![]() ![]() The author explains the latter distinction through the analogy of the elephant and the rider. Finally, human intuitions are the primary drivers and rationality is often employed to justify those intuitions. Firstly, there’s something more to human morality than just care/harm. Such experiments carried out by Professor Jonathan Haidt, the author of the book the righteous mind, indicate two things. Some suggested that the neighbours might find out about it and be traumatized by this. Some of the respondents said that the man would get diseases from such an action and, therefore, it was wrong. But when pressed further with the contention that he did not harm anyone, they invented reasons to justify their reactions. Many people with liberal inclinations intuitively said that the man was morally wrong. If you think he’s not morally wrong because the chicken was dead and he did no harm to anyone, you’re a liberal.īut when this question was posed to many people with liberal inclinations, despite conceding that there wasn’t anything morally wrong with the man’s action, they showed a very high degree of disgust. Was the man morally right or wrong in doing so? If your gut reaction to the question is yes because he violated something sacred, then you’re a conservative. But instead of simply cooking the chicken, he had sexual intercourse with the chicken and then cooked it. Let’s suppose that there’s a man who bought a chicken from the supermarket. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |