Results for 'Reasoned judgments'

958 found
Order:
  1. A Reasonable Objectivism for Aesthetic Judgments: Towards An Aesthetic Psychology.Elisabeth Schellekens - 2008 - Dissertation, University of London
    This doctoral thesis is an examination of the possibility of ascribing objectivity to aesthetic judgements. The aesthetic is viewed in terms of its being a certain kind of relation between the mind and the world; a clear understanding of aesthetic judgements will therefore be capable of telling us something important about both subjects and objects, and the ties between them. In view of this, one of the over-riding aims of this thesis is the promotion of an ‘aesthetic psychology’, a philosophical (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  42
    Rational intuitions: How reason underlies deontological moral judgments.Arjan S. Heir - forthcoming - Philosophical Psychology.
    Joshua Greene’s dual process account contends that deontological moral judgments are the result of intuitions that are automatic, emotional and arational. Deontological intuitions cannot be trusted, Greene argues, because they are arationally acquired and deployed. However, the empirical evidence taken to support this view is methodologically flawed and does not support the utilitarianism-rational and deontology-emotional links that dual process theorists postulate. Instead, the available evidence supports a social domain account of moral development, in which the acquisition of moral intuitions (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3.  36
    Confidence judgments in syllogistic reasoning: the role of consistency and response cardinality.Igor Bajšanski, Valnea Žauhar & Pavle Valerjev - 2018 - Thinking and Reasoning 25 (1):14-47.
    ABSTRACTIn two experiments, we examined the resolution of confidence judgments in syllogistic reasoning and their heuristic bases. Based on the assumptions of Koriat's Self-Consistency Model of confidence, we expected the confidence judgments to be related to conclusion consensuality, reflecting the role of consistency as a heuristic cue to confidence. In Experiment 1, the participants evaluated 24 syllogisms with conclusions that varied with respect to validity and consensuality. In Experiment 2, the participants produced conclusions to 64 pairs of premises. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  26
    Reasoned justification of moral judgments.Nicholas Rescher - 1958 - Journal of Philosophy 55 (6):248-255.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  23
    (1 other version)Value Judgments: How to Reason About Value Judgments.Stephen R. L. Clark - 1988 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures 24:173-190.
    When opinion polls are conducted on some urgent matter of the day those polled are permitted to declare themselves ‘Don't Knows’. It is usually a minority who are so ill-disposed as to forget their civic duty to have an opinion on each and every subject, and they can usually expect to be rebuked as fence-sitters or slugabeds. People confronted by the demand that they take sides can generally produce a ‘view’ which they maintain against all-comers without the slightest attempt to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Experiments on nonmonotonic reasoning. The coherence of human probability judgments.Niki Pfeifer & G. D. Kleiter - 2002 - In H. Leitgeb & G. Schurz (eds.), Pre-Proceedings of the 1 s T Salzburg Workshop on Paradigms of Cognition.
    Nonmonotonic reasoning is often claimed to mimic human common sense reasoning. Only a few studies, though, investigated this claim empirically. In the present paper four psychological experiments are reported, that investigate three rules of system p, namely the and, the left logical equivalence, and the or rule. The actual inferences of the subjects are compared with the coherent normative upper and lower probability bounds derived from a non-infinitesimal probability semantics of system p. We found a relatively good agreement of human (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7.  6
    Diagnostic Hypotheses and Practical Judgments: Towards a Characterization of Clinical Reasoning.Atocha Aliseda - 2024 - Global Philosophy 34 (1):1-15.
    In this article I lay the foundations towards a tentative characterization of clinical reasoning, one that highlights its reflective and inferential character, as well as its fallibility and orientation towards action. To this end, I put forward some epistemic considerations on medical knowledge followed by addressing the following questions: _what tools exist for teaching clinical reasoning_? and _how to develop a clinical competence through critical thinking_? Moreover, I offer an overview of clinical reasoning through the lenses of two theoretical perspectives (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  24
    Reasons and value judgments.Richard Fumerton - 1979 - Journal of Value Inquiry 13 (4):259-273.
  9. Interpersonal Judgments, Embodied Reasoning and Juridical Legitimacy.Somogy Varga - 2018 - In Albert Newen, Leon De Bruin & Shaun Gallagher (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of 4E Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  28
    Identity-motivated reasoning: Biased judgments regarding political leaders and their actions.Sharon Arieli, Adi Amit & Sari Mentser - 2019 - Cognition 188 (C):64-73.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  39
    Particularist moral reasoning and consistency in moral judgments.Gregory E. Kaebnick - 1999 - Journal of Value Inquiry 33 (1):43-56.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12. Chaim Perelman and the reasonableness of value judgments.P. L. Lecis - 1998 - Rivista di Storia Della Filosofia 53 (1).
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  32
    The conjunction fallacy: Judgmental heuristic or faulty extensional reasoning?Irwin D. Nahinsky, Daniel Ash & Brent Cohen - 1986 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 24 (3):186-188.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  17
    Knowledge Judgments in “Gettier” Cases.John Turri - 2016 - In Wesley Buckwalter & Justin Sytsma (eds.), Blackwell Companion to Experimental Philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp. 335–348.
    Knowledge sets the standard for appropriate assertion and recent evidence suggests that it might also set the standard for appropriate belief and decision‐making. Governments spend hundreds of millions of dollars to support the creation, transfer, and mobilization of knowledge. Philosophers have created a dizzying array of Gettier case thought experiments. In doing so, many have been guilty of experimenter bias. This includes some original players who helped set the agenda for decades to come. Cognitive scientists recently began seriously investigating knowledge (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  15.  23
    Moral Judgments as Educated Intuitions.Hanno Sauer - 2017 - Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Rationalists about the psychology of moral judgment argue that moral cognition has a rational foundation. Recent challenges to this account, based on findings in the empirical psychology of moral judgment, contend that moral thinking has no rational basis. In this book, Hanno Sauer argues that moral reasoning does play a role in moral judgment—but not, as is commonly supposed, because conscious reasoning produces moral judgments directly. Moral reasoning figures in the acquisition, formation, maintenance, and reflective correction of moral intuitions. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  16.  26
    On the Reasonableness of Moral Judgments.David AIm - 2000 - Social Theory and Practice 26 (2):251-277.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  81
    Frans van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, & Bert Meuffels: Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules: Springer, Dordrecht, 2009, Volume 16 of the Springer Argumentation Library. ISBN: 978-90-481-2613-2. DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9. HB: $139.00.Dale Hample - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (3):375-381.
    Frans van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, & Bert Meuffels: Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules Content Type Journal Article Pages 375-381 DOI 10.1007/s10503-010-9183-6 Authors Dale Hample, University of Maryland College Park MD 20742 USA Journal Argumentation Online ISSN 1572-8374 Print ISSN 0920-427X Journal Volume Volume 24 Journal Issue Volume 24, Number 3.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  28
    The Table of Judgments: Critique of Pure Reason, A67-76; B 92-101.Reinhard Brandt - 1995 - Ridgeview Publishing Company.
  19.  58
    Dual processes of emotion and reason in judgments about moral dilemmas.Eoin Gubbins & Ruth M. J. Byrne - 2014 - Thinking and Reasoning 20 (2):245-268.
    We report the results of two experiments that show that participants rely on both emotion and reason in moral judgments. Experiment 1 showed that when participants were primed to communicate feelings, they provided emotive justifications not only for personal dilemmas, e.g., pushing a man from a bridge that will result in his death but save the lives of five others, but also for impersonal dilemmas, e.g., hitting a switch on a runaway train that will result in the death of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  20. Moral judgments about altruistic self-sacrifice: When philosophical and folk intuitions clash.Bryce Huebner & Marc D. Hauser - 2011 - Philosophical Psychology 24 (1):73-94.
    Altruistic self-sacrifice is rare, supererogatory, and not to be expected of any rational agent; but, the possibility of giving up one's life for the common good has played an important role in moral theorizing. For example, Judith Jarvis Thomson (2008) has argued in a recent paper that intuitions about altruistic self-sacrifice suggest that something has gone wrong in philosophical debates over the trolley problem. We begin by showing that her arguments face a series of significant philosophical objections; however, our project (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  21.  81
    Moral Judgments in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.Yulia W. Sullivan & Samuel Fosso Wamba - 2022 - Journal of Business Ethics 178 (4):917-943.
    The current research aims to answer the following question: “who will be held responsible for harm involving an artificial intelligence system?” Drawing upon the literature on moral judgments, we assert that when people perceive an AI system’s action as causing harm to others, they will assign blame to different entity groups involved in an AI’s life cycle, including the company, the developer team, and even the AI system itself, especially when such harm is perceived to be intentional. Drawing upon (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  22.  28
    Sanctions versus reasons for value judgments.Stephen C. Pepper - 1960 - Ethics 70 (2):109-117.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  29
    Moral Judgments, Moral Virtues, and Moral Norms.Miroslav Popper - 2010 - Human Affairs 20 (4):308-326.
    Moral Judgments, Moral Virtues, and Moral Norms The paper consists of two basic parts. In the first, contemporary approaches to moral judgments and their relations with moral virtues and moral norms are analyzed. The focus is on comparing the role of the emotions and reason, and conscious and unconscious processes in forming and/or justifying moral judgments. The second part examines views on the current broader socio-political situation in Western countries and points to the growing feelings of insecurity (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  38
    Moral Judgments of In-Group and Out-Group Harm in Post-conflict Urban and Rural Croatian Communities.Michael A. Moncrieff & Pierre Lienard - 2018 - Frontiers in Psychology 9:318769.
    Our research brings to light features of the social world that impact moral judgments and how they do so. The moral vignette data presented were collected in rural and urban Croatian communities that were involved to varying degrees in the Croatian Homeland War. We argue that rapid shifts in moral accommodations during periods of violent social strife can be explained by considering the role that coordination and social agents' ability to reconfigure their social network (i.e., relational mobility) play in (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  25.  29
    Surprising judgments about robot drivers: Experiments on rising expectations and blaming humans.Peter Danielson - 2015 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 1 (1):73-86.
    N-Reasons is an experimental Internet survey platform designed to enhance public participation in applied ethics and policy. N-Reasons encourages individuals to generate reasons to support their judgments, and groups to converge on a common set of reasons pro and con various issues. In the Robot Ethics Survey some of the reasons contributed surprising judgments about autonomous machines. Presented with a version of the trolley problem with an autonomous train as the agent, participants gave unexpected answers, revealing high expectations (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  38
    Moral Judgments, Cognitivism and the Dispositional Nature of Belief: Why Moral Peer Intransigence is Intelligible.John Eriksson & Marco Tiozzo - 2021 - Philosophia 49 (4):1753-1766.
    Richard Rowland has recently argued that considerations based on moral disagreement between epistemic peers give us reason to think that cognitivism about moral judgments, i.e., the thesis that moral judgments are beliefs, is false. The novelty of Rowland’s argument is to tweak the problem descriptively, i.e., not focusing on what one ought to do, but on what disputants actually do in the light of peer disagreement. The basic idea is that moral peer disagreement is intelligible. However, if moral (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  27.  22
    Peirce's Essential Discovery: "Our Senses as Reasoning Machines" Can Quasi-Prove Our Perceptual Judgments.Dan Nesher - 2002 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 38 (1/2):175 - 206.
  28. (1 other version)Manipulating Morality: Third‐Party Intentions Alter Moral Judgments by Changing Causal Reasoning.Jonathan Phillips & Alex Shaw - 2014 - Cognitive Science 38 (8):1320-1347.
    The present studies investigate how the intentions of third parties influence judgments of moral responsibility for other agents who commit immoral acts. Using cases in which an agent acts under some situational constraint brought about by a third party, we ask whether the agent is blamed less for the immoral act when the third party intended for that act to occur. Study 1 demonstrates that third-party intentions do influence judgments of blame. Study 2 finds that third-party intentions only (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  29.  68
    Being Judgmental–A vice of attention.Dan Dake - 2024 - Journal of Value Inquiry 58 (2):353-369.
    There are a class of moral virtues that have an intimate relationship with agential evaluation, following Gary Watson we can call these ‘second-order virtues,’ e.g., modesty, blind charity, being judgmental, etc. Julia Driver has argued that these virtues are distinguished by being virtues which require ignorance. Richard Y. Chappell and Helen Yetter-Chappell have argued that these virtues are distinguished by being virtues of salience. Aside from the disagreement about the distinguishing features of these virtues, there is an intrinsic interest in (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. House architecture judgments-bayesian, Dempster-Shafer, or rule-based reasoning.Pw Frey - 1986 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 24 (5):351-351.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31.  82
    “This Argument Fails for Two Reasons…”: A Linguistic Analysis of Judicial Evaluation Strategies in US Supreme Court Judgments[REVIEW]Davide Mazzi - 2010 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 23 (4):373-385.
    The centrality of argumentation in the judicial process is an age-old acquisition of research on legal discourse. Notwithstanding the deep insights provided by legal theoretical and philosophical works, only recently has judicial argumentation been tackled in its linguistic dimension. This paper aims to contribute to the development of linguistic studies of judicial argumentation, by shedding light on evaluation as a prominent aspect in the construction of the judge’s argumentative position. Evaluation as a deep structure of judicial argumentation is studied from (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  32.  42
    "Ought" Judgments and Motivation.Michael Pendlebury - 2002 - American Philosophical Quarterly 39 (2):183 - 196.
    Competing metaethical theories are sometimes cast as alternative ways of responding to an inconsistency between two apparent features of moral judgments, viz., that they are truth-apt expressions of belief and that they have motivational force. I argue that this is an oversimplification that fails to address some important data that can be accommodated on the basis of a straightforward “good reasons” account of “ought” judgments that explains why certain of these judgments have motivational force will others do (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  33. Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning.David P. McCabe & Alan D. Castel - 2008 - Cognition 107 (1):343-352.
  34.  13
    Fickle Judgments in Moral Dilemmas: Time Pressure and Utilitarian Judgments in an Interdependent Culture.Hirofumi Hashimoto, Kaede Maeda & Kaede Matsumura - 2022 - Frontiers in Psychology 13.
    In the trolley problem, a well-known moral dilemma, the intuitive process is believed to increase deontological judgments, while deliberative reasoning is thought to promote utilitarian decisions. Therefore, based on the dual-process model, there seems to be an attempt to save several lives at the expense of a few others in a deliberative manner. This study examines the validity of this argument. To this end, we manipulate decision-making time in the standard trolley dilemma to compare differences among 119 Japanese female (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  35.  31
    Moral judgments and ethical constructs in clinical psychology doctoral students.Angie C. Jenkin, Helen Ellis-Caird & David A. Winter - 2021 - Ethics and Behavior 31 (1):1-12.
    ABSTRACT This cross-sectional study compared the moral reasoning of first-year and third-year doctoral students in clinical psychology. Nineteen first-year and 20 third-year students were recruited from 17 doctoral training programs in the UK. Most adopted a sophisticated approach to moral judgments, as assessed by the Defining Issues Test, although, surprisingly, more experienced students had significantly less sophisticated schemata. In their moral judgments, less experienced students relied more heavily on their personal, and more experienced students on their professional, constructs, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  36.  29
    Moral reasoning.R. W. Beardsmore - 1969 - New York,: Schocken Books.
    Accounts of moral reasoning have tended either to ignore the differences in what men count as good reasons for their moral judgments, or, in emphasizing these differences, to imply that anything whatsoever can count as a moral reason. This book shows that both of these positions rest on a mistaken assumption, and by rejecting this assumption brings out important features of moral discourse. Although moral disagreement is seen to be far more radical than empirical disagreement, a framework of agreement (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  37.  4
    Interpretation modeling: Social grounding of sentences by reasoning over their implicit moral judgments.Liesbeth Allein, Maria Mihaela Truşcǎ & Marie-Francine Moens - 2025 - Artificial Intelligence 338 (C):104234.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. Skeptical theism and value judgments.David James Anderson - 2012 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (1):27-39.
    One of the most prominent objections to skeptical theism in recent literature is that the skeptical theist is forced to deny our competency in making judgments about the all-things-considered value of any natural event. Some skeptical theists accept that their view has this implication, but argue that it is not problematic. I think that there is reason to question the implication itself. I begin by explaining the objection to skeptical theism and the standard response to it. I then identify (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  39.  69
    Children’s developing metaethical judgments.Marco F. H. Schmidt, Ivan Gonzalez-Cabrera & Michael Tomasello - 2017 - Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 164:163-177.
    Human adults incline toward moral objectivism but may approach things more relativistically if different cultures are involved. In this study, 4-, 6-, and 9-year-old children (N = 136) witnessed two parties who disagreed about moral matters: a normative judge (e.g., judging that it is wrong to do X) and an antinormative judge (e.g., judging that it is okay to do X). We assessed children’s metaethical judgment, that is, whether they judged that only one party (objectivism) or both parties (relativism) could (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  40.  34
    The Table of Judgments: Critique of Pure Reason a 67–76; B 92–101. [REVIEW]Seung Kee Lee - 1997 - Review of Metaphysics 51 (1):138-139.
    In this book, Brandt presents an interpretation of a fairly short but famous and important passage in the Critique of Pure Reason wherein Kant introduces “the table of judgments.” Kant argues that the categories can be derived from the table of the forms of judgment which presumably corresponds to the division of judgments commonly studied by formal logicians.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41.  70
    Ethical judgments on selected accounting issues: An empirical study. [REVIEW]Keith G. Stanga & Richard A. Turpen - 1991 - Journal of Business Ethics 10 (10):739 - 747.
    This study investigates the judgments made by accounting majors when confronted with selected ethical dilemmas that pertain to accounting practice. Drawing upon literature in philosophy and moral psychology, it then examines these judgments for potential gender differences. Five case studies, each involving a specific ethical dilemma that a practicing accountant might face, were administered to 151 acounting majors (males = 67; females = 84), in four sections of intermediate accounting II at a large, state university. The results suggest (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   46 citations  
  42.  50
    Public reason and the normativity of the reasonable.Alessandro Ferrara - 2004 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (5-6):579-596.
    The main purpose of the paper is to contribute to reconstructing the kind of normativity underlying Rawls’s notion of public reason and of the reasonable. The implicit target is the somewhat popular view according to which the transition from the framework of A Theory of Justice to that of Political Liberalism would entail a loss of normativity. On the contrary, the related ideas of public reason and the reasonable are argued to presuppose a notion of normativity – linked with judgment (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  43. Being Realistic About Reasons.Thomas Scanlon - 2014 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    It is often claimed that irreducibly normative truths would have unacceptable metaphysical implications, and are incompatible with a scientific view of the world. The book argues, on the basis of a general account of the relevance of ontological questions, that this claim is mistaken. It is also a mistake to think that interpreting normative judgments as beliefs would make it impossible to explain their connection with action. An agent’s acceptance of a normative judgment can explain that agent’s subsequent action (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   325 citations  
  44. Reason and Emotion: How Teachers Respond to Ethical Problems.Niclas Lindström & Lars Samuelsson - 2018 - ATINER'S Conference Paper Series.
    Teachers frequently face ethical problems in their everyday practice – ranging from pedagogical choices affecting their pupils to pressing conflicts that need to be solved – and they are expected to respond to such problems in a professional manner. Given the centrality of the ethical dimension to the teaching profession, an important question is how teachers tend to approach such problems. While some studies have been carried out regarding how teachers in particular approach ethical problems, there are interesting studies revealing (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. A dissociation between moral judgments and justifications.Marc Hauser, Fiery Cushman, Liane Young, J. I. N. Kang-Xing & John Mikhail - 2007 - Mind and Language 22 (1):1–21.
    To what extent do moral judgments depend on conscious reasoning from explicitly understood principles? We address this question by investigating one particular moral principle, the principle of the double effect. Using web-based technology, we collected a large data set on individuals' responses to a series of moral dilemmas, asking when harm to innocent others is permissible. Each moral dilemma presented a choice between action and inaction, both resulting in lives saved and lives lost. Results showed that: (1) patterns of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   146 citations  
  46.  97
    Inductive judgments about natural categories.Lance J. Rips - 1975 - Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14 (6):665-681.
    The present study examined the effects of semantic structure on simple inductive judgments about category members. For a particular category, subjects were told that one of the species had a given property and were asked to estimate the proportion of instances in the other species that possessed the property. The results indicated that category structure—in particular, the typicality of the species—influenced subjects' judgments. These results were interpreted by models based on the following assumption: When little is known about (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   81 citations  
  47.  16
    Enforcement of foreign judgments, systemic calibration, and the global law market.Christopher A. Whytock & Samuel P. Baumgartner - 2022 - Theoretical Inquiries in Law 23 (1):119-164.
    There are important reasons for states to recognize and enforce the judgments of other states’ courts. There are also reasons that may militate against recognition or enforcement of certain foreign judgments, making it appropriate to calibrate or “fine tune” the presumption favoring recognition and enforcement so it is not applied too broadly. Most calibration principles, such as the principle that a judgment from a court lacking jurisdiction should not be recognized, are case-specific. However, one calibration principle that is, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  20
    Technological reason and the regulation of emotion.Louis C. Charland - 2009 - In James Phillips (ed.), Philosophical perspectives on technology and psychiatry. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 55-69.
    Louis Charland's ‘Technological reason and the regulation of emotion’ focuses on a specific area, that of the emotions, in which he sees a problematic dominance of the technical attitude. He argues that our technologically oriented psychiatry has taken an instrumentalist approach to regulation of emotion that severely limits and distorts the role of emotion in psychiatric practice. A prominent example is the exclusion of moral judgments and values, emotion-laden aspects of experience, from psychotherapy because they do not fit the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  49.  56
    Practical Reasonableness: Some Metaethical Issues.Evan Simpson - 2013 - Journal of Value Inquiry 47 (4):425-437.
    Normative judgments are typically subject to emotional reasons that cannot be justified by reference to facts alone. As a result, practical disputes sometimes go unsettled in ways that support James Lenman's view of moral inquiry as politics. An important consequence is that reasonableness is often preferable to truth as a criterion of good practical judgment. Although the role of emotions suggests metaethical expressivism as preferable to realism for analysing practical reasoning, reasonableness transforms expressivism from a form of noncognitivism into (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50.  99
    A Dissociation Between Moral Judgments and Justifications.Marc Hauser, Fiery Cushman, Liane Young, R. Kang-Xing Jin & John Mikhail - 2007 - Mind and Language 22 (1):1-21.
    : To what extent do moral judgments depend on conscious reasoning from explicitly understood principles? We address this question by investigating one particular moral principle, the principle of the double effect. Using web-based technology, we collected a large data set on individuals’ responses to a series of moral dilemmas, asking when harm to innocent others is permissible. Each moral dilemma presented a choice between action and inaction, both resulting in lives saved and lives lost. Results showed that: patterns of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   140 citations  
1 — 50 / 958