Folk Psychology and Moral Evaluation

Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):237-251 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Assessments of an action done intentionally, as we might expect, influence judgments of moral responsibility. What we don't expect is the converse--judgments of moral responsibility influencing assessments of whether an action was done intentionally. Yet this is precisely how people decide, according to Knobe (2003, 2004) and Mendlow (2004) and Nadelhoffer (2004a). I evaluate whether the studies actually support this biasing effect. I argue that the studies are at best inconclusive and that even if they demonstrated that people fall under the biasing effect, such tendencies ought to have no bearing upon philosophical analyses of the concept of intentional action.

Similar books and articles

Intentional action and "in order to".Eric Wiland - 2007 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 27 (1):113-118.
Folk Psychology and Folk Morality: Response to Critics.Joshua Knobe - 2004 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):270-279.
Intentional action: Controversies, data, and core hypotheses.Alfred R. Mele - 2003 - Philosophical Psychology 16 (2):325-340.
On trying to save the simple view.Thomas Nadelhoffer - 2006 - Mind and Language 21 (5):565-586.
Intentionality and moral judgments in commonsense thought about action.Steven Sverdlik - 2004 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):224-236.
Blame, Badness, and Intentional Action: A Reply to Knobe and Mendlow.Thomas Nadelhoffer - 2004 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):259-269.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-19

Downloads
757 (#20,044)

6 months
97 (#41,836)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Julie Yoo
California State University, Northridge

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references