Moral parochialism misunderstood: a reply to Piazza and Sousa
نویسندگان
چکیده
Department of Anthropology and Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1553, USA Institute of Social Anthropology, FSEV, Comenius University, 820 05 Bratislava 25, Slovakia Social Sciences Subdivision, College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, IL 60137-6599, USA Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-3210, USA Department of Psychology and Department of Economics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z4 School of Archaeology and Anthropology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 0200, Australia Department of Philosophy and Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick NJ 08901-1107, USA Jepson School of Leadership Studies, University of Richmond, VA 23173, USA Department of Philosophy and Hang Seng Centre for Cognitive Studies, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S3 7QB, UK
منابع مشابه
Are withholding and withdrawing therapy always morally equivalent? A reply to Sulmasy and Sugarman.
This paper argues that Sulmasy and Sugarman have not succeeded in showing a moral difference between withholding and withdrawing treatment. In particular, they have misunderstood historical entitlement theory, which does not automatically prefer a first occupant by just acquisition.
متن کاملRunning head: A DEFLATIONARY VIEW Harmful transgressions qua moral transgressions: A deflationary view
One important issue in moral psychology concerns the proper characterization of the folk understanding of the relationship between harmful transgressions and moral transgressions. Psychologist Elliot Turiel and associates have claimed with a broad range of supporting evidence that harmful transgressions are understood as transgressions that are authority independent and general in scope, which,...
متن کاملMoral parochialism and contextual contingency across seven societies
Human moral judgement may have evolved to maximize the individual's welfare given parochial culturally constructed moral systems. If so, then moral condemnation should be more severe when transgressions are recent and local, and should be sensitive to the pronouncements of authority figures (who are often arbiters of moral norms), as the fitness pay-offs of moral disapproval will primarily deri...
متن کاملRunning Head: RELIGIOSITY AND CONSEQUENTIALIST MORAL THINKING Religiosity, Political Orientation, and Consequentialist Moral Thinking
Religiosity and Consequentialist Moral Thinking 2 Three studies demonstrated that the moral judgments of religious individuals and political conservatives are highly insensitive to consequentialist (i.e., outcome-based) considerations. In Study 1, both religiosity and political conservatism predicted a resistance towards consequentialist thinking concerning a range of transgressive acts, indepe...
متن کامل