Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Decoding Academia #4: (Uhlmann, et al. 2015) *Video* (Patreon)

Published:
2022-03-10 07:36:17
Edited:
2022-03-10 13:40:01
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

Slightly delayed but good things come to those who wait... maybe...

We take a look at another paper this time one focusing on Moral Psychology and a possible 'third way' to avoid the limitations with act-based approaches (that fall into Consequentialist and Deontological categories).

The paper is posted in a previous post but if anyone wants it I'll add it here so just comment below if so. Audio version coming soon...

Files

Decoding Academia 4: Uhlmann et al. (2015)

Comments

Ymirsdreams

Peter Singer would be a very interesting guru to look at. On the topic of morality, so would Machiavelli (100% a literary guru for many).

Tom Allison

Very nice. Also a nice "lunch length" bit of content ;). It strikes me that the theme of individual versus collective moral judgements might be an interesting one to explore - are they different? Do they come to different conclusions/serve different purposes? I have to fess up, I haven#t read the paper, yet -- may have more to ask after that -- but as a format, I quite like these.

Lilydale

I like these too, in someways more than the guru decoding because it gets me to read a journal article that I wouldn’t have done otherwise, and then to hear it being discussed is so much fun!

Kat

Darn about raising the price! I like these decoding academia posts. They're more entertaining than most of those free "coursera" courses I've taken and I don't have to do homework either. The paper discusses actions but I guess statements e.g. of modesty or bragging are also virtue signalling (or its opposite). What about becoming a hermit, or monk and entering a life of contemplation? I'm never going to remember that word "deontological"

Shannon

My random thoughts listening to this. I don't know what it is about deontology, but I find it odd many people view it as this demanding thing. All ethical systems are demanding, they give what they "ought" to do, (or in virtue ethics case what virtues they ought to pursue). Deontology has been argued to be a type of virtue ethics (at least Kant's version). So I don't know if there are these clean lines between these theories. As well I find it odd to think people who have not thought about ethics in terms of virtue ethics, deontology or utilitarianism would be clearly one or the other. To me in my day to day experience it seems people are just a mish mash and bring these labels into the public space seems like intellectual imperialisms on the unwashed masses. Though there is some value in using these classifies, there just seems something odd in going that x person is x,y,z ethic system they have not signed off on. Seems more they are acting like x,y,z ethics. To me it would make more sense to say Socrates is the father of virtue ethics, as his influence is felt by many different schools of virtue ethics trying to claim him as their own. But I can understand why you would say Aristotle. Seems weird to suggest that utilitarians would be against duels, it could offer the most utility in stopping people from challenging you to duels in the future cause, obviously, you are such a badass dueler. Or it could bring about more utility as it is better to resolve the dispute in a duel, rather then have some drawn out fight. It seems there are many ways a utilitarian could view dueling as allowed (though perhaps it would be hard to justify as the ideal in a utilitarian society).

Mark K

The virtue ethics discussion is bringing me back to my time in Catholic school when the nun said you couldn't commit any sin if you were on a desert island alone. Then my classmate said you could still take the name of God in vain and she shot him such a look. I find it interesting that the ancient Greeks thought morally repugnant acts like Oedipus marrying his mother resulted in disturbance to the physical world (a plague in the city) even though Oedipus was unaware. A neat solution to "moral dumbfounding."

Robert Andrews

Thanks for the discussion. You mention that Dave Pizarro has written about over-reliance on the trolley problem. Do you have a link to his papers on this?

Robert Andrews

I was wondering about it because although the trolley problem is a bit of a cliche by now, one thing that seems to me to be an advantage of it is that it seems to have allowed for a lot of replication. In addition, we can also see variation across cultures. For example, it seems that in non-WEIRD countries, there is more of a reluctance to maximize utility. Also, some researchers such as Albert Costa believe they have found a foreign language effect (FLE) in which people are more willing to take utilitarian decisions if asked to make a decision in their second language rather than in their first, between say pushing the fat man in front of train to save five people, possibly because a second language is less emotionally connected than their first. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261839039_Your_Morals_Depend_on_Language