Abstract
The nature of moral action versus moral judgment has been extensively debated in numerous disciplines. We introduce Virtual Reality moral paradigms examining the action individuals take in a high emotionally arousing, direct action-focused, moral scenario. In two studies involving qualitatively different populations, we found a greater endorsement of utilitarian responses–killing one in order to save many others–when action was required in moral virtual dilemmas compared to their judgment counterparts. Heart rate in virtual moral dilemmas was significantly increased when compared to both judgment counterparts and control virtual tasks. Our research suggests that moral action may be viewed as an independent construct to moral judgment, with VR methods delivering new prospects for investigating and assessing moral behaviour.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,247
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Ethical Issues with Simulating the Bridge Problem in VR.Erick Jose Ramirez & Scott LaBarge - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (6):3313-3331.
Is Moral Enhancement a Right, or a Threat to Rights?John R. Shook - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:209-231.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Judgment, Deliberation, and the Self-Effacement of Moral Theory.Damian Cox - 2012 - Journal of Value Inquiry 46 (3):289-302.
Action Trees and Moral Judgment.Joshua Knobe - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (3):555-578.
Ought and Ought Not.Richard Robinson - 1971 - Philosophy 46 (177):193 - 202.
Ought and Ought Not: PHILOSOPHY.Richard Robinson - 1971 - Philosophy 46 (177):193-202.
The Cultural Capital of the Moralist and the Scientist.Min Ju Kang & Michael Glassman - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):340-341.
Agent-Based Theories of Right Action.Damian Cox - 2006 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (5):505-515.
Beyond Moral Judgment.Alice Crary - 2007 - Harvard University Press.
Reflection and Reasoning in Moral Judgment.Joshua D. Greene - 2012 - Cognitive Science 36 (1):163-177.
The Role of Moral Commitments in Moral Judgment.Tania Lombrozo - 2009 - Cognitive Science 33 (2):273-286.
Moral Expertise: Judgment, Practice, and Analysis*: Julia Driver.Julia Driver - 2013 - Social Philosophy and Policy 30 (1-2):280-296.
God and Objective Moral Values.Robert Gascoigne - 1985 - Religious Studies 21 (4):531 - 549.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-06-29

Total views
17 ( #613,356 of 2,448,510 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,843 of 2,448,510 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes