La moralidad de la cámara de modo dual: perspectivas teológicas católicas sobre la teoría del proceso dual de Joshua Greene

Recent research on the neuronal background of human decision-making, carried out by Joshua Greene, challenges various parts of traditional Christian ethics: the Principle of Double Effect, deontology and virtue ethics. The Principle of Double Effect is a standard principle used in bioethics and several other ethical fields. It is sometimes illustrated by two thought experiments, the Trolley dilemma and the Footbridge dilemma. Greene claims that “from a psychological point of view, the crucial difference between the Trolley dilemma and the Footbridge dilemma lies in the latter’s tendency to engage people’s emotions in a way that the former does not.” Moreover, he is convinced that Kant’s deontology is nothing more than rationalization of our tribal morality, whereas virtue ethics is a mere description of Aristotle’s tribal morality.Although Greene’s experiments and positions have been reflected on in Protestant theological ethics, so far there has been virtually no response from the side of Catholic moral theology. In this article, it is argued that Greene’s experiments are compatible with Catholic moral tradition. They do not necessarily lead, on the one hand, to the subversion of either the Doctrine of Double Effect or deontological ethics. The means/side effect distinction, which is the essence of the Principle of Double Effect, may be evolutionarily conditioned, but this would only mean it is part of our nature.Similarly, the utilitarianism proposed by Greene is no more impartial than ‘intuitive’ deontological judgement. In fact, the utilitarian analysis is often expected to be as impartial as the free market, but free markets are not always as free as liberal economists would like us to believe. Greene’s research, on the other hand, can help us understand better certain parts of our Catholic tradition, especially the need for a preferential option for the poor and for seeking truth through dialogue.