I found some fault with this article, which states that most people don't respond to certain moral dilemmas as utilitarians, with the exception of certain psychopaths. The evidence is that generally when people are presented with hypothetical examples of violating basic moral rules when doing so would clearly serve the greater good. One example of such a dilemma was if a group of people were on a life raft and there was a choice between forcing an injured man off the raft, who would likely die in any case, and allowing the raft to sink meaning that everyone would die.
90% claim that they wouldn't push the man off, regardless of the consequences. However, this is not a valid test of what they would do if they were actually in such a situation. There is a difference between saying that you wouldn't push him off and actually allowing yourself and a few others to drown as a result of your commitment to such a principle.
The study noted that the 10% who chose to state that they would push the man off tended to give answers that indicated psychopathy, Machiavellianism and existential malaise. Granted people might be more willing to state that they would push the man overboard if they were willing to state that they liked to watch people fight. Likewise if they were willing to state that manipulating others was often the best way of dealing with them. On the last point we might think about how being placed on a small raft in the midst of a miserable with a few miserable companions who were all likely to drown in the immediate future would effect how worthwhile you would think life would be. People tend to underestimate the extent to which their state of mind effects their decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment