Moral Psychology (Phil134-Ucsb)

Front 1

sociobiology (E.O. Wilson)

Back 1

the systematic study of the biological basis of social behavior in all organisms

Front 2

biologist's fallacy (Blackburn)

Back 2

the fallacy of determining the "true" psychology of a person from their genes.

Front 3

two senses of "altruism", primary & secondary

Back 3

1. the principle or practice of unselfish concern or devotion to the welfare of others.
2. behavior by an animal that benefits its kind but disadvantages itself.

Front 4

psychological altruism & evolutionary altruism

Back 4

Psychological Altruism - the principle that there are some truly unselfish ultimate motives

Evolutionary Altruism - behavior by an animal that may be to its disadvantage but that benefits others of its kind

Evolutionary Altruism stems from an instinct to evolutionarily altruistic action, which itself is derived from genetic code. Psychological Altruism is a moral principle or intentional practice of unselfish motivation or action.

Front 5

ultimate desire & instrumental desire

Back 5

ultimate desire - a desire for something as an end in itself

intrumental desire - a desire for something that leads to the fulfillment of an ultimate desire

Front 6

psychological egoism & ethical egoism

Back 6

psychological egoism - the principle that all human actions are ultimately self-interested

ethical egoism - that self-interested actions are always morally right or permissble

Front 7

empathy-helping relationship

Back 7

empathic arousal induces an individual to help a needy other

empathic arousal -> helping needy other

Front 8

empathy-altruism hypothesis

Back 8

the hypothesis that empathic arousal causes people to have truly altruistic motives

(and these motives account for EHR)

Front 9

AARH

Back 9

aversive arousal reduction hypothesis

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to benefit themselves by reducing aversive arousal.

Front 10

ESPH

Back 10

empathy specific punishment hypothesis

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to avoid punishments they believe to follow not helping a needy other, hence benefiting themselves. further, these punishments must be believed to be empathy-specific or their salience is.

Front 11

ESPH-SOC

Back 11

empathy specific punishment hypothesis - socially admistered version

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to avoid believed punishments that follow from not helping a needy other; a self-serving goal: these punishments are believed to come from others

also the punishment is believed to be empathy specific or its salience is.

Front 12

ESPH-SLF

Back 12

empathy specific punishment hypothesis - self administered version

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to avoid believed punishments that follow not helping a needy other: these punishments are believed to come from oneself

the punishment is believed to be empathy specific or its salience is.

Front 13

ESRH

Back 13

empathy specific rewards hypothesis

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to gain rewards believed to follow from helping a needy other: a self-serving goal.

these rewards are believed to be empathy specific or its salience is

Front 14

ESRH-SSR

Back 14

empathy specific rewards hypothesis - social self rewards version

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to gain rewards believed to follow helping a needy other; these rewards can come from onself or others but: the subject must be the one to help the needy other to reap the rewards

+empathy specific

Front 15

EJH

Back 15

empathic joy hypothesis

the ultimate goal of empathically aroused individuals is to gain rewards (joy) they believe follow helping a needy other: BUT the individual only cares that the needy other is helped so they do not have to be the one to help.

(+empathy specific)
(+self-serving)

Front 16

NSRH

Back 16

negative state relief hypothesis

empathic arousal acquired from exposure to a needy other causes a negative state and the ultimate goal of the individual is to relieve themselves of the neg. state by helping the needy other

(self serving)

Front 17

ESPH-SOC vs. EAH
main experiment?

Back 17

high vs. low social evaluation

First, the subject would be induced to have either high empathic arousal or low. Then two situations were created to test the subject: high social evaluation and low. In the low social evaluation condition, subjects were led to believe that no one would know if they offered help. In the high social evaluation condition, subjects were led to believe that the needy other would know if they offered to help. The result was that an EHR was not exclusive to high-empathy subjects who expected there to be high potential for negative social evaluation

Front 18

NSRH vs. EAH
main experiment?

Back 18

(low empathic arousal vs. high) + negative state + (mood enhancement offer vs. not)

a situation in which subjects had low or high empathic arousal, and were either told their mood would be enhanced afterwards or not. The hypothesis said that the EHR will cease if empathically aroused subjects anticipate their mood will be enhanced if they choose not to help. The result was that the EHR did not cease even when empathically aroused subjects anticipated their mood to be enhanced in the case that they choose not to help.

Front 19

What are the two senses of the term "reason?" (M. Smith)

Back 19

motivating reason - Mental states that potentially explain an agent’s action from that agent’s perspective.

normative reason - considerations that justify a subject in taking an action.

“Considerations that count in favor of doing something”

Front 20

direction of fit

Back 20

a relationship between mental states and the external world

mind-to-world - the mind must fit the world (belief)

the relationship of mental states to the external world in terms of counterfactual dependence in favor of external facts

world-to-mind - the world must fit the mind (desire)

the relationship of the external world to mental states in terms of counterfactual dependence in favor of internal mental states

Front 21

Batson's (abductive) argument against psychological egoism

Back 21

1. EAH --> ψA
2. ψA --> ~ψE
3. EAH --> ~ψE
4. EAH
--------------------
5. ~ψE

(+explanation)

Front 22

AARH
Explains...?
Key experiment?
Predictions, Variables, Results?

Back 22

aversive arousal reduction hypothesis

explain the EHR as an alternative to EAH.

(low vs. high empathic arousal) x (easy vs. difficult escape)

Will ease of escape eliminate EHR?
EAH: No AARH: Yes; Answer: No

(EAH is correct)

Front 23

Sober & Wilson's Explanation of NSRH

Back 23

S&W: empathizing with a needy other creates sadness subjects belive cannot be ameliorated by an unremarkable mood augmentation.

Batson: that is just a restatement of the NSRH

S&W: No, it's not. Perhaps it’s the case that people know listening to music will not ameliorate their negative state.

Alt. proposal provides reason to reject Batson’s claim; their argument leaves open the possibility of NSRH being true, so there exists an alternative to the EAH.

Front 24

2 Theses of Humean Theory of Motivation

Back 24

(stronger, constitutive) R at T constitutes a motivation reason of agent A to ϕ iff there is some ψ such that R at t consists of a desire of A to ψ and a belief that were he to ϕ he would ψ.

(weaker, presence) Agent A at t has a motivating reason to ϕ only if there is some ψ such that, at t, A desire to ψ and believes that were he to ϕ he would ψ

Front 25

explain (1) biologists fallacy and (2) why evolutionary theory does not directly prove that humans are inherently selfish

Back 25

genes do not determine an individual's psychology

anthropomorphic language concerning genes can lead to this confusion

Front 26

Strong Phenomenological Conception of Desire

2 objections?

Back 26

S has a desire iff S believes (S has a desire)

narcissistic newspaper John
deluded musician John

1. SPCD -> desires = sensations
2. desires =/= sensations
(propositional content & phenomenological content)

Front 27

Mark Platt's Objection to Humean Theory of Motivation

Back 27

Either:

(1) since HTM says desires are essentially phenomenological there exists a contradiction because we (i) act without desire, and (ii) have desires even when we don't experience them.

(2) HTM is trivially true b/c only other definition of desire is "that which causes or explains actions"