Literature DB >> 17444922

Throwing a bomb on a person versus throwing a person on a bomb: intervention myopia in moral intuitions.

Michael R Waldmann1, Jörn H Dieterich.   

Abstract

Most people consider it morally acceptable to redirect a trolley that is about to kill five people to a track where the trolley would kill only one person. In this situation, people seem to follow the guidelines of utilitarianism by preferring to minimize the number of victims. However, most people would not consider it moral to have a visitor in a hospital killed to save the lives of five patients who were otherwise going to die. We conducted two experiments in which we pinpointed a novel factor behind these conflicting intuitions. We show that moral intuitions are influenced by the locus of the intervention in the underlying causal model. In moral dilemmas, judgments conforming to the prescriptions of utilitarianism are more likely when the intervention influences the path of the agent of harm (e.g., the trolley) than when the intervention influences the path of the potential patient (i.e., victim).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17444922     DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01884.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Sci        ISSN: 0956-7976


  19 in total

1.  Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment.

Authors:  Joshua D Greene; Sylvia A Morelli; Kelly Lowenberg; Leigh E Nystrom; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-12-26

2.  Moral kinematics: the role of physical factors in moral judgments.

Authors:  Rumen I Iliev; Sonya Sachdeva; Douglas L Medin
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-11

Review 3.  The neurobiology of moral behavior: review and neuropsychiatric implications.

Authors:  Mario F Mendez
Journal:  CNS Spectr       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.790

4.  Judgments of Morality in War: Commentary on Watkins (2020).

Authors:  Sheila B Frankfurt; Alanna Coady
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-08-26

5.  Trolley dilemma in the sky: Context matters when civilians and cadets make remotely piloted aircraft decisions.

Authors:  Markus Christen; Darcia Narvaez; Julaine D Zenk; Michael Villano; Charles R Crowell; Daniel R Moore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  What we say and what we do: the relationship between real and hypothetical moral choices.

Authors:  Oriel FeldmanHall; Dean Mobbs; Davy Evans; Lucy Hiscox; Lauren Navrady; Tim Dalgleish
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2012-03-09

7.  Age differences in intuitive moral decision-making: Associations with inter-network neural connectivity.

Authors:  Shenyang Huang; Leonard Faul; Gunes Sevinc; Laetitia Mwilambwe-Tshilobo; Roni Setton; Amber W Lockrow; Natalie C Ebner; Gary R Turner; R Nathan Spreng; Felipe De Brigard
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2021-09-02

8.  The Role of Self-Sacrifice in Moral Dilemmas.

Authors:  Sonya Sachdeva; Rumen Iliev; Hamed Ekhtiari; Morteza Dehghani
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Moral dilemmas in females: children are more utilitarian than adults.

Authors:  Monica Bucciarelli
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-09-08

10.  The outlandish, the realistic, and the real: contextual manipulation and agent role effects in trolley problems.

Authors:  Natalie Gold; Briony D Pulford; Andrew M Colman
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-01-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.