8 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Miguel Farias [8]Miguel Farías Farías [1]
  1. The Neural Basis of Intuitive and Counterintuitive Moral Judgement.Guy Kahane, Katja Wiech, Nicholas Shackel, Miguel Farias, Julian Savulescu & Irene Tracey - 2011 - 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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   52 citations  
  2.  92
    ‘Utilitarian’ Judgments in Sacrificial Moral Dilemmas Do Not Reflect Impartial Concern for the Greater Good.Guy Kahane, Jim A. C. Everett, Brian D. Earp, Miguel Farias & Julian Savulescu - 2015 - Cognition 134:193-209.
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   36 citations  
  3. Cold or Calculating? Reduced Activity in the Subgenual Cingulate Cortex Reflects Decreased Emotional Aversion to Harming in Counterintuitive Utilitarian Judgment.Katja Wiech, Guy Kahane, Nicholas Shackel, Miguel Farias, Julian Savulescu & Irene Tracey - 2013 - 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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  4. An fMRI Study Measuring Analgesia Enhanced by Religion as a Belief System.Katja Wiech, Miguel Farias, Guy Kahane, Nicholas Shackel, Wiebke Tiede & Irene Tracey - unknown
    Although religious belief is often claimed to help with physical ailments including pain, it is unclear what psychological and neural mechanisms underlie the influence of religious belief on pain. By analogy to other top-down processes of pain modulation we hypothesized that religious belief helps believers reinterpret the emotional significance of pain, leading to emotional detachment from it. Recent findings on emotion regulation support a role for the right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, a region also important for driving top-down pain inhibitory circuits. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  5.  36
    The Psychology of Atheism.Miguel Farias - 2013 - In Stephen Bullivant & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Atheism. Oxford University Press. pp. 468.
    This essay suggests that atheists endorse a range of naturalistic beliefs, such as belief in progress and in science. Social-psychological evidence for this belief replacement hypothesis, where naturalistic beliefs take the place of supernatural ones, is reviewed. Atheists seem to implicitly use their naturalistic beliefs to alleviate feelings of uncertainty, anxiety and stress, a psychological function which, until recently, had only been reported for religious beliefs. The second part of the essay focuses on motivational implications of being an atheist. Here, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  6
    Why Would Anyone Want to Believe in Big Gods?Inti A. Brazil & Miguel Farias - 2016 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 39.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. The Scientific Study of Belief and Pain Modulation: Conceptual Problems.Miguel Farias, Guy Kahane & Nicholas Shackel - 2016 - In F. P. Mario, M. F. P. Peres, G. Lucchetti & R. F. Damiano (eds.), Spirituality, Religion and Health: From Research to Clinical Practice. New York, USA: Springer.
    We examine conceptual and methodological problems that arise in the course of the scientific study of possible influences of religious belief on the experience of physical pain. We start by attempting to identify a notion of religious belief that might enter into interesting psychological generalizations involving both religious belief and pain. We argue that it may be useful to think of religious belief as a complex dispositional property that relates believers to a sufficiently thick belief system that encompasses both cognitive (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  10
    El movimiento estudiantil chileno del 2011 en intervenciones discursivas del Presidente Piñera.Claudio Araya Seguel & Miguel Farías Farías - 2014 - 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
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark