Moral Reasoning
Conscious mental activity evaluating a moral judgment for its (in)consistency with other moral commitments
Social Intuitionist Model
invented by Haidt
- consists of intuition, judgment and reasoning
- judgment primarily driven by intuitions
- reasoning primarily driven by judgment
- > according to theory: not possible to influence views of somebody by appealing to reasoning (intuition prevails)
Dual-process model of moral judgment
Deontological moral judgment
-> concerns for rights and duties driven by emotional intuitive responses
Utilitarian/consequentialist judgments
-> aimed at promoting greater good driven by cognitive processes
-> suggests changeability of others opinion by targetting system for controlled cognititon
Action principle
Harm caused by an action less morally acceptable than harm caused by an omission
Utilitarian vs deontological judgments
Cognitive load slows down utilitarian judgment, not deontological
-people with greater working memory tend to use utilitarian judgment more
WEIRD Moral reasoning
Endorse moral codes emphasizing individual rights and independence
-personal actions seen as personal right
Non-WEIRD Moral reasoning
- more strongly moralized duty-based communal obligations and spiritual purity
- personal actions seen as collective moral concern (e.g. sexual behavior not seen as personal choice)
Sacrificing dilemma
Individualistic: will sacrifice
Collectivist: more likely to consider additional contextual information
-> less judgment of others who wouldnt sacrifice
Factors for cultural differences
- Differences in social institutions (e.g. kinship structures, economic markets)
- Ecological factors (e.g. pathogen prevalence)
- Religion: e.g. differing views on pure vs. impure actions
Cultural differences within societies
Higher socioeconomic status: make more utilitarian decisions
- political ideology: left: more built on care and fairness, conservative: more built on loyalty, authority and purity
- poor people more cooperative less likely to cheat,
- rich people greater acceptance of greed
Moral identity
Network of moral trait associations collectively defining a person’s moral character
- dimensions:
1. internalization
2. symbolization - > private and public moral self
Internalization
Chronic accessibility of person’s moral self-schema
-> indicative of subjective experience of moral identity
Symbolization
Importance a person places on exhibiting a public moral self to affirm their morality
-> partly driven by impression management and self-verification motives
Prescriptive moral regulation
Performance of good deeds, helping others by lessening their suffering or improving their welfare
- > immoral to not do them when having the chance
- high internalizers more likely to engage
- high symbolizers motivated by situational cues (e.g. has to be public)
Proscriptive moral regulation
Inhibiting motivations to commit harmful or immoral acts
- > high internalizers: more moral restraint
symbolizers: more receptive to retaliatory and punitive reactions (more aware of status)
Internalization primary principle (IPP)
Moral identity internalization has stronger impact on individual’s reactions to cues in social environment when thinking about prescriptive moral behaviors
- > symbolizers only engage when it promotes reputation
- > for prescriptive moral outcomes
Internalization-symbolization equality principle (ISEP)
Internalization and symbolization equally important in regulating reaction to situational cues when faced with temptation to act immorally
-internalization: personality and relational cues (e.g. power)
-symbolization: relevant for reactive
proscriptive moral behavior
-> for proscriptive moral outcomes
Licensing effect
If environment doesn’t sanction immoral behavior, high symbolizers are likely to engage in it
Components of Moral reasoning
Arises from coordinated activity between domain-general capacities:
- perspective-taking
- salience processing
- executive control
- valuation
- social norm compliance
Mutualistic perspective
Assumption that it is evolutionarily adaptive to prefer some kinds of moral outcomes because it helps to maintain cooperation
Humean idea
Moral judgments arise from immediate aversive reaction to perceived or imagined harm to victims
-> judgments because of initial reaction
Justice motivation
We are more likely to morally agree with someone when we can identify with them
- > prosecutors: try to make out defendant as out-group
- > defense attorneys: try to humanize their clients
Sleep and moral awareness
Lack of sleep leads to lack of moral awareness
-> decrease of 2 hours of sleep per night, 10% decrease in moral awareness
Western moral theory
Only criminal behavior classified as immoral (US)
