Moral Implications from Cognitive (Neuro)Science? No Clear Route

Ethics 127 (1):241-256 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Joshua Greene argues that cognitive (neuro)science matters for ethics in two ways, the “direct route” and the “indirect route.” Greene illustrates the direct route with a debunking explanation of the inclination to condemn all incest. The indirect route is an updated version of Greene’s argument that dual-process moral psychology gives support for consequentialism over deontology. I consider each of Greene’s arguments, and I argue that neither succeeds. If there is a route from cognitive (neuro)science to ethics, Greene has not found it.

Author's Profile

Micah Lott
Boston College

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-01-17

Downloads
992 (#13,599)

6 months
126 (#32,732)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?