Moral tribes (Greene, 2014)
Ch. 4: Moral Convictions
Introduction
Reference: Greene, Joshua. Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason and the Gap Between Us and Them, Atlantic Books, Limited, 2014.
Main focus: Exploring moral intuitions, particularly through the lens of utilitarianism and its implications in moral decision-making.
Chapter 1: Alarming Acts
Utilitarianism Observations: - Utilitarianism promotes actions for the greater good, but this can lead to morally questionable actions (e.g., organ harvesting, trolley dilemma). - Reflection: Many philosophers believe morality includes considerations beyond mere happiness maximization.
Two Strategies to Address Criticism: - Accommodation: Show that utilitarianism's implications are consistent with common moral sense. E.g., organ stealing generally doesn't lead to a greater good. - Reform: Use scientific insights to understand why certain moral intuitions exist and how they may misguide us.
The Tragedy of Commonsense Morality
Challenge: Different communities have varying moral standards, thus, a universal justification (utilitarianism) struggles against diverse moral intuitions.
Example: Mill’s progressive arguments challenged societal norms, exemplifying reformist utilitarianism.
Automatic Moral Intuitions
Two Types of Failures: - Oversensitivity: Moral judgments affected by irrelevant factors (e.g., race in jury decisions). - Undersensitivity: Ignoring relevant factors (e.g., defendant’s age).
Chapter 2: Trolley Dilemmas
Trolley Case: - Switch case: Most approve turning trolley to save five by sacrificing one. - Footbridge case: Most disapprove of pushing a person to save five.
Psychological Questions: Why the difference in responses? - Emotional responses impede utilitarian decision-making, often overriding rational analysis.
Reactions in Trolley Dilemmas
Research Findings: - Impersonal (switch) vs. personal (footbridge) dilemma emotional engagement differs. - Evidence shows gut reactions (emotional) inform moral judgments more than rational utility evaluation (e.g., brain studies).
Variables Affecting Decisions
Distance and Personal Force: - The feeling of taking direct action (pushing) vs. indirect action (hitting a switch) alters moral intuitions. - Remote footbridge case: Increased approval for hitting a switch instead of pushing directly.
Means vs. Side Effects
Philosophical Context: - Doctrine of Double Effect: Harm is acceptable as a side effect but not as a means. Example: military vs. strategic bombing includes provisions based on intention.
Empirical Evidence: Decisions can hinge on whether harm is seen as means or collateral.
Experimentation with Trolley Cases
Testing human automatic responses to distinguish between personal involvement in harm vs. collateral damage: - Obstacle collide case: Higher moral acceptance for harm as a side effect rather than as a means directly. - Findings indicate that emotional responses vary based on perceived intent and physical engagement.
Chapter 3: Modular Myopia Hypothesis
Theory Description: - Human brains contain modules that alert to action plans leading to harm but are blind to side effects, leading to moral blindness.
Evolutionary Context: - Humans became skillful action planners; such capabilities necessitated developing self-control mechanisms against violence.
Implications of Modular Myopia
Adaptive Cognitive Feature: Emotion-driven moral reasoning can cause biases in judgment, especially in complicated moral dilemmas.
Life Application: Awareness of default moral judgments provides insights into real world ethics (e.g., justice, fairness).
Chapter 4: Doing and Allowing Distinction
Moral Psychology: - Active harm (doing) is judged worse than passive harm (allowing). Examples from everyday life and medical ethics.
Experimentation demonstrating differences in perception of actions vs omissions.
Chapter 5: Utilitarianism's Demand
Personal Requirements: Being an ideal utilitarian is often seen as burdensome, contrasting present lifestyles with moral obligations to help others.
Practical Approach: Understanding that true application of utilitarianism must accommodate personal and practical life realities.
Chapter 6: The Duty to Help
Examination of the moral obligation to assist the needy, using a drowning child scenario as a grounding argument.
Experimentation to illuminate perceptions of duty across distances in aid contexts.
Chapter 7: Justice and Fairness
Contrast with Utilitarianism: Questions about whether maximizing happiness conflicts with justice principles, using retributive perspectives.
Response to Critique: Incorporation of utilitarian principles to address common intuitions regarding justice and punishment.
Conclusion
Moral Insights: Emphasizing the need to re-evaluate automated moral responses in light of broader ethical frameworks, highlighting complexities amidst apparently simple moral evaluations.
Broader Implications: Discussing how moral systems impact legislative and social constructs, revealing limitations in current understanding of punishment, justice, and equality from a utilitarian lens.
Moral Convictions
Introduction
Joshua Greene's Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason and the Gap Between Us and Them (2014) focuses on exploring moral intuitions, particularly through the lens of utilitarianism and its implications in moral decision-making.
Chapter 1: Alarming Acts
Utilitarianism promotes actions for the greater good, but it can lead to morally questionable actions such as organ harvesting and the trolley dilemma. Reflection on this reveals that many philosophers believe morality includes considerations beyond mere happiness maximization. To address criticism of utilitarianism, two strategies are suggested: accommodation, which involves showing that its implications align with common moral sense (for example, organ stealing generally does not lead to a greater good), and reform, which uses scientific insights to understand why certain moral intuitions exist and how they may misguide us. However, a challenge arises from the tragedy of commonsense morality; different communities possess varying moral standards, which makes a universal justification, such as utilitarianism, struggle against diverse moral intuitions. An example of this is Mill’s progressive arguments that challenged societal norms, illustrating reformist utilitarianism.
Automatic Moral Intuitions
In this context, two types of failures in moral intuitions are observed: oversensitivity, where moral judgments are affected by irrelevant factors (e.g., race in jury decisions), and undersensitivity, where relevant factors (e.g., defendant’s age) are ignored.
Chapter 2: Trolley Dilemmas
In the analysis of trolley cases, the switch case, where most approve turning a trolley to save five by sacrificing one, and the footbridge case, where most disapprove of pushing a person to save five, prompts psychological questions regarding the differing responses. Emotional responses often impede utilitarian decision-making, frequently overriding rational analysis. Research findings indicate that emotional engagement differs in impersonal versus personal dilemmas, revealing that gut reactions inform moral judgments more than rational utility evaluations. Variables affecting decisions include the perceived distance and personal involvement in harm; the feeling of taking direct action (like pushing) versus indirect action (like hitting a switch) alters moral intuitions. In remote footbridge cases, increased approval is noted for hitting a switch rather than pushing directly.
Means vs. Side Effects
The philosophical context of the doctrine of double effect states that harm is acceptable as a side effect but not as a means. The distinction can be illustrated with military examples, where the intention affects the moral judgment of actions. Empirical evidence suggests that decisions may hinge on whether harm is seen as a means or collateral.
Chapter 3: Modular Myopia Hypothesis
The modular myopia hypothesis posits that human brains contain modules alert to action plans leading to harm but are blind to side effects, which results in moral blindness. Humans' evolutionary development of action planning necessitated self-control mechanisms against violence, thus creating an adaptive cognitive feature where emotion-driven moral reasoning sometimes biases judgments, especially in complex dilemmas. Awareness of default moral judgments can provide insights into real-world ethics regarding justice and fairness.
Chapter 4: Doing and Allowing Distinction
Moral psychology highlights that active harm (doing) is judged more severely than passive harm (allowing), with various examples emerging from everyday situations and medical ethics showcasing the difference in perception between actions and omissions.
Chapter 5: Utilitarianism's Demand
Being an ideal utilitarian is often viewed as burdensome, as it contrasts with present lifestyles alongside moral obligations to assist others. A practical approach reveals that the true application of utilitarianism must accommodate personal and practical life realities.
Chapter 6: The Duty to Help
The moral obligation to assist the needy is examined through scenarios like the drowning child argument, with experiments illuminating perceptions of duty across varying distances in aid contexts.
Chapter 7: Justice and Fairness
Utilitarianism is contrasted with principles of justice, addressing whether maximizing happiness conflicts with justice principles through retributive perspectives. The incorporation of utilitarian principles serves to respond to critiques related to justice and punishment.
Conclusion
The necessity to re-evaluate automated moral responses emerges as crucial in light of broader ethical frameworks, revealing complexities within seemingly simple moral evaluations. Additionally, the broader implications of how moral systems impact legislative and social constructs expose limitations in current understandings of punishment, justice, and equality from a utilitarian perspective.