Essays in Philosophical Moral Psychology

The dissertation consists of four essays and a comprehensive introduction that discusses the topics, methods, and most prominent theories of philosophical moral psychology. I distinguish three main questions: What are the essential features of moral thinking? What are the psychological conditions of moral responsibility? And finally, what are the consequences of empirical facts about human nature to normative ethics? Each of the three last articles focuses on one of these issues. The first essay and part of the introduction are dedicated to methodological questions, in particular the relationship between empirical (social) psychology and philosophy. I reject recent attempts to understand the nature of morality on the basis of empirical research. One characteristic feature of moral thinking is its practical clout: if we regard an action as morally wrong, we either refrain from doing it even against our desires and interests, or else feel shame or guilt. Moral views seem to have a conceptual connection to motivation and emotions – roughly speaking, we can’t conceive of someone genuinely disapproving an action, but nonetheless doing it without any inner motivational conflict or regret. This conceptual thesis in moral psychology is called (judgment) internalism. It implies, among other things, that psychopaths cannot make moral judgments to the extent that they are incapable of corresponding motivation and emotion, even if they might say largely the words we would expect. Is internalism true? Recently, there has been an explosion of interest in so-called experimental philosophy, which is a methodological view according to which claims about conceptual truths that appeal to our intuitions should be tested by way of surveys presented to ordinary language users. One experimental result is that the majority of people are willing to grant that psychopaths make moral judgments, which challenges internalism. In the first article, ‘The Rise and Fall of Experimental Philosophy’, I argue that these results pose no real threat to internalism, since experimental philosophy is based on a too simple conception of the relationship between language use and concepts. Only the reactions of competent users in pragmatically neutral and otherwise conducive circumstances yield evidence about conceptual truths, and such robust intuitions remain inaccessible to surveys for reasons of principle. The epistemology of folk concepts must still be based on Socratic dialogue and critical reflection, whose character and authority I discuss at the end of the paper. The internal connection between moral judgment and motivation led many metaethicists in the past century to believe along Humean lines that judgment itself consists in a pro-attitude rather than a belief. This expressivist view, as it is called these days, has far-reaching consequences in metaethics. In the second essay I argue that perhaps the most sophisticated form of contemporary expressivism, Allan Gibbard’s norm-expressivism, according to which moral judgments are decisions or contingency plans, is implausible from the perspective of the theory of action. In certain circumstances it is possible to think that something is morally required of one without deciding to do so. Morality is not a matter of the will. Instead, I sketch on the basis of Robert Brandom’s inferentialist semantics a weak form of judgment internalism, according to which the content of moral judgment is determined by a commitment to a particular kind of practical reasoning. The last two essays in the dissertation emphasize the role of mutual recognition in the development and maintenance of responsible and autonomous moral agency. I defend a compatibilist view of autonomy, according to which agents who are unable to recognize right and wrong or act accordingly are not responsible for their actions – it is not fair to praise or blame them, since they lacked the relevant capacity to do otherwise. Conversely, autonomy demands an ability to recognize reasons and act on them. But as a long tradition in German moral philosophy whose best-known contemporary representative is Axel Honneth has it, both being aware of reasons and acting on them requires also the right sort of higher-order attitudes toward the self. Without self-respect and self-confidence we remain at the mercy of external pressures, even if we have the necessary normative competence. These attitudes toward the self, in turn, are formed through mutual recognition – we value ourselves when those who we value value us. Thus, standing in the right sort of relations of recognition is indirectly necessary for autonomy and moral responsibility. Recognition and valuing are concretely manifest in actions and institutions, whose practices make possible participation on an equal footing. Seeing this opens the way for a kind of normative social criticism that is grounded in the value of freedom and automomy, but is not limited to defending negative rights. It thus offers a new way to bridge the gap between liberalism and communitarianism.

Human Rights in Action

In the post-World War II era human rights have emerged as an enormous global phenomenon. In Finland human rights have particularly in the 1990s moved from the periphery to the center of public policy making and political rhetoric. Human rights education is commonly viewed as the decisive vehicle for emancipating individuals of oppressive societal structures and rendering them conscious of the equal value of others; both core ideals of the abstract discourse. Yet little empirical research has been conducted on how these goals are realized in practice. These factors provide the background for the present study which, by combining anthropological insights with critical legal theory, has analyzed the educational activities of a Scandinavian and Nordic network of human rights experts and PhD students in 2002-2005. This material has been complemented by data from the proceedings of UN human rights treaty bodies, hearings organized by the Finnish Foreign Ministry, the analysis of different human rights documents as well as the manner human rights are talked of in the Finnish media. As the human rights phenomenon has expanded, human rights experts have acquired widespread societal influence. The content of human rights remains, nevertheless, ambiguous: on the one hand they are law, on the other, part of a moral discourse. By educating laymen on what human rights are, experts act both as intermediaries and activists who expand the scope of rights and simultaneously exert increasing political influence. In the educational activities of the analyzed network these roles were visible in the rhetorics of legality and legitimacy . Among experts both of these rhetorics are subject to ongoing professional controversy, yet in the network they are presented as undisputable facts. This contributes to the impression that human rights knowledge is uncontested. This study demonstrates how the network s activities embody and strengthen a conception of expertise as located in specific, structurally determined individuals. Simultaneously its conception of learning emphasizes the adoption of knowledge by students, emphasizing the power of experts over them. The majority of the network s experts are Nordic males, whereas its students are predominantly Nordic females and males from East-European and developing countries. Contrary to the ideals of the discourse the network s activities do not create dialogue, but instead repeat power structures which are themselves problematic.

A legitimação jurídico-moral da regulação estatal à luz da premissa liberal republicana: autonomia privada, igualdade e autonomia pública. Estudo de caso sobre as regulações paternalistas

A presente tese tem por objetivo principal estudar a legitimação jurídico-moral da regulação estatal. Trata-se de tema de grande relevância e extrema atualidade em decorrência de dois fatores. Por um lado, desde o fenômeno da virada kantiana e da retomada da preocupação com o estabelecimento de uma teoria da justiça, tornou-se necessária a análise de justificação jurídico-moral de toda e qualquer instituição político-jurídica positivada. Por outro lado, entre as inúmeras instituições político-jurídicas positivadas, cresce cada vez mais a utilização das medidas jurídicas regulatórias, através das quais o Poder Público direciona ou controla a conduta dos agentes com o intuito de atingir determinada finalidade. Instituto econômico que é, ao interferir na alocação de riquezas, bens e serviços no mercado, a regulação estatal há tempos já vem sendo objeto de análise em uma perspectiva de legitimação econômica. Tradicionalmente, ainda dentro do paradigma da racionalidade, os economistas sempre apontaram as falhas de mercado como as razões a justificar as regulações estatais em um viés econômico. Mais recentemente, por sua vez, os adeptos da economia comportamental, rompendo ou relativizando as lições da Rational Choice Theory, têm apontado também as ações irracionais em heurística como razões a justificar as regulações estatais em um viés econômico. Ocorre, entretanto, que a regulação estatal é um instituto interdisciplinar. Ao direcionar ou controlar a conduta dos indivíduos, limitando ou implementando direitos e liberdades, a regulação constitui instituto simultaneamente jurídico e moral. A presente tese, portanto, buscará apresentar as razões a servir de justificação para a regulação estatal em uma perspectiva jurídico-moral. Neste ponto, adotar-se-á como paradigma de aferição de legitimação jurídico-moral das instituições político-jurídicas positivadas (entre as quais as regulações estatais) um liberalismo-republicano, consistente na compatibilização do liberalismo-igualitário com um republicanismo moderado. Desta forma, o estudo buscará defender a possibilidade de a legitimação jurídico-moral das diversas regulações estatais encontrar fundamento em um ou alguns de três valores jurídico-morais: a autonomia individual privada, as condições igualitárias e a autonomia pública. No que diz respeito à implementação da autonomia individual privada e das condições igualitárias, primeiramente, a tese defenderá a possibilidade de ser realizada uma nova leitura jurídico-moral dos institutos econômicos das falhas de mercado e das ações irracionais em heurística. Neste sentido, o conceito de falhas de mercado e o conceito de ações irracionais em heurística, em uma leitura jurídico-moral como razões a justificar a legitimação das regulações estatais, devem ser entendidos como situações em que o atuar livre dos agentes no mercado viole ou deixe de implementar os valores jurídico-morais fundamentais da autonomia individual privada e das condições igualitárias. Ainda no que diz respeito às influências liberal-igualitárias, a tese sustentará que, mesmo na inexistência de falhas de mercado ou de ações irracionais em heurística, será possível o estabelecimento de regulações estatais que encontrem justificação no valor jurídico-moral fundamental da igualdade, desde que tais regulações estejam destinadas a implementar as condições igualitárias mínimas necessárias à manutenção da própria autonomia individual privada e da dignidade humana. Por outro lado, no que diz respeito às influências republicanas, será exposto que as regulações estatais podem encontrar legitimação jurídico-moral também no valor jurídico-moral fundamental da autonomia pública. A saber, as regulações podem se encontrar legitimadas jurídico-moralmente quando da implementação dos projetos e políticas deliberados pelos cidadãos e pela sociedade no exercício da soberania popular, desde que tais projetos coletivos não violem os requisitos mínimos de dignidade humana dos indivíduos. A tese defenderá que os princípios da proporcionalidade e da igualdade podem exercer um papel de destaque na análise de legitimação jurídico-moral das regulações estatais. O princípio da proporcionalidade, neste ponto, será útil instrumental metodológico na aferição de legitimação jurídico-moral de uma medida regulatória em uma perspectiva interna, quando da aferição da relação estabelecida entre os meios e os fins da regulação. O princípio da igualdade, por sua vez, será útil instrumental metodológico na aferição de legitimação jurídico-moral de uma medida regulatória em uma perspectiva comparativa entre as diversas medidas regulatórias existentes. Por fim, uma vez enfrentados os pontos mais sensíveis pertinentes à justificação de toda e qualquer medida regulatória bem como estabelecida uma teoria geral acerca da legitimação jurídico-moral da regulação estatal, a presente tese realizará um estudo de caso acerca da legitimação jurídico-moral especificamente das regulações que utilizam argumentos de natureza paternalista. Trata-se de regulações que, ao direcionar a conduta de agentes com o intuito de zelar por bens, direitos e interesses destes próprios indivíduos cuja liberdade é restringida, apresentam-se extremamente controversas. Será exposto que, desde a clássica obra On Liberty de JONH STUART MILL, o paternalismo jurídico vem sendo tradicionalmente associado a uma conotação pejorativa de violação aos valores jurídico-morais fundamentais. A tese, porém, adotará posição segundo a qual as regulações paternalistas podem eventualmente encontrar legitimação jurídico-moral na promoção ou proteção dos valores jurídico-morais fundamentais da autonomia individual privada e da igualdade. Além disto, defenderá o estudo que os institutos econômicos das falhas de mercado da assimetria de informações e dos problemas de coordenação bem como os institutos econômicos das ações irracionais em heurística, adotados na nova leitura jurídico-moral proposta, servirão de instrumental útil na identificação das situações em que tais regulações paternalistas se encontram legitimadas jurídico-moralmente diante da premissa liberal-republicana.

From Rights to Compassion: The D Case and Contemporary Abortion Politics

This chapter is concerned with exploring the dynamics of contemporary debate on women’s reproductive choices and rights in the somewhat transformed social, political and economic context of the Republic of Ireland. News coverage of the events of April and May 2007 provide the focus of attention, as the case of ‘D’, a 17 year old in the temporary care of the state, seeking to terminate her pregnancy after a diagnosis of severe foetal abnormality, became yet again a focus of public debate on abortion access within the state. The analysis explores how the issues this case raised were framed in the public domain, in order to consider the shifting moral grammar shaping the debate. The paper explores the ways in which this case illustrates the ongoing tensions between changing characterisations of Irishness, and the social dynamics of access to reproductive rights, particularly for national minors in the care of the state.

Predicting intentions to purchase organic food: The role of affective and moral attitudes in the Theory of Planned Behaviour

This study examined the usefulness of integrating measures of affective and moral attitudes into the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)-model in predicting purchase intentions or organic foods. Moral attitude was operationalised Lis positive self-rewarding feelings of doing the right thing. Questionnaire data were gathered in three countries: Italy (N = 202), Finland (N = 270) and UK (N = 200) in March 2004. Questions focussed on intentions to purchase organic apples and organic ready-to-cook pizza instead of their conventional alternatives. Data were analysed using Structural Equation Modelling by simultaneous multi-group analysis of the three Countries. Along with attitudes, moral attitude and subjective norms explained considerable shares of variances in intentions. The relative influences of these variables varied between the Countries, such that in the UK and Italy moral attitude rather than subjective norms had stronger explanatory power. In Finland it was other way around. Inclusion of moral attitude improved the model fit and predictive ability of the model, although only marginally in Finland. Thus the results partially Support the usefulness of incorporating moral measures as well as affective items for attitude into the framework of TPB. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Explicit argumentation as a supervisory tool for decision making in child protection cases involving human rights issues

This paper addresses the problems often faced by social workers and their supervisors in decision making where human rights considerations and child protection concerns collide. High profile court cases in the United Kingdom and Europe have consistently called for social workers to convey more clarity when justifying their reasons for interfering with human rights in child protection cases. The themes emerging from these case law decisions imply that social workers need to be better at giving reasons and evidence in more explicit ways to support any actions they propose which cause interference with Convention Rights. Toulmin (1958, 1985) offers a structured approach to argumentation which may have relevance to the supervision of child protection cases when social workers and managers are required to balance these human rights considerations. One of the key challenges in this balancing act is the need for decision makers to feel confident that any interventions resulting in the interference of human rights are both justified and proportionate. Toulmin’s work has already been shown to have relevance for assisting social workers navigate pathways through cases involving competing ethical and moral demands (Osmo and Landau, 2001) and more recently to human rights and decision making in child protection (Duffy et al, 2006). Toulmin’s model takes the practitioner through a series of stages where any argument or proposed recommendation (claim) is subjected to intense critical analysis involving exposition of its strengths and weaknesses. The author therefore proposes that explicit argumentation (Osmo and Landau, 2001) may help supervisors and practitioners towards safer and more confident decision making in child protection cases involving the interference of the human rights of children and parents. In addition to highlighting the broader context of human rights currently permeating child protection decision making, the paper will include case material to practically demonstrate the application of Toulmin’s model of argumentation to the supervision context. In this way the paper adopts a strong practice approach in helping to assist practitioners with the problems and dilemmas they may come up against in decision making in complex cases.

Harmful transgressions qua moral transgressions: A deflationary view

One important issue in moral psychology concerns the proper characterization of the folk understanding of the relationship between harmful transgressions and moral transgressions. Psychologist Elliot Turiel and associates have claimed with a broad range of supporting evidence that harmful transgressions are understood as transgressions that are authority independent and general in scope, which, according to them, characterizes these transgressions as moral transgressions. Recently, many researchers questioned the position advocated by the Turiel tradition with some new evidence. We entered this debate proposing an original, deflationary view in which perceptions of basic-rights violation and injustice are fundamental for the folk understanding of harmful transgressions as moral transgressions in Turiel’s sense. In this article, we elaborate and refine our deflationary view, while reviewing the debate, addressing various criticisms raised against our perspective, showing how our perspective explains the existent evidence, and suggesting new lines of inquiry.

Rights, Rationality and Reproduction: Balancing Interests in the Abortion Debate

As medical technology has advanced, so too have our attitudes towards the level of control we can or should expect to have over our procreative capacities. This creates a multidimensional problem for the law and family planning services in terms of access to services – whether to avoid conception or terminate a pregnancy – and the negligent provision of these services. These developments go to the heart of our perception of autonomy. Unsurprisingly, these matters also raise a moral dilemma for the law. Distinctively, discourse in this area is dominated by assertions of subjective moral value; in relation to life, to personal choice and to notions of the archetypal family. Against this, I stress that a model of objective morality can answer these challenging questions and resolve the inherent problems of legal regulation. Therefore, I argue that notions of autonomy must be based on a rational, action-based understanding of what it means to be a ‘moral agent’. I claim that from this we might support a legal standard, based on objective rational morality, which can frame our constitutional norms and our conception of justice in these contentious areas. This paper claims that the current regulation of abortion is outdated and requires radical reform. It proposes a scheme that would shift the choice towards the mother (and the father), remove the unnecessarily broad disability ground and involve doctors having a role of counsel (rather than gatekeeper).

Task Competency in the Rights Analytic: Mental Health and the Justification for Rights and Duties

The paper concerns the moral status of persons for the purposes of rights-holding and duty-bearing. Developing from Gewirth’s argument to the Principle of Generic Consistency (PGC) and Beyleveld et al.’s Principle of Precautionary Reasoning, I argue in favour of a capacity-based assessment of the task competencies required for choice-rights and certain duties (within the Hohfeldian analytic). Unlike other, traditional, theories of rights, I claim that precautionary reasoning as to agentic status holds the base justification for rights-holding. If this is the basis for generic legal rights, then the contingent argument must be used to explain communities of rights. Much in the same way as two ‘normal’ adult agents may not have equal rights to be an aeroplane pilot, not all adults hold the same task competencies in relation to the exercise of the generic rights to freedom derived from the PGC. In this paper, I set out to consider the rights held by children, persons suffering from mental illness and generic ‘full’ agents. In mapping the developing ‘portfolio’ of rights and duties that a person carries during their life we might better understand the legal relations of those who do not ostensibly fulfil the criteria of ‘full’ agent.

NGO Duties in Relation to Human Rights. A Closer Look at One Proposal

This paper investigates the moral duties that human rights NGOs, such as Amnesty International, and development NGOs, such as Oxfam, have in relation to human rights – especially in relation to the human right to a decent standard of living. The mentioned NGOs are powerful new agents on the global scene, and according to many they might be duty-bearers in relation to human rights. However, until now their moral duties have hardly been investigated. The present paper investigates NGO duties in relation to human rights by looking in particular to a moral theory recently proposed by Leif Wenar, a theory which has some similarities to utilitarianism. In applying this theory, a case for human-rights duties of NGOs is developed mainly by considering the indispensable role that civil society plays in protecting human rights. The paper concludes that, at least, NGOs bear duties with regard to human rights when, as in certain real-life cases, NGO involvement is the only way to achieve acceptable protection against standard threats to certain goods, such as a decent standard of living.

Consideración moral de los animales. Un enfoque filosófico y ecoético orientado hacia la política

Aceptando hipotéticamente que se ha de considerar moralmente a los animales el texto se pregunta por las razones que validan dicha tesis y, además, por los mecanismos a través de los cuales dicha consideración sería efectiva. Frente a estas preguntas se revisarán tres enfoques teóricos que ofrecen respuestas diversas a los interrogantes planteados: el enfoque de los intereses de Peter Singer, la perspectiva de los derechos de Salt y Regan, y la teoría de las capacidades de Martha Nussbaum. No obstante, en el curso de la reconstrucción mencionada el texto evidenciará algunos problemas de estos planteamientos y su alcance a la hora de impulsar la transformación de las prácticas cotidianas de los humanos con los animales ya que carecen de fuerza política para validar y extender nuevas formas de relacionarnos con los animales. El texto sostendrá que una alianza de los mejores elementos de estas tres teorías puede conformar una base sólida para la creación y fundamentación de movimientos sociales y políticos que impulsen la renovación de la relación de los hombres con los animales.

The moral background of the political philosophers –The Nozick case–

 On the assumption that any complex Modern Political Theory involves a decision about human rights, this article considers a possible assessment of the broader aspects of the conception of the State in the work of Nozick. Based on one critical point of view originally formulated by H.L.A. Hart, it defends the claim that the libertarian conception is untenable in moral terms. 

Human rights.

Esta serie presenta un contenido adaptado a la Educación para la Ciudadanía para alumnos de más de catorce años y está concebida para fomentar en las escuelas la cultura política, la responsabilidad social y moral y, la participación en la vida comunitaria. Este texto, en concreto, anima a los estudiantes a comprometerse con cuestiones que van desde la injusticia política y económica a los derechos de los niños y de los discapacitados, así como, a conocer el equilibrio entre derechos y responsabilidades. Se acompaña de un material-recurso para el profesor.

When consent doesn't work: a rights-based case for limits to consent’s capacity to legitimise

Consent's capacity to legitimise actions and claims is limited by conditions such as coercion, which render consent ineffective. A better understanding of the limits to consent's capacity to legitimise can shed light on a variety of applied debates, in political philosophy, bioethics, economics and law. I show that traditional paternalist explanations for limits to consent's capacity to legitimise cannot explain the central intuition that consent is often rendered ineffective when brought about by a rights violation or threatened rights violation. I argue that this intuition is an expression of the same principles of corrective justice that underlie norms of compensation and rectification. I show how these principles can explain and clarify core intuitions about conditions which render consent ineffective, including those concerned with the consenting agent's option set, his mental competence, and available information.