Haidt, The Emotional Dog 2001

The article focuses on moral judgment, traditionally understood through rationalist models, positing reasoning as the primary driver.
Two types of model:
- Rationalist Models: Suggest moral judgment arises from moral reasoning and reflection (Kohlberg, 1969; Turiel, 1983).
- Social Intuitionist Models: Propose that moral judgment arises from quick, intuitive responses influenced by social and cultural contexts.

Four key points argued against the rationalist perspective:
1. Overemphasis on Reasoning: The rational process is often overstated; intuitions might come before rational thoughts.
2. Motivated Reasoning: Reasoning is often biased by personal motives, rather than being purely objective.
3. Post Hoc Justifications: Reasoning frequently serves as justifications post hoc rather than guiding initial judgments.
4. Moral Emotion: Moral actions correlate more closely with moral emotions than with reasoning processes.
The model suggests people's initial moral reactions are often emotional and intuitive.
It emphasizes the role of social discourse in shaping moral opinions – reasoning serves to articulate these intuitions rather than dictate them.

Moral judgments often result from quick evaluations (intuitions), leading to unjustified moral stances.
Case Study: Julie and Mark's incestuous relationship raises immediate moral intuitions, provoking social conditioning to find logical justifications in the following discussion.
This reflects the intuitive response and later rationalizations typical of moral judgments, revealing the disconnect between initial feelings and rational explanations.

Plato to Rationalist Models: Philosophers historically associated emotion with depravity and moral failings, favoring reason as a path to moral truth.
Advances in Understanding: Shifts in the 18th century began to recognize emotions' roles in moral judgments (Hume) but were overshadowed by Kantian ethics in later philosophical thought.

Emotion’s role can be observed in children’s moral judgments, where feelings precede logical reasoning.
The psychological landscape saw initial emotional responses evaluated in light of cultural morals (empirical studies reflected this).

Distinction between two cognitive pathways:
- Intuitive (Fast): Quick, often unnoticed evaluations that inform immediate judgments.
- Reasoned (Slow): Deliberate thought processes for reflection and post hoc justification.
Applications include:
- Assessing moral dilemmas where emotions may lead judgments initially, later followed by rational justifications or pressures from social contexts.

Moral actions are often more strongly predicted by emotional reactions rather than reasoning capabilities.
Case studies (e.g., psychopaths) highlight disconnection between moral reasoning and the absence of emotional responses.
Empirical support indicates that prosocial behavior aligns closely with empathetic reactions rather than intellectual reasoning (Batson's empathy-altruism hypothesis).

Addressing moral judgment in educational environments might be effectively achieved through atmospheres that stimulate moral intuitions while encouraging reasoned discourse.
Cultivation of environments that prompt discussions around moral scenarios might enhance intuitive understanding alongside rational discussions, fostering a more holistic approach to moral education.

The complexity in human morality suggests a model accommodating both intuitive and reasoned processes is warranted.
Encouraging integration and application of insights from both rationalist and intuitionist models will lead to deeper understanding of moral psychology.