PSY1PAC 2024 Semester 2 Lecture 9_1pp (PRE) (1).pdf

latrobe.edu.au PSY1PAC Introductory Psychology: People and Culture Lecture 9: Morality and Religion Reading: Dawson & Tyson (2012)...

latrobe.edu.au PSY1PAC Introductory Psychology: People and Culture Lecture 9: Morality and Religion Reading: Dawson & Tyson (2012) Dr Matthew Ruby Department of Psychology, Counselling and Therapy [email protected] La Trobe University CRICOS Provider Code Number 00115M Acknowledgment of Country La Trobe University acknowledges that our campuses are located on the lands of many traditional custodians in Australia. We recognise their ongoing connection to the land and value their unique contribution to the University and wider Australian society. We are committed to providing opportunities for Indigenous Australians, both as individuals and communities through teaching and learning, research and community partnerships across all our campuses. La Trobe University pays our respect to Indigenous Elders, past, present and emerging and will continue to incorporate Indigenous knowledge systems and protocols as part of our ongoing strategic and operational business.  Lecture Outline Models of Moral Reasoning When Ethics Collide Morality and Emotion Morality and Politics Religious Influences on Societal Values Moralisation of Thoughts & Behaviours  Learning Outcomes Students should be able to: Discuss the challenges of ethnocentrism in exploring cultural differences in moral reasoning Outline Kohlberg’s model of moral reasoning Explain how Kohlberg’s model of moral reasoning and Shweder’s codes of ethics relate to each other Understand the conflicts between orthodox and progressive cultural groups  Learning Outcomes Students should be able to: Identify and differentiate between the five moral intuitions, and how these correlate with people’s political orientation Explain Max Weber’s thesis on the relationships between the Protestant Reformation, work ethic, and the development of capitalism Understand cultural variation in whether thoughts are moralised  Morality Across Cultures People socialized to hold certain set of moral values Different cultures, different value sets How to judge without being ethnocentric?  Kohlberg’s Stage Theory of Morality Proposed a universal set of progressive moral levels 3 key levels Level corresponds to one’s level of cognitive development Image is public domain / CC0 license  Level 1: Preconventional Determined by physical/hedonistic consequences of action Image is public domain / CC0 license  Level 2: Conventional Determined by external standards, concern for social order Image is public domain / CC0 license  Level 3: Postconventional Determined by internalised, abstract principles about justice and individual rights Image is public domain / CC0 license  Heinz Dilemma In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So, having tried every legal means, Heinz gets desperate and considers breaking into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.  Cross-Cultural Evidence Meta-analysis of 45 studies, 27 different cultures. All cultures: All adults Level 2 or 3 All cultures: More children at Level 1 than adults All urban cultures: Some adults at Level 3 (esp. West) All tribal cultures: NO adults at Level 3 (Snarey, 1985)  Cross-Cultural Evidence How to interpret the cultural variation? Some cultures not developed enough for advanced moral reasoning? Are stages product of Western understanding of morality? Image is public domain / CC0 license  Cross-Cultural Evidence Two common interpretations of cultural differences: 1. Education system in the West allows people to reach the third level. Risk of ethnocentric bias; assumes third stage is best 2. Cultures encounter different challenges, and moral systems develop in response to specific cultural environments. May be moral values that Kohlberg’s model does not include  “Big 3” Moral Ethics Shweder: 3 key moral ethics found in the world Kohlberg’s model uses the “Ethic of Autonomy” Focused on protection of justice and individual rights Was someone harmed? Was someone denied their rights? Did someone act unfairly? Image is public domain / CC0 license  Ethic of Community Roles and obligations within community or social hierarchy Did someone show a lack of loyalty? Did someone betray their group? Did someone fulfill the duties of their role? Image is public domain / CC0 license  Ethic of Divinity Maintain sanctity and “natural order” Did someone violate standards of purity? Was someone unable to control their desires? Did someone violate divine laws? Image is public domain / CC0 license INTERACTIVE COMPONENT HERE (no pre-lecture spoilers)  “Big 3” Moral Ethics All 3 ethics found across cultures Western cultures particularly concerned with Autonomy Community and Divinity very important in many others  When Ethics Collide Moral obligations are: Objective obligations: things people should do even if no official rule exists Legitimately regulated: things people should be prevented from doing, and that should lead to punishment if done If an obligation is not considered to be moral, it is a convention or personal choice (a social obligation).  When Ethics Collide Which ethic is more important? Autonomy or Community? Dilemmas pitting ethics against each other US-American and Indian adults Moral violation ranged from minor to extreme (Miller & Bersoff, 1992)  Sample Dilemma (Miller & Bersoff, 1992) (Miller & Bersoff, 1992)  Disgust and Morality Disgust a common response to moral violations Facial muscle movements associated with disgust Smell something unpleasant See photographs of contamination Witness unfair treatment Disgust  ambiguous behavior viewed as problematic Image is public domain / CC0 license  Disgust and Morality Participants hypnotised to feel disgust when hear “take” or “often” Read vignettes, rate actor’s immorality, from 0 to 100 Example: “Congressman Arnold Paxton frequently gives speeches condemning corruption and arguing for campaign finance reform. But he is just trying to cover up the fact that he himself [will take bribes from / is often bribed by] the tobacco lobby, and other special interests, to promote their legislation.” Image is public domain / CC0 license (Wheatley & Haidt, 2005)  Disgust and Morality 80 Moral Condemnation 70 60 50 40 Control Word Hypnotized Word (Wheatley & Haidt, 2005)  Disgust and Morality Similar pattern for scenarios with no immoral behavior Example: “Dan is a student council representative at his school. This semester he is in charge of scheduling discussions about academic issues. He [tries to take / often picks] topics that appeal to both professors and students in order to stimulate discussion.’’ (Wheatley & Haidt, 2005)  Disgust and Morality 40 Moral Condemnation 30 20 10 0 Control Word Hypnotized Word (Wheatley & Haidt, 2005)  Disgust and Morality Why is Dan immoral? “It just seems like he’s up to something.” “He’s a popularity-seeking snob.” “It just seems so weird and disgusting.” INTERACTIVE COMPONENT HERE (no pre-lecture spoilers) BREAK TIME   Culture Wars Opinions on moral issues can be very different even within the same country, resulting in “culture wars” between groups. These are often based on: Socioeconomic status Political affiliation Religious affiliation Geographic region?  Orthodoxy & Progressivism Number of justifications (Adapted from Jensen, 1997)  Moral Intuitions (Foundations) Jonathan Haidt et al.: 3 ethics  5 moral foundations Later revised to be “moral intuitions” Autonomy  Harm and Fairness Community  Ingroup and Authority Divinity  Purity Political Left: Harm & Fairness > Ingroup, Authority, Purity Political Right: Relatively even endorsement of all five intuitions Jonathan Haidt by Miller Center of (Haidt et al., 2009; Graham et al., 2009) Public Affairs is licensed under CC BY 2.0  Moral Intuitions and Food Vegetarians in West (e.g., Canada, UK, USA) ↑ Concern for animals and environment ↑ Universalism ↓ Authoritarianism Typically choose to become vegetarian (Spencer, 1993; Stuart, 2006; Regan, 1984; Allen et al., 2000)  Moral Intuitions and Food Vegetarians in India ↑ SES ↑ Religiosity ↑ Purity motivations for diet Typically raised vegetarian or not (Caplan, 2009; Preece, 2008; Spencer, 2006)  Moral Intuitions and Food How do vegetarians and omnivores differ in their endorsement of the Moral Foundations* across cultures? (Ruby et al., 2013)  Moral Intuitions & Food Euro-Americans / Euro-Canadians Fairness/Reciprocity Harm/Care Indians Purity/Sanctity Authority/Tradition Ingroup/Loyalty (Ruby et al., 2013) All images are public domain / CC0 license  Moral Intuitions & Food Euro Canadians: n = 91 (57% women, 12%veg, Mage = 25.4) Euro Americans: n = 266 (57% women, 8% veg, Mage = 35.7) Indians (MTurk): n = 256 (57% women, 28% veg, Mage = 29.3) Indians (students): n = 200 (51% women, 52% veg, Mage = 25.4)  Results: Purity/Sanctity Importance p =.56, d = 0.14 p =.12, d = 0.41 p <.001, d = 0.52 p <.001, d = 1.81 Image is public domain / CC0 license  Results: Authority/Respect Importance p =.39, d = 0.21 p =.07, d = 0.43 p <.01, d = 0.43 p <.001, d = 1.52 Image is public domain / CC0 license  Results: Ingroup/Loyalty Importance p =.97, d = 0.00 p =.82, d = 0.06 p <.001, d = 0.49 p <.001, d = 1.43 Image is public domain / CC0 license  Results: Harm/Care Importance p =.91, d = 0.03 p =.06, d = 0.44 p <.001, d = 0.85 p <.001, d = 1.34 Image is public domain / CC0 license  Results: Fairness/Reciprocity Importance p =.48, d = 0.21 p <.03, d = 0.59 p <.001, d = 0.60 p <.001, d = 0.83 Image is public domain / CC0 license  Religion and Achievement Motivation Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904) argued capitalism was tied to cultural ideas from the Protestant reformation: Individualized relation with God Calling: unique God-given purpose Predestination: before a person was born, it was determined if they would go to heaven or hell. Thus, it was a moral duty to work to gain achievements. (Weber, 1904)  Religion and Achievement Motivation People need to find calling, devote their life to it. Unknown who was predetermined to go to heaven, but God’s rewards may hint at it. It was sinful to enjoy the fruits of one’s labor, better to just pursue one’s calling. This became secularised and woven into the cultural fabric, causing a general drive to accumulate wealth. The accumulation of capital laid the foundations for capitalism. (Weber, 1904)  Evidence for the Protestant Ethic In nineteenth-century Germany, Protestant counties were wealthier and had greater literacy than Catholic counties. Protestant nations earned more income than mixed Protestant-Catholic nations, which earned more than Catholic nations. Protestant parents expected their children to become self-reliant earlier than Catholic parents. Stories written by Protestant boys had more evidence of strong achievement motivation than stories written by Catholic boys. (Becker & Woessmann, 2009; Furnham, 1990; McClelland, 1961)  Evidence for the Protestant Ethic Uhlmann et al. (2011) found that Americans, but not Canadians, who were primed with salvation-related concepts exhibited a stronger work ethic afterward. Sanchez-Burks (2002) found that American Protestants were less likely than American non- Protestants to pay attention to other people’s relational cues during work. INTERACTIVE COMPONENT HERE (no pre-lecture spoilers)  Morality of Thoughts Differences in Judaism versus Christianity in terms of whether thoughts constitute a moral domain Judaism Primarily based on the Hebrew Bible and Talmud Emphasis on practices Behavior more important than thought for morality Christianity Primarily based on the New Testament Emphasis on faith and belief Thoughts important for morality as well as behavior (Cohen & Rozin, 2001)  Morality of Thoughts Practitioners of Christianity are more likely to feel that people have control over their thoughts than practitioners of Judaism. Practitioners of Judaism are more likely to feel that thoughts don’t necessarily lead to behavior; Protestants are more likely to feel that thoughts do lead to behavior. (Cohen & Rozin, 2001)  Morality of Thoughts Similar results emerged for: Mr. B consciously entertaining an affair with an attractive colleague Mr. B pretending to care about his parents and treating them nicely even though he doesn’t like them (Cohen & Rozin, 2001)  Morality of Thoughts Cultural variation in role of intention when judging the morality of harmful behavior Traditional small-scale societies may think differently about intention than Western, industrialised societies. For example, Yasawans from Fiji: Frown upon speculating about the intentions behind other people’s behavior View unintentional bad actions as almost as immoral as intentional ones (Robbins & Rumsey, 2008; McNamara et al., 2019; Robbins et al., 2017) INTERACTIVE COMPONENT HERE (no pre-lecture spoilers)