Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Delineating the Moral Domain.Edouard Machery - 2012 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 7.
    Moral psychology and naturalistic moral philosophers should strive to understand how moral and non-moral norms differ. Using Patricia Churchland’s recent book Braintrust as an example, I describe the pitfalls of failing to take this issue seriously, and I introduce a new research program about the delineation of the moral domain.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Conformorality. A Study on Group Conditioning of Normative Judgment.Chiara Lisciandra, Marie Postma-Nilsenová & Matteo Colombo - 2013 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology (4):751-764.
    How does other people’s opinion affect judgments of norm transgressions? In our study, we used a modification of the famous Asch paradigm to examine conformity in the moral domain. The question we addressed was how peer group opinion alters normative judgments of scenarios involving violations of moral, social, and decency norms. The results indicate that even moral norms are subject to conformity, especially in situations with a high degree of social presence. Interestingly, the degree of conformity can distinguish between different (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Authority Dependence and Judgments of Utilitarian Harm.Jared Piazza, Paulo Sousa & Colin Holbrook - 2013 - Cognition 128 (3):261-270.
    Three studies tested the conditions under which people judge utilitarian harm to be authority dependent (i.e., whether its right or wrongness depends on the ruling of an authority). In Study 1, participants judged the right or wrongness of physical abuse when used as an interrogation method anticipated to yield useful information for preventing future terrorist attacks. The ruling of the military authority towards the harm was manipulated (prohibited vs. prescribed) and found to significantly influence judgments of the right or wrongness (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Nativism and the Evolutionary Debunking of Morality.Brendan Cline - 2015 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (2):231-253.
    Evolutionary debunking arguments purport to undercut the justification of our moral judgments by showing why a tendency to make moral judgments would evolve regardless of the truth of those judgments. Machery and Mallon (2010. Evolution of morality. In J.M. Doris and The Moral Psychology Research Group (Eds.), The Moral Psychology Handbook (pp. 3-46). Oxford: Oxford University Press) have recently tried to disarm these arguments by showing that moral cognition – in the sense that is relevant to debunking – is not (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Confounds in Moral/Conventional Studies.K. J. P. Quintelier & D. M. T. Fessler - 2015 - Philosophical Explorations 18 (1):58-67.
    In ‘The nature of moral judgments and the extent of the moral domain’, Fraser criticises findings by Kelly et al. that speak against the moral/conventional distinction, arguing that the experiment was confounded. First, we note that the results of that experiment held up when confounds were removed . Second, and more importantly, we argue that attempts to prove the existence of a M/C distinction are systematically confounded. In contrast to Fraser, we refer to data that support our view. We highlight (...)
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Rise of Moral Cognition.Joshua D. Greene - 2015 - Cognition 135:39-42.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • On Blaming and Punishing Psychopaths.Marion Godman & Anneli Jefferson - 2017 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 11 (1):127-142.
    Current legal practice holds that a diagnosis of psychopathy does not remove criminal responsibility. In contrast, many philosophers and legal experts are increasingly persuaded by evidence from experimental psychology and neuroscience indicating moral and cognitive deficits in psychopaths and have argued that they should be excused from moral responsibility. However, having opposite views concerning psychopaths’ moral responsibility, on the one hand, and criminal responsibility, on the other, seems unfortunate given the assumption that the law should, at least to some extent, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Nature of Moral Judgements and the Extent of the Moral Domain.Ben Fraser - 2012 - Philosophical Explorations 15 (1):1-16.
    A key question for research on the evolutionary origins of morality concerns just what the target of an evolutionary explanation of morality should be. Some researchers focus on behaviors, others on systems of norms, yet others on moral emotions. Richard Joyce (2006) offers an evolutionary explanation for the trait of making moral judgments. Here, I defend Joyce’s account of moral judgment against two objections from Stephen Stich (2008). Stich’s first objection concerns the supposed universality of moral judgments as Joyce conceives (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Harmful Transgressions Qua Moral Transgressions: A Deflationary View.Paulo Sousa & Jared Piazza - 2014 - Thinking and Reasoning 20 (1):99-128.
  • The Case of the Drunken Sailor: On the Generalisable Wrongness of Harmful Transgressions.Katinka J. P. Quintelier, Daniel M. T. Fessler & Delphine De Smet - 2012 - Thinking and Reasoning 18 (2):183 - 195.
    There is a widespread conviction that people distinguish two kinds of acts: on the one hand, acts that are generalisably wrong because they go against universal principles of harm, justice, or rights; on the other hand, acts that are variably right or wrong depending on the social context. In this paper we criticise existing methods that measure generalisability. We report new findings indicating that a modification of generalisability measures is in order. We discuss our findings in light of recent criticisms (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations