Upgrade to remove ads
Ethics: Morals and Intuition
Terms in this set (35)
according to greene and haidt, judgements can be explained by:
the interaction of two distinct psychological systems
these two different psychological systems are:
- system I
- system II
system I (intuitive/emotional system):
- operations are uncontrolled, intuitive, non calculative, emotional
- reacts spontaneously and intuitively to these problems
- responses tend to dominate people's moral judgments and reasoning
system II (rational system):
- operations are controlled, calculative, reasoned, unemotional
- tends to think about these problems in utilitarian terms
in regards to the trolley problem, in the switch problem:
- most people bring up utilitarian arguments
- most people would throw the switch
in regards to the trolley problem, in the footbridge problem:
- most people have difficulties in finding arguments
- most people would not push the man from the bridge
system I is associated with parts of the brain that are known to:
deal with emotions
system II is associated with parts of the brain that are known to:
be relevant for calculations
moral judgment is often based on:
moral intuitions and not only on moral reasoning
what do people use in moral judgement?
moral heuristics are:
tools applied to find quick and easy solutions to
therefore, people may have the same moral intuition independent of:
which ethical approach they adhere to if any
moral heuristic used in the switch problem:
it is acceptable to throw a switch that (indirectly) leads to a death
moral heuristic used in the footbridge problem:
it is not acceptable to throw a human being in the path of the trolley
Cold-heart heuristic: "Don't cause a death knowingly."
This is supposed to explain widespread opposition to cost-benefit analyses
Action heuristic: "Don't do harmful acts."
This is supposed to explain why people see doing harm as worse than allowing harm, as in active vs. passive euthanasia and in vaccination policies
Betrayal heuristic: "Punish, and do not reward, betrayals of trust."
This is supposed to explain opposition to safer airbags that cause some deaths
Nature heuristic: "Don't tamper with nature." ("Don't play God")
This is supposed to explain opposition to genetic engineering and cloning
Fee heuristic: "Don't engage in wrongdoing for a fee."
This is supposed to explain opposition to emissions trading
A two-system model allows a person to know that:
something is wrong without knowing why
In the social intuitionist model moral judgment is caused by:
- quick moral intuitions (from system I)
- is followed by slow, ex post facto moral
reasoning (from system II)
The „intuitive" system I:
- fast and effortless
- process is unintentional and runs automatically
- process is inaccessible, only results enter awareness
- doesn't need extra resources/no effort
The „reasoning" system II:
- slow and effortful
- process is intentional and controllable
- process is consciously accessible and viewable
- demands extra resources, that are limited
The intuitive judgment link: (1)
People use moral heuristics. Moral judgments
appear unconscious, automatically and effortlessly as the result of moral intuitions.
The post hoc reasoning link: (2)
After a moral judgment is made moral reasoning
is engaged. It is an effortful process, in which a
person searches for arguments that will support the already-made judgment.
The reasoned persuasion link: (3)
Moral judgment is verbally spread to justify one's
already-made moral judgment to others. This triggers new intuitions which make them accessible
for the (non rational) arguments.
The social persuasion link: (4)
Moral judgments from friends, allies, and
acquaintances have a direct influence on others,
even if no reasoned persuasion is used (group
norm, trust, values, etc.).
The reasoned judgment link: (5)
People may at times reason their way to a
judgment by the force of logic, overriding and
adapting their initial intuition.
The private reflection link: (6)
In the course of thinking about a situation a
person may activate a new intuition that contradicts the initial intuitive judgment.
The most widely discussed method of triggering new intuitions is role-taking.
the idea that our ability to make ethical choices is often limited or restricted because of internal and external pressures
Dispositions and heuristics can lead to:
biases, i.e., systematic tendencies in behavior
- leads to unethical behavior
- actions and judgments are biased in favor of themselves
- claim bigger shares for themselves
- attribute their successes to internal or personal factors but attribute their failures to situational factors they can not control
- tend to enforce self-serving norms in distribution situations. (e.g., distribution norms in negotiations)
Sunk cost effect:
Most people consider sunk costs in deciding on future courses of action --> this can result in escalation of commitment
people throw good money after bad in a deteriorating situation = managers of companies that have poured huge amounts of resources into a
particular project have great difficulty stopping that project when it is reasonable to do so
de-biasing can be successful in the following limited ways:
- warning people about the potential for bias.
- describing the likely direction of the bias.
- illustrating biases to the subject.
- providing extended training, feedback, coaching...
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
Morality 4 EVO FINAL
Ch. 6: Ethical decision making
Ethics-Chapter 3- Conscience and Moral Development
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
Gesellschaft- und Handelsrecht
Ethics: Trust and reciprocityinte
Ethics: Lying and incentives
Ethics: Virtue Ethics