Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):552-553 (2005)
Crossing the border into the moral domain changes moral thinking in two ways: (1) the facts at hand become “anthropocentric” facts not easily open to revision, and (2) moral reasoning is often the servant of moral intuitions, making it difficult for people to challenge their own intuitions. Sunstein's argument is sound, but policy makers are likely to resist.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
What Are Dual Process Models? Implications for Cultural Analysis in Sociology.Omar Lizardo, Robert Mowry, Brandon Sepulvado, Dustin S. Stoltz, Marshall A. Taylor, Justin Van Ness & Michael Wood - 2016 - Sociological Theory 34 (4):287-310.
Using Insights From Applied Moral Psychology to Promote Ethical Behavior Among Engineering Students and Professional Engineers.Scott D. Gelfand - forthcoming - Science and Engineering Ethics:1-22.
Similar books and articles
Social Intuitionists Answer Six Questions About Morality.Jonathan Haidt & Fredrik Bjorklund - 2008 - In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.), Moral Psychology Vol. 2. MIT Press.
The Role of Parents in Moral Development: A Social Domain Analysis.Judith G. Smetana - 1999 - Journal of Moral Education 28 (3):311-321.
Is the Emotional Dog Wagging its Rational Tail, or Chasing It?Cordelia Fine - 2006 - Philosophical Explorations 9 (1):83 – 98.
Adam Smith's Invisible Hand Argument.John D. Bishop - 1995 - Journal of Business Ethics 14 (3):165 - 180.
On Moral Intuitions and Moral Heuristics: A Response.Cass R. Sunstein - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):565-570.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads54 ( #94,561 of 2,153,858 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #225,089 of 2,153,858 )
How can I increase my downloads?