Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Rationalization and Reflection Differentially Modulate Prior Attitudes Toward the Purity Domain.Ivar R. Hannikainen & Alejandro Rosas - 2019 - Cognitive Science 43 (6):e12747.
    Outside Western, predominantly secular‐liberal environments, norms restricting bodily and sexual conduct are widespread. Moralization in the so‐called purity domain has been treated as evidence that some putative violations are victimless. However, respondents themselves disagree: They often report that private yet indecent acts incur self‐harm, or harm to one's family and the wider community—a result which we replicate in Study 1. We then distinguish two cognitive processes that could generate a link between harmfulness and immorality, and recreate them in Studies 2 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Act Versus Impact: Conservatives and Liberals Exhibit Different Structural Emphases in Moral Judgment.Ivar R. Hannikainen, Ryan M. Miller & Fiery A. Cushman - 2017 - Ratio 30 (4):462-493.
    Conservatives and liberals disagree sharply on matters of morality and public policy. We propose a novel account of the psychological basis of these differences. Specifically, we find that conservatives tend to emphasize the intrinsic value of actions during moral judgment, in part by mentally simulating themselves performing those actions, while liberals instead emphasize the value of the expected outcomes of the action. We then demonstrate that a structural emphasis on actions is linked to the condemnation of victimless crimes, a distinctive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Unfounded dumbfounding: How harm and purity undermine evidence for moral dumbfounding.Steve Guglielmo - 2018 - Cognition 170:334-337.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • What in the World Is Moral Disgust?Alberto Giubilini - 2016 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94 (2):227-242.
    I argue that much philosophical discussion of moral disgust suffers from two ambiguities: first, it is not clear whether arguments for the moral authority of disgust apply to disgust as a consequence of moral evaluations or instead to disgust as a moralizing emotion; second, it is not clear whether the word ‘moral’ is used in a normative or in a descriptive sense. This lack of clarity generates confusion between ‘fittingness’ and ‘appropriateness’ of disgust. I formulate three conditions that arguments for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Predicting Regional Variations in Nationalism With Online Expression of Disgust in China.Shuqing Gao, Hao Chen, Kaisheng Lai & Weining Qian - 2021 - Frontiers in Psychology 12.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Self-ownership and disgust: why compulsory body part redistribution gets under our skin.Christopher Freiman & Adam Lerner - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (12):3167-3190.
    The self-ownership thesis asserts, roughly, that agents own their minds and bodies in the same way that they can own extra-personal property. One common strategy for defending the self-ownership thesis is to show that it accords with our intuitions about the wrongness of various acts involving the expropriation of body parts. We challenge this line of defense. We argue that disgust explains our resistance to these sorts of cases and present results from an original psychological experiment in support of this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Disgust as Heuristic.Robert William Fischer - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (3):679-693.
    Suppose that disgust can provide evidence of moral wrongdoing. What account of disgust might make sense of this? A recent and promising theory is the social contagion view, proposed by Alexandra Plakias. After criticizing both its descriptive and normative claims, I draw two conclusions. First, we should question the wisdom of drawing so straight a line from biological poisons and pathogens to social counterparts. Second, we don’t need to explain the evidential value of disgust by appealing to what the response (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Embodied free will beliefs: Some effects of physical states on metaphysical opinions.Michael R. Ent & Roy F. Baumeister - 2014 - Consciousness and Cognition 27:147-154.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Rediscovering Tomkins polarity theory: Humanism, normativism, and the psychological basis of left-right ideological conflict in the US and Sweden.Artur Nilsson & John T. Jost - 2011 - PLoS ONE 15 (7).
    According to Silvan Tomkins polarity theory, ideological thought is universally structured by a clash between two opposing worldviews. On the left, a humanistic worldview seeks to uphold the intrinsic value of the person; on the right, a normative worldview holds that human worth is contingent upon conformity to rules. In this article, we situate humanism and normativism within the context of contemporary models of political ideology as a function of motivated social cognition, beliefs about the social world, and personality traits. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Intuitive And Reflective Responses In Philosophy.Nick Byrd - 2014 - Dissertation, University of Colorado
    Cognitive scientists have revealed systematic errors in human reasoning. There is disagreement about what these errors indicate about human rationality, but one upshot seems clear: human reasoning does not seem to fit traditional views of human rationality. This concern about rationality has made its way through various fields and has recently caught the attention of philosophers. The concern is that if philosophers are prone to systematic errors in reasoning, then the integrity of philosophy would be threatened. In this paper, I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Repugnance as Performance Error: The Role of Disgust in Bioethical Intuitions.Joshua May - 2016 - In Steve Clarke, Julian Savulescu, C. A. J. Coady, Alberto Giubilini & Sagar Sanyal (eds.), The Ethics of Human Enhancement: Understanding the Debate. Oxford University Press. pp. 43-57.
    An influential argument in bioethics involves appeal to disgust, calling on us to take it seriously as a moral guide (e.g. Kass, Miller, Kahan). Some argue, for example, that genetic enhancement, especially via human reproductive cloning, is repellant or grotesque. While objectors have argued that repugnance is morally irrelevant (e.g. Nussbaum, Kelly), I argue that the problem is more fundamental: it is psychologically irrelevant. Examining recent empirical data suggests that disgust’s influence on moral judgment may be like fatigue: an exogenous (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations