首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Moralized Rationality: Relying on Logic and Evidence in the Formation and Evaluation of Belief Can Be Seen as a Moral Issue
【2h】

Moralized Rationality: Relying on Logic and Evidence in the Formation and Evaluation of Belief Can Be Seen as a Moral Issue

机译:道德理性:在信仰的形成和评估中依靠逻辑和证据可以被视为道德问题

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In the present article we demonstrate stable individual differences in the extent to which a reliance on logic and evidence in the formation and evaluation of beliefs is perceived as a moral virtue, and a reliance on less rational processes is perceived as a vice. We refer to this individual difference variable as moralized rationality. Eight studies are reported in which an instrument to measure individual differences in moralized rationality is validated. Results show that the Moralized Rationality Scale (MRS) is internally consistent, and captures something distinct from the personal importance people attach to being rational (Studies –). Furthermore, the MRS has high test-retest reliability (), is conceptually distinct from frequently used measures of individual differences in moral values, and it is negatively related to common beliefs that are not supported by scientific evidence (). We further demonstrate that the MRS predicts morally laden reactions, such as a desire for punishment, of people who rely on irrational (vs. rational) ways of forming and evaluating beliefs (Studies and ). Finally, we show that the MRS uniquely predicts motivation to contribute to a charity that works to prevent the spread of irrational beliefs (). We conclude that (1) there are stable individual differences in the extent to which people moralize a reliance on rationality in the formation and evaluation of beliefs, (2) that these individual differences do not reduce to the personal importance attached to rationality, and (3) that individual differences in moralized rationality have important motivational and interpersonal consequences.
机译:在本文中,我们证明了稳定的个体差异,在一定程度上,在信念的形成和评估中依赖逻辑和证据被视为道德美德,而对较不理性的过程的依赖则被视为恶习。我们将此个体差异变量称为道德合理性。据报道,有八项研究证实了一种可以衡量道德理性上个体差异的工具。结果表明,道德理性量表(MRS)在内部是一致的,并且捕捉到了一些不同于人们对理性的个人重视的东西(研究–)。此外,MRS具有很高的重测信度(),在概念上与经常使用的衡量道德价值观个体差异的方法不同,并且与科学证据不支持的普遍信念具有消极关系()。我们进一步证明,MRS预测了依靠非理性(相对于理性)形成和评估信念(研究和)的人们在道德上的反应,例如对惩罚的渴望。最后,我们证明了MRS独特地预测了为慈善事业做出贡献的动机,该慈善事业可防止非理性信念的传播()。我们得出的结论是:(1)人们在道德上对形成和评估信念的依赖理性的道德化程度方面存在稳定的个体差异;(2)这些个体差异不会降低对理性的个人重视,并且( 3)在道德理性上的个体差异具有重要的动机和人际关系后果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号