Moral Sentimentalism

In a way reminiscent of Hume's approach in the Treatise, a reviving moral sentimentalism can use the notion of empathy to ground both its normative account of moral obligation and its metaethical account of moral language. A virtuous person is empathically caring about others and expresses such feeling/motivation in her actions. But the judgment that something is right or good is also based in empathy, and the sentimentalist can espouse a form of moral realism by making use of a Kripkean reference-fixer theory of the role of feelings of approval and disapproval in moral judgment.     

Why do people behave immorally when drunk?

Alcohol intoxication is a major source of antisocial behavior in our society, strongly implicated in various forms of interpersonal aggression. Yet, moral philosophers have paid surprisingly little attention to the literature on alcohol and its effects. In part, this is because philosophers who have adopted a more empirically informed approach to moral psychology have gravitated toward moral sentimentalism, while the literature on alcohol intoxication fits very poorly with the sentimentalist account. Most contemporary research on the psychological effects of alcohol is focused upon variants of the “disinhibition” theory, which suggests that alcohol does not provoke any specific affect, it merely weakens executive control. This research, we argue, lends support to a deontic moral psychology, which identifies our ability to suppress behavioral impulses as a central feature of moral agency.     

6～10岁儿童道德移情特点的研究

道德移情是近期日益受重视和研究的一种重要情感形式。本研究以6、8、10岁的176名儿童为样本,参照M.L Hoffiman关于道德移情的理论观点,运用个别交谈法以道德情境故事为材料探究了儿童的道德移情特点。结果表明：我国6－10岁儿童面临道德情境时作出的道德移情反应随年龄的增长而提高;他们对集体的道德移情反应强于对个人的道德移情反应;他们对声誉损害的道德移情反应最强、其次是对人身伤害的、最后是对财物损坏的;他们在相同感、内疚感、气愤感诸不同情感上的移情反应与Hoffman的设想既有相同点,也有不同处。     

认知共情和情绪共情的发展差异:元分析初探

共情的毕生发展模型表明认知共情和情绪共情两维度可能存在发展差异,本研究借助元分析技术考察个体认知共情和情绪共情的毕生发展特点。通过文献检索和筛查,获取了136项研究和178个独立效应量,共计50606名被试。发表偏差检验表明文献选取不存在发表偏差,异质性检验表明应选取随机效应模型进行分析。随机效应模型分析的结果表明,总体而言个体的共情反应以认知共情为主（Z=5.39,p<0.001）。进一步的调节效应分析表明,不同发展阶段个体的共情反应受认知共情和情绪共情的影响存在差异（Q_b=73.99,p<0.001）。具体而言,学前期儿童主要以情绪共情为主,儿童中期至成年早期主要以认知共情为主,成年中期至成年晚期主要以情绪共情为主。     

Is empathy associated with more prosocial behaviour? A meta-analysis

Empathy is an important prerequisite for prosocial behaviour (PB). However, different concepts and methodological tools have been used in research on the relationship between empathy and PB, leading to ambiguous results. This study used a meta-analysis to explore this relationship and to identify the moderating variables. After a literature search, 62 studies and 146 samples with 71,310 participants were included. Our random effects model revealed a positive correlation of PB with both cognitive empathy (r = .32) and affective empathy (r = .30). In addition, the relationship between empathy and PB is moderated by culture, publication type, education level, and empathy measures. Our conclusion is that there is a significant correlation between empathy and PB that is influenced by sample characteristics and methodological factors.     

认知共情和情绪共情的发展差异:元分析初探

共情的毕生发展模型表明认知共情和情绪共情两维度可能存在发展差异,本研究借助元分析技术考察个体认知共情和情绪共情的毕生发展特点。通过文献检索和筛查,获取了136项研究和178个独立效应量,共计50606名被试。发表偏差检验表明文献选取不存在发表偏差,异质性检验表明应选取随机效应模型进行分析。随机效应模型分析的结果表明,总体而言个体的共情反应以认知共情为主（Z=5.39,p<0.001）。进一步的调节效应分析表明,不同发展阶段个体的共情反应受认知共情和情绪共情的影响存在差异（Q_b=73.99,p<0.001）。具体而言,学前期儿童主要以情绪共情为主,儿童中期至成年早期主要以认知共情为主,成年中期至成年晚期主要以情绪共情为主。     

神经科学视角下的共情研究热点

共情是指个体对他人情绪和想法的感受及理解。近年来关于共情神经机制的研究日益增多,但多集中在情感共情、认知共情、生理性疼痛共情等方面,而对社会痛共情、积极共情和不对称共情反应的研究相对较少。且由于研究范式及个体差异等原因,研究结果之间也充满着争议。未来研究可以设计更具生态效度的共情研究范式、进一步深化和细化共情的神经机制研究、从神经机制角度探讨不同共情能力个体的特点及共情反应的调节因素。     

IS MY FEELING YOUR PAIN BAD FOR OTHERS? EMPATHY AS VIRTUE VERSUS EMPATHY AS FIXED TRAIT

The purpose of this article is to (1) critique the primary arguments given by Paul Bloom and Jesse Prinz against empathy, and (2) to argue instead that empathy is best understood as a virtue that plays an important but complicated role in the moral life. That it is a virtue does not mean that it always functions well, and empathy sometimes contributes to behavior that is partial and unfair. In some of their writings, both Bloom and Prinz endorse the view that empathy is a fixed trait, but there is little reason to think this, and the studies that they cite do not support this view. Further, a number of recent studies suggest the opposite: our empathic reactions are malleable and subject to environmental effects and learning. Although our capacities for cognitive and emotional empathy are clearly not sufficient for being moral, I argue that they are functionally necessary traits that, like other virtues, must be cultivated correctly.     

How (and where) does moral judgment work?

Moral psychology has long focused on reasoning, but recent evidence suggests that moral judgment is more a matter of emotion and affective intuition than deliberate reasoning. Here we discuss recent findings in psychology and cognitive neuroscience, including several studies that specifically investigate moral judgment. These findings indicate the importance of affect, although they allow that reasoning can play a restricted but significant role in moral judgment. They also point towards a preliminary account of the functional neuroanatomy of moral judgment, according to which many brain areas make important contributions to moral judgment although none is devoted specifically to it.     

Humanity or justice?

This paper reflects on a critique of cosmopolitanism mounted by Tom Campbell, who argues that cosmopolitans place undue stress on the issue of global justice. Campbell argues that aid for the impoverished needy in the third world, for example, should be given on the Principle of Humanity rather than on the Principle of Justice. This line of thought is also pursued by ‘Liberal Nationalists’ like Yael Tamir and David Miller. Thomas Nagel makes a similar distinction and questions whether the ideal of justice can even be meaningfully applied on a global scale. The paper explores whether the distinction between the Principle of Humanity and the Principle of Justice might be a false dichotomy in that both principles could be involved in humanitarian assistance. It will suggest that both principles might be grounded in an ethics of caring and that the ethics of caring cannot be so sharply distinguished from the discourse of justice and of rights. As a result, the Principle of Humanity and the Principle of Justice cannot be so sharply distinguished either. It is because we care about others as human beings (Principle of Humanity) that we pursue justice for them (Principle of Justice) and the alleviation of their avoidable suffering.     

Psychological Aspects of Genetic Counseling: XIII. Empathy and Decency

The issues confronting genetic counselees, the demands of the new genetics and other factors suggest strongly the need for greater attention to counseling procedures which convey understanding of clients and help them feel more hopeful and more capable of dealing with their life problems. This should include interventions to help them feel more effective in their coping efforts as well as such ego-bolstering techniques as the expression of kindness, the provision of appropriate rewards, and other attempts to raise the client's self-esteem. These attempts should be a standard part of all genetic counseling. The traditional arguments of potential harm and time limitations often used to avoid counseling efforts are viewed through the lens of countertransference.