The response model of moral disgust
The philosophical debate over disgust and its role in moral discourse has focused on disgust's epistemic status: can disgust justify judgments of moral wrongness? Or is it misplaced in the moral domain—irrelevant at best, positively distorting at worst? Correspondingly, empirical research into...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Synthese (Dordrecht) 2018-12, Vol.195 (12), p.5453-5472 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 5472 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 5453 |
container_title | Synthese (Dordrecht) |
container_volume | 195 |
creator | Plakias, Alexandra |
description | The philosophical debate over disgust and its role in moral discourse has focused on disgust's epistemic status: can disgust justify judgments of moral wrongness? Or is it misplaced in the moral domain—irrelevant at best, positively distorting at worst? Correspondingly, empirical research into disgust has focused on its role as a cause or amplifier of moral judgment, seeking to establish how and when disgust either causes us to morally condemn actions, or strengthens our pre-existing tendencies to condemn certain actions. Both of these approaches to disgust are based on a set of assumptions that I call, in what follows, the evidential model of disgust. This paper proposes an alternative model, which I call the response model. Instead of looking at disgust as a cause and justification of judgments of moral wrongness, I will argue that disgust is better understood as a response to wrongness. More precisely, I argue that disgust is a response to norm violations, and that it is (sometimes) a fitting response insofar as norm violations are potentially contagious and therefore pose a threat to the stability and maintenance of norms. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11229-017-1455-3 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2135958451</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26750683</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26750683</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-acf308aaf32ef7891dc4aff3c7f8eb57e0def360191043ac455dfd1b0063d7593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFKAzEQhoMoWKsP4EFY6Dk6s7PZJEcpWoWCl3oO6SapLW1Tk-3BtzdlRW-eZg7_98_wMXaLcI8A8iEj1rXmgJJjIwSnMzZCIYmDbptzNgIgzaUS8pJd5bwBQGwbGLHJ4sNXyedD3Gdf7aLz2yqGsiS7rdw6r465v2YXwW6zv_mZY_b-_LSYvvD52-x1-jjnHZHque0CgbI2UO2DVBpd19gQqJNB-aWQHpwP1AJqhIZsV950weESoCUnhaYxmwy9hxQ_jz73ZhOPaV9OmhpJaKEagSWFQ6pLMefkgzmk9c6mL4NgTi7M4MIUF-bkwlBh6oHJJbtf-fTX_B90N0Cb3Mf0e6VupYBWEX0Dy6Bpow</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2135958451</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The response model of moral disgust</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Plakias, Alexandra</creator><creatorcontrib>Plakias, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><description>The philosophical debate over disgust and its role in moral discourse has focused on disgust's epistemic status: can disgust justify judgments of moral wrongness? Or is it misplaced in the moral domain—irrelevant at best, positively distorting at worst? Correspondingly, empirical research into disgust has focused on its role as a cause or amplifier of moral judgment, seeking to establish how and when disgust either causes us to morally condemn actions, or strengthens our pre-existing tendencies to condemn certain actions. Both of these approaches to disgust are based on a set of assumptions that I call, in what follows, the evidential model of disgust. This paper proposes an alternative model, which I call the response model. Instead of looking at disgust as a cause and justification of judgments of moral wrongness, I will argue that disgust is better understood as a response to wrongness. More precisely, I argue that disgust is a response to norm violations, and that it is (sometimes) a fitting response insofar as norm violations are potentially contagious and therefore pose a threat to the stability and maintenance of norms.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-7857</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0964</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11229-017-1455-3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Education ; Emotions ; Epistemology ; Evidentiality ; Judgment ; Logic ; Metaphysics ; Morality ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Language ; Philosophy of Science ; Psychological aspects</subject><ispartof>Synthese (Dordrecht), 2018-12, Vol.195 (12), p.5453-5472</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2018</rights><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2017</rights><rights>Synthese is a copyright of Springer, (2017). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-acf308aaf32ef7891dc4aff3c7f8eb57e0def360191043ac455dfd1b0063d7593</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-acf308aaf32ef7891dc4aff3c7f8eb57e0def360191043ac455dfd1b0063d7593</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1003-9668</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26750683$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26750683$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297,57995,58228</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Plakias, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><title>The response model of moral disgust</title><title>Synthese (Dordrecht)</title><addtitle>Synthese</addtitle><description>The philosophical debate over disgust and its role in moral discourse has focused on disgust's epistemic status: can disgust justify judgments of moral wrongness? Or is it misplaced in the moral domain—irrelevant at best, positively distorting at worst? Correspondingly, empirical research into disgust has focused on its role as a cause or amplifier of moral judgment, seeking to establish how and when disgust either causes us to morally condemn actions, or strengthens our pre-existing tendencies to condemn certain actions. Both of these approaches to disgust are based on a set of assumptions that I call, in what follows, the evidential model of disgust. This paper proposes an alternative model, which I call the response model. Instead of looking at disgust as a cause and justification of judgments of moral wrongness, I will argue that disgust is better understood as a response to wrongness. More precisely, I argue that disgust is a response to norm violations, and that it is (sometimes) a fitting response insofar as norm violations are potentially contagious and therefore pose a threat to the stability and maintenance of norms.</description><subject>Education</subject><subject>Emotions</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Evidentiality</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Morality</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Language</subject><subject>Philosophy of Science</subject><subject>Psychological aspects</subject><issn>0039-7857</issn><issn>1573-0964</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFKAzEQhoMoWKsP4EFY6Dk6s7PZJEcpWoWCl3oO6SapLW1Tk-3BtzdlRW-eZg7_98_wMXaLcI8A8iEj1rXmgJJjIwSnMzZCIYmDbptzNgIgzaUS8pJd5bwBQGwbGLHJ4sNXyedD3Gdf7aLz2yqGsiS7rdw6r465v2YXwW6zv_mZY_b-_LSYvvD52-x1-jjnHZHque0CgbI2UO2DVBpd19gQqJNB-aWQHpwP1AJqhIZsV950weESoCUnhaYxmwy9hxQ_jz73ZhOPaV9OmhpJaKEagSWFQ6pLMefkgzmk9c6mL4NgTi7M4MIUF-bkwlBh6oHJJbtf-fTX_B90N0Cb3Mf0e6VupYBWEX0Dy6Bpow</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>Plakias, Alexandra</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GB0</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1003-9668</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>The response model of moral disgust</title><author>Plakias, Alexandra</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-acf308aaf32ef7891dc4aff3c7f8eb57e0def360191043ac455dfd1b0063d7593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Education</topic><topic>Emotions</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Evidentiality</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Morality</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Language</topic><topic>Philosophy of Science</topic><topic>Psychological aspects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Plakias, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>DELNET Social Sciences & Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Plakias, Alexandra</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The response model of moral disgust</atitle><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle><stitle>Synthese</stitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>195</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>5453</spage><epage>5472</epage><pages>5453-5472</pages><issn>0039-7857</issn><eissn>1573-0964</eissn><abstract>The philosophical debate over disgust and its role in moral discourse has focused on disgust's epistemic status: can disgust justify judgments of moral wrongness? Or is it misplaced in the moral domain—irrelevant at best, positively distorting at worst? Correspondingly, empirical research into disgust has focused on its role as a cause or amplifier of moral judgment, seeking to establish how and when disgust either causes us to morally condemn actions, or strengthens our pre-existing tendencies to condemn certain actions. Both of these approaches to disgust are based on a set of assumptions that I call, in what follows, the evidential model of disgust. This paper proposes an alternative model, which I call the response model. Instead of looking at disgust as a cause and justification of judgments of moral wrongness, I will argue that disgust is better understood as a response to wrongness. More precisely, I argue that disgust is a response to norm violations, and that it is (sometimes) a fitting response insofar as norm violations are potentially contagious and therefore pose a threat to the stability and maintenance of norms.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s11229-017-1455-3</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1003-9668</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0039-7857 |
ispartof | Synthese (Dordrecht), 2018-12, Vol.195 (12), p.5453-5472 |
issn | 0039-7857 1573-0964 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2135958451 |
source | SpringerLink Journals; Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | Education Emotions Epistemology Evidentiality Judgment Logic Metaphysics Morality Philosophy Philosophy of Language Philosophy of Science Psychological aspects |
title | The response model of moral disgust |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T05%3A58%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20response%20model%20of%20moral%20disgust&rft.jtitle=Synthese%20(Dordrecht)&rft.au=Plakias,%20Alexandra&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=195&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=5453&rft.epage=5472&rft.pages=5453-5472&rft.issn=0039-7857&rft.eissn=1573-0964&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11229-017-1455-3&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26750683%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2135958451&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26750683&rfr_iscdi=true |