julian Savulescu & Irene Tracey (2012). The Neural Basis of Intuitive and Counterintuitive Moral Judgement. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 7 (4):393-402.
    Neuroimaging studies on moral decision-making have thus far largely focused on differences between moral judgments with opposing utilitarian (well-being maximizing) and deontological (duty-based) content. However, these studies have investigated moral dilemmas involving extreme situations, and did not control for two distinct dimensions of moral judgment: whether or not it is intuitive (immediately compelling to most people) and whether it is utilitarian or deontological in content. By contrasting dilemmas where utilitarian judgments are counterintuitive with dilemmas in which they are intuitive, we (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation