Beyond killing one to save five: Sensitivity to ratio and probability in moral judgment
Beyond killing one to save five: Sensitivity to ratio and probability in moral judgment
复制标题
超越杀一救五：道德判断中对比率和概率的敏感性
DOI：
10.1016/j.jesp.2023.104499
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Rickless, Samuel C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ryazanov, Arseny A.;Wang, Shawn Tinghao;Nelkin, Dana Kay;McKenzie, Craig R.M.;Rickless, Samuel C.
目前关于道德判断的大量研究都集中在关于一次生命和五次生命之间的权衡的道德困境上。一个人是否认为杀害一个无辜的人来拯救另外五个人在道德上是必要的还是不允许的，已经被用来确定一个人是在诉诸结果主义还是非结果主义推理。但是，这种对一到五个人之间的权衡的关注，可能会掩盖道德决策中涉及的更微妙的承诺，当要交换的生命的数量和比例不同，以及当每种结果发生的概率不确定时，这些承诺就会显现出来。四项研究考察了参与者对以这些方式与标准情景背道而驰的情景的反应。研究1考察了人们对特定行动挽救的生命与死亡的生命的比率的敏感程度。研究2验证了这两个值之间的比率而不是差值是可行的。研究3检查参与者是否将对一些人的概率伤害视为等同于肯定伤害较少，并保持预期比率恒定。研究4探讨了一个类似的问题，即概率储蓄的敏感性。参与者对概率伤害的预期比率非常敏感，而背离了概率储蓄的期望值。总而言之，这些研究提供了证据，证明人们的道德判断与门槛道义论原则是一致的。
A great deal of current research on moral judgments centers on moral dilemmas concerning tradeoffs between one and five lives. Whether one considers killing one innocent person to save five others to be morally required or impermissible has been taken to determine whether one is appealing to consequentialist or non-consequentialist reasoning. But this focus on tradeoffs between one and five may obscure more nuanced commitments involved in moral decision-making that are revealed when the numbers and ratio of lives to be traded off are varied, and when the probabilities of each outcome occurring are less than certain. Four studies examine participants' reactions to scenarios that diverge in these ways from the standard ones. Study 1 examines the extent to which people are sensitive to the ratio of lives saved to lives ended by a particular action. Study 2 verifies that the ratio rather than the difference between the two values is operative. Study 3 examines whether participants treat probabilistic harm to some as equivalent to certainly harming fewer, holding expected ratio constant. Study 4 explores an analogous issue regarding the sensitivity of probabilistic saving. Participants are remarkably sensitive to expected ratio for probabilistic harms while deviating from expected value for probabilistic saving. Collectively, the studies provide evidence that people's moral judgments are consistent with the principle of threshold deontology.
登录
查看更多内容
解释水平和道德判断：一些并发症
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Han Gong;D. Medin
通讯作者：
D. Medin
道德困境中的决策：主观信念对结果概率的影响
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Y. Shou;Fei Song
通讯作者：
Fei Song
DOI：
10.1037/xlm0000369
发表时间：
2017-08-01
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
De Freitas, Julian;DeScioli, Peter;Pinker, Steven
通讯作者：
Pinker, Steven
对与错
影响因子：
64.8
作者：
S. Lock
通讯作者：
S. Lock
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Cohen, Dale J.;Ahn, Minwoo
通讯作者：
Ahn, Minwoo