道德困境之困境——情与理的辩争被引量：46

Dilemma of Moral Dilemmas: The Conflict between Emotion and Reasoning in Moral Judgments

下载PDF

导出

摘要道德判断是人类日常生活中必不可少的评价性活动之一,但道德判断中情与理的作用争执不休。从休谟和康德的哲学论争到发展心理学家对道德推理的关注,直至现代社会心理学家对情绪的重新审视,道德判断的决策机制已经演变为多种模型相互竞争的局面。在回顾和分析道德判断各种理论的基础上,阐述了情绪和推理在道德判断中的作用,认为今后应当更多地关注道德推理的实际作用,并当运用更为先进的操纵手段,同时注重情境的影响来考察道德判断中情与理的问题。 Though moral judgment ranks among one of the most essential human activities, arguments about the roles of emotion and reasoning play in moral judgment never cease. From the philosophical controversy between Hume and Kant to the debates among developmental psychologists; from social psychology arguments about the power of the situations to neuroscience insights about the brain constraints to human morality, modern psychology has witnessed the paradigm shifts from time to time concerning the importance of emotion and reasoning in moral judgments. We reviewed several competing theories on moral judgment and gave a synthetic view of the roles emotion and reasoning play in moral judgment. We suggest that the psychological contributions in understanding human morality would come from the systematical analysis of moral judgments in real life situations involving real individuals with real implications. Methodologically, multi-level and multi-method analysis is much needed. By studying the effects of situational factors in moral judgments, we may eventually be able to go beyond the dichotomy of emotion and reasoning to truly understand the mechanisms involved in human moral judgments.

作者喻丰彭凯平韩婷婷柴方圆柏阳

机构地区清华大学心理学系 Department of Psychology 北京师范大学心理学院

出处《心理科学进展》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2011年第11期1702-1712,共11页 Advances in Psychological Science

关键词道德道德判断道德推理情绪双加工理论 morality moral judgment moral reasoning emotion dual-process model

分类号 B849 [哲学宗教—应用心理学] C91 [经济管理]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献60

1Baron, J. (1994). Nonconsequentialist decisions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 1-42.
2Bartels, D. M., & Burnett, R. C. (2011). A group construal account of drop-in-the-bucket thinking in policy preference and moral judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 50-57.
3Bauer, R. M., Leritz, E., & Bowers, D. (2003). Research methods in neuropsychology. In J. A. Schinka & W. F. Velicer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology, vol. 2: Research methods in psychology (pp. 289-322). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
4Bazerman, M. H. & Greene, J. D. (2010). In favor of clear thinking: Incorporating moral rules into a wise cost-benefit analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 209-212.
5Bennis, W. M., Medin, D. L., & Bartels, D. M. (2010). The costs and benefits of calculation and moral rules. Perspectives in Psychological Sciences, 5, 187-202.
6Bloom, P. (2010). How do morals change? Nature, 464, 490.
7Caruso, E. M., & Gino, F. (2011). Blind ethics: Closing one's eyes polarizes moral judgments and discourages dishonest behavior. Cognition, 118, 280-285.
8Cohon, R. (2010). Hume's moral philosophy. In Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2010 edition). Retrieved February 22, 2011, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/hume-m oral/.
9Crain, W. C. (1985). Theories of development (pp.118-136). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
10Cushman, F., & Young, L. (2011). Patterns of moral judgment derive from nonmoral psychological representations. Cognitive Science, 35, 1-24.