Knobe vs Machery: Testing the trade-off hypothesis

Mind and Language 23 (2):247-255 (2008)
Abstract
Recent work by Joshua Knobe has established that people are far more likely to describe bad but foreseen side effects as intentionally performed than good but foreseen side effects (this is sometimes called the 'Knobe effect' or the 'side-effect effect.' Edouard Machery has proposed a novel explanation for this asymmetry: it results from construing the bad side effect as a cost that must be incurred to receive a benefit. In this paper, I argue that Machery's 'trade-off hypothesis' is wrong. I do this by reproducing the asymmetry between judgments about good and bad side effects in cases that cannot plausibly be construed as trade-offs.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00339.x
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 31,396
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
The Epistemic Side-Effect Effect.James R. Beebe & Wesley Buckwalter - 2010 - Mind and Language 25 (4):474-498.
The Pervasive Impact of Moral Judgment.Dean Pettit & Joshua Knobe - 2009 - Mind and Language 24 (5):586-604.

View all 21 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
129 ( #42,404 of 2,225,993 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
47 ( #7,018 of 2,225,993 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature