No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Considering the role of self-interest in moral disciplining
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 October 2023
Abstract
Why do people moralize harmless behaviors? Although people rely on cooperative principles in making their moral judgments, I argue that self-interest likely plays a role even in these judgments. I suggest potential lines of research that might examine the role of self-interest in puritanical morality.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Shariff, A., Rahwan, I., & Bonnefon, J. (2020). Universals and variations in moral decisions made in 42 countries by 70,000 participants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(5), 2332–2337. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911517117CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, M., Keefer, L. A., Sacco, D. F., & Brown, F. L. (2022). Demonstrate values: Behavioral displays of moral outrage as a cue to long-term mate potential. Emotion, 22(6), 1239–1254. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000955CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curry, O. S., Mullins, D. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2019). Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies. Current Anthropology, 60(1), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1086/701478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, Y., & Savani, K. (2020). From variability to vulnerability: People exposed to greater variability judge wrongdoers more harshly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(6), 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000185CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irons, W. (2001). Religion as a hard-to-fake sign of commitment. In Nesse, R. M. (Ed.), Evolution and the capacity for commitment (pp. 292–309). Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. C., Gelfand, M. J., De, S., & Fox, A. (2019). The loosening of American culture over 200 years is associated with a creativity–order trade-off. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(3), 244–250. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0516-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karinen, A. K., Wesseldijk, L. W., Jern, P., & Tybur, J. M. (2021). Sex, drugs, and genes: Illuminating the moral condemnation of recreational drugs. Psychological Science, 32(10), 1582–1591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797621997350CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurzban, R., Dukes, A., & Weeden, J. (2010). Sex, drugs and moral goals: Reproductive strategies and views about recreational drugs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277(1699), 3501–3508. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0608CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moon, J. W. (2021). Why are world religions so concerned with sexual behavior? Current Opinion in Psychology, 40, 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.07.030CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moon, J. W., Tratner, A. E., & McDonald, M. M. (2022). Men are less religious in more gender-equal countries. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 289(1968), 20212474. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.2474CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersen, M. B. (2013). Moralization as protection against exploitation: Do individuals without allies moralize more? Evolution and Human Behavior, 34(2), 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinsof, D., & Haselton, M. G. (2016). The political divide over same-sex marriage: Mating strategies in conflict? Psychological Science, 27, 435–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615621719CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pitesa, M., & Thau, S. (2014). A lack of material resources causes harsher moral judgments. Psychological Science, 25(3), 702–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613514092CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sell, A., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2009). Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(35), 15073–15078. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0904312106CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weeden, J., Cohen, A. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2008). Religious attendance as reproductive support. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(5), 327–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.03.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
Moral disciplining: The cognitive and evolutionary foundations of puritanical morality
Related commentaries (28)
A broader theory of cooperation can better explain “purity”
Are we all implicit puritans? New evidence that work and sex are intuitively moralized in both traditional and non-traditional cultures
Considering the role of self-interest in moral disciplining
Disciplining the disciplined: Making sense of the gender gap that lies at the core of puritanical morals
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: Indulging in harmless pleasures can support self-regulation and foster cooperation
Drinking and feasting are perceived as facilitating cooperation
Evolutionary research confirms that a need for collective action increases puritanism
Is undisciplined behavior antithetical to cooperation, or is it part and parcel of it?
Little puritans?
Moral artificial intelligence and machine puritanism
Moral disciplining provides a satisfying explanation for Chinese lay concepts of immorality
Moral emotions underlie puritanical morality
Moralistic punishment is not for cooperation
On cooperative libertines and wicked puritans
Puritanical moral rules as moral heuristics coping with uncertainties
Puritanical moralism may signal patience rather than cause self-control
Puritanical morality and the scaffolded evolution of self-control
Puritanical morality: Cooperation or coercion?
Puritanism as moral advertisement helps solve the puzzle of ineffective moralization
Puritanism needs purity, and moral psychology needs pluralism
Purity is linked to cooperation but not necessarily through self-control
Purity is not a distinct moral domain
Purity is still a problem
Signals of discipline and puritanical challenges to liberty
The evolution of puritanical morality has not always served to strengthen cooperation, but to reinforce male dominance and exclude women
The many faces of moralized self-control: Puritanical morality is not reducible to cooperation concerns
There are no beautiful surfaces without a terrible depth
“WEIRD” societies still value (even needless) self-control and self-sacrifice
Author response
The puritanical moral contract: Purity, cooperation, and the architecture of the moral mind