Misunderstanding Metaethics: Difficulties Measuring Folk Objectivism and Relativism
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Recent research on the metaethical beliefs of ordinary people appears to show that they are metaethical pluralists that adopt different metaethical standards for different moral judgments. Yet the methods used to evaluate folk metaethical belief rely on the assumption that participants interpret what they are asked in metaethical terms. We argue that most participants do not interpret questions designed to elicit metaethical beliefs in metaethical terms, or at least not in the way researchers intend. As a result, existing methods are not reliable measures of metaethical belief. We end by discussing the implications of our account for the philosophical and practical implications of research on the psychology of metaethics.
Downloads
Article Details
By submitting his/her work to the Editorial Board, the author accepts, upon having his/her text recommended for publication, that Diametros applies the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license to the works we publish. Under this license, authors agree to make articles legally available for reuse, without permission or fees. Anyone may read, download, copy, print, distribute or reuse these articles without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as the author and original source are properly cited. The author holds the copyright without any other restrictions. Full information about CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
References
Andow J. (2016), “Qualitative Tools and Experimental Philosophy,” Philosophical Psychology, 29 (8): 1128–1141.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2016.1224826
Ayars A., Nichols S., (2019), “Rational Learners and Metaethics: Universalism, Relativism, and Evidence from Consensus,” Mind & Language 35 (1): 67–89.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12232
Beebe J.R., Sackris D. (2016), “Moral Objectivism Across the Lifespan,” Philosophical Psychology 29 (6): 912–929.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2016.1174843
Beebe J.R. (2015), “The Empirical Study of Folk Metaethics,” Etyka 50: 11–28.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14394/etyka.486
Beebe J.R., Qiaoan R., Wysocki T. et al. (2015), “Moral Objectivism in Cross-Cultural Perspective,” Journal of Cognition and Culture 15 (3–4): 386–401.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12342157
Björnsson G. (2017), “Contextualism in Ethics”, [in:] International Encyclopedia of Ethics, H. LaFollette (ed.), published online: 21 June 2017, doi: 10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee760.pub2.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee760.pub2
Camerer C., Loewenstein G., Weber M. (1989), “The Curse of Knowledge in Economic Settings: An Experimental Analysis,” Journal of Political Economy 97 (5): 1232–1254.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261651
Colebrook R. (under review), “Reconceptualizing Folk Metaethics,” URL = https://www.academia.edu/36014543/The_Irrationality_of_Folk_Metaethics [Accessed 8.5.2020].
View in Google Scholar
Collier-Spruel L., Hawkins A., Jayawickreme E. et al. (2019), “Relativism or Tolerance? Defining, Assessing, Connecting, and Distinguishing Two Moral Personality Features with Prominent Roles in Modern Societies,” Journal of Personality 87 (6): 1170–1188.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12466
Collins D. (2003), “Pretesting Survey Instruments: An Overview of Cognitive Methods,” Quality of Life Research 12 (3): 229–238.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023254226592
Cova F., Strickland B., Abatista A. et al. (2018), “Estimating the Reproducibility of Experimental Philosophy,” Review of Philosophy and Psychology, published online: 14 June 2018, doi: 10.1007/s13164-018-0400-9.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-018-0400-9
Feltz A., Cokely E.T. (2008), “The Fragmented Folk: More Evidence of Stable Individual Differences in Moral Judgments and Folk Intuitions,” [in:] Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, B.C. Love, K. McRae, V.M. Sloutsky (eds), TX: Cognitive Science Society, Austin: 1771–1776.
View in Google Scholar
Fisher M., Knobe J., Strickland B. et al. (2017), “The Influence of Social Interaction on Intuitions of Objectivity and Subjectivity,” Cognitive Science 41 (4): 1119–1134.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12380
Forsyth D.R. (1980), “A Taxonomy of Ethical Ideologies,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 (1): 175–184.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.1.175
Gert J. (2013), “Color Constancy and Dispositionalism,” Philosophical Studies 162 (2): 183–200.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-011-9754-x
Goodwin G.P., Darley J.M. (2010), “The Perceived Objectivity of Ethical Beliefs: Psychological Findings and Implications for Public Policy,” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (2): 161–188.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-009-0013-4
Goodwin G.P., Darley J.M. (2008), “The Psychology of Meta-Ethics: Exploring Objectivism,” Cognition 106 (3): 1339–1366.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.06.007
Goodwin G.P., Darley J.M. (2012), “Why are Some Moral Beliefs Perceived to be More Objective than Others?,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48 (1): 250–256.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.006
Heiphetz L., Young L.L. (2017), “Can Only One Person Be Right? The Development of Objectivism and Social Preferences Regarding Widely Shared and Controversial Moral Beliefs,” Cognition 167: 78–90.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.05.014
Joyce R. (2015a), “Moral Objectivity and Moral Relativism,” [in:] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), E.N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-anti-realism/moral-objectivity-relativism.html [Accessed 2.10.2019].
View in Google Scholar
Joyce R. (2015b), “Moral Anti-Realism,” [in:] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), E.N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-anti-realism/ [Accessed 2.10.2019].
View in Google Scholar
Gowans C. (2015), “Moral Relativism,” [in:] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition), E.N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-relativism/ [Accessed 5.10.2019].
View in Google Scholar
McHugh M.L. (2012), “Interrater Reliability: The Kappa Statistic,” Biochemia Medica 22 (3): 276–282.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2012.031
Moss D. (2017), “Experimental Philosophy, Folk Metaethics and Qualitative Methods,” Teorema 36 (3): 185–203.
View in Google Scholar
Nichols S. (2004), “After Objectivity: An Empirical Study of Moral Judgment,” Philosophical Psychology 17 (1): 3–26.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0951508042000202354
Pölzler T. (2018), “How to Measure Moral Realism,” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 9 (3): 647–670.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-018-0401-8
Pölzler T., Wright J.C. (2020), “Anti-Realist Pluralism: A New Approach to Folk Metaethics,” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 11 (1): 53–82.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-019-00447-8
Pölzler T., Wright J.C. (2019), “Empirical Research on Folk Moral Objectivism,” Philosophy Compass 14 (5): e12589.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12589
Rai T.S., Holyoak K.J. (2013), “Exposure to Moral Relativism Compromises Moral Behavior,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49 (6): 995–1001.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.06.008
Rose D., Nichols S. (2019), “From Punishment to Universalism,” Mind & Language 34 (1): 59–72.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12191
Rysiew P. (2011), “Relativism and Contextualism,” [in:] A Companion to Relativism, S.D. Hales (ed.), Blackwell Publishing, West Sussex (UK): 286–305.
View in Google Scholar
Sarkissian H., Park J., Tien D. et al. (2011), “Folk Moral Relativism,” Mind & Language 26 (4): 482–505.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2011.01428.x
Sarkissian H., Phelan M. (2019), “Moral Objectivism and a Punishing God,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 80: 1–7.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.012
Wainryb C., Shaw L.A., Langley M. et al. (2004), “Children’s Thinking about Diversity of Belief in the Early School Years: Judgments of Relativism, Tolerance, and Disagreeing Persons,” Child Development 75 (3): 687–703.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00701.x
Wright J.C. (2018), “The Fact and Function of Meta-Ethical Pluralism: Examining the Evidence,” [in:] Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy (vol. 2), T. Lombrozo, S. Nichols, J. Knobe (eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford: 119–150.
View in Google Scholar
Wright J.C., Grandjean P.T., McWhite C.B. (2013), “The Meta-Ethical Grounding of Our Moral Beliefs: Evidence for Meta-Ethical Pluralism,” Philosophical Psychology 26 (3): 336–361.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2011.633751
Yilmaz O., Bahçekapili H.G. (2015), “Without God, Everything is Permitted? The Reciprocal Infl uence of Religious and Meta-Ethical Beliefs,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 58: 95–100.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.01.003
Yilmaz O., Bahçekapili H.G. (2018), “Meta-Ethics and the Mortality: Mortality Salience Leads People to Adopt a Less Subjectivist Morality,” Cognition 179: 171–177.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.014
Young L., Durwin A.J. (2013), “Moral Realism as Moral Motivation: The Impact of Meta-Ethics on Everyday Decision-Making,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49 (2): 302–306.
View in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.013