In this thesis I propose that emotions and rationality are integrated, and jointly constitute our moral agency. I argue against the influential ‘sentimentalist’ claim that emotions are the only constituents of the moral reasons for which we act, by showing that emotions are inextricably bound up with our sensory and conceptual capacities. In contrast, I propose we act for moral reasons when we act in light of the narratives we create and understand. Narrative understanding here is the capacity to inhabit a chain of events. It is embodied and action-­‐ orientated, and is co-­‐constituted through our emotional, conceptual and sensory capacities.

Thesis (M.A.)--Boston University

Thesis (MA)--Stellembosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this thesis is to argue for a new metric for determining the moral status of another being. Determining this status is of foundational importance in a number of legal, political, and ethical concerns, including but not limited to animal rights, the treatment of criminals, and the treatment of the psychologically afflicted. This metric will be based upon one’s capacity to morally consider others. In other words, in order to have full moral status, one must be able to have moral concern for others and act upon this concern to even a minimal degree. In doing so, one will be considered to belong to a “moral community”, which affords the member a certain set of rights, privileges, and duties towards other community members. Arguing for the existence of such a community achieves the pragmatic aspect of this thesis. I argue that morality is geared towards group-survival strategies which have been evolutionarily selected for, and thus by organizing societal structures towards the tools which nature has armed us with, we may maximize the powers and capacities of the community members. In order to achieve these aims, I defend a concept of morality as based in emotion, requiring certain neurological structures, which gives the first set of criteria for identifying potential members of the moral community. I then discuss the issue of identifying the capacity for morality in non-human minds, arguing that we may infer moral capacities from behaviourism. In summary, the findings of this paper are that first, morality is essentially emotional in nature and is a product of the nature of our neurological system, although rational processes and enculturation shape particular moral sensitivities and priorities. Second, one can infer the existence of moral capacities in animals from their behaviour, and, at risk of engaging in anthropomorphism, to deny these capacities completely entails solipsism. Thirdly, and most importantly, those who are capable of morally considering others ought to be afforded full moral status themselves and be brought into a “moral community” wherein special rights, freedoms, and privileges allow the members to most efficiently contribute to the community, maximizing the powers and benefits of the community. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie tesis is om ’n nuwe maatstaf voor te hou waarvolgens die morele status van ’n ander wese bepaal kan word. Die bepaling van hierdie status is van fundamentele belang vir ’n hele aantal regs-, politiese en etiese aangeleenthede. Dit sluit, onder andere, diereregte, die behandeling van misdadigers en die behandeling van diegene met sielkundige probleme in. Hierdie maatstaf sal gebaseer word op die vermoë van die individuele wese om ander moreel in ag te neem. Met ander woorde om volle morele status te hê, moet 'n wese daartoe in staat wees om moreel besorg te wees oor ander en om, ten minste tot ’n minimale mate, na gelang van hierdie besorgheid op te tree. Op grond hiervan kan daar aanvaar word dat daardie wese tot ’n “morele gemeenskap” behoort, wat ook aan hom ’n stel regte, voordele en pligte teenoor ander gemeenskapslede sal besorg. Om ’n argument vir die bestaan van só ’n gemeenskap te maak sal die pragmatiese doelwit van hierdie tesis bereik. Ek argumenteer dat moraliteit ingestel is op groepsoorlewingstrategieë wat evolusionêr geselekteer is. Dit wil sê deur samelewingstrukture op só ’n wyse te organiseer dat dit gebruik maak van die gereedskap waarmee die natuur ons bewapen het, sal ons die bevoegdhede en die vermoëns van gemeenskapslede kan maksimaliseer. Om hierdie doelwitte te bereik, verdedig ek ’n verstaan van moraliteit as gebaseer in emosies wat sekere neurologiese strukture benodig. Dít verskaf die eerste stel kriteria waarvolgens potensiële lede van die morele gemeenskap geïdentifiseer kan word. Ek bespreek vervolgens die moontlikheid om die vermoë tot moraliteit in nie-menslike verstande te identifiseer en argumenteer dat morele vermoëns vanuit gedragsleer afgelei kan word. Ter opsomming is die bevindinge van hierdie tesis, eerstens, dat moraliteit wesenlik emosioneel van aard en ’n produk van ons neurologiese sisteem is, alhoewel rasionele prosesse en verkulturering spesifieke morele sensitiwiteite en prioriteite vorm. Tweedens kan die bestaan van morele vermoëns in diere afgelei word vanuit hulle optrede, en, alhoewel ons hier die risiko van antropomorfisme loop, behels die ontkenning van hierdie vermoëns solipsisme. Derdens, en die belangrikste, diegene wat daartoe in staat is om ander moreel in ag te neem behoort self volledig morele status toegeken te word. Hulle word sodoende in die “morele gemeenskap” betrek waar spesiale regte, vryhede en voordele gemeenskapslede sal toelaat om op die mees effektiewe wyse tot die gemeenskap by te dra om sodoende die bevoegdhede en voordele van die gemeenskap te maksimaliseer.

The essay aims to provide an overview of existing research on moral cognition and its neural correlates, as well as to highlight aspects in which the findings from the field of cognitive neuroscience can add to the understanding of the challenges that arise from having artificial systems as moral decision-makers. Morality is an important characteristic of the human way of life and a central mechanism in the modern society. Research suggests that morality has evolved as a function to promote cooperation and prosocial behaviour. Morality has been a topic of investigation in several interdisciplinary fields and often includes the exploration of reason and emotion and their respective roles. Contemporary technological advances include the increased presence of artificial intelligence (AI) that aims to simulate the human mind. Empirical evidence suggests that deontological responses are more closely related to emotional components of moral cognition and linked to increased activity in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. In contrast, utilitarian responses appear to be more reliant on reason and a more complex neural network that is linked to increased activity in primarily dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. AI has successfully accomplished certain elements of simulating human cognition. However, key findings suggest that the integration of reason and emotion is essential which is possibly challenging for AI to fully replicate.

Le modèle cognitif dualiste du jugement moral fondé sur l'opposition raison-émotion et dans lequel la raison contrôlerait les émotions est encore très largement dominant (Greene, Sommerville et al. 2001). Pourtant, l'idée de ce contrôle raisonné des émotions, en particulier lors de la résolution de dilemmes sociaux a été remise en cause (Knoch, Pascual-Leone et al. 2006). Comme l'a suggéré Jorge Moll, en proposant une approche beaucoup plus intégrée, la prise de décision dans un contexte moral pourrait ne pas se limiter à cette opposition entre processus affectifs et raisonnés (Moll, Zahn et al. 2005). Par ailleurs, lors de la résolution de dilemmes moraux, ce qui est appelé le jugement semble être dissocié du choix de l'action, mais à ce jour, la plupart des études publiées confondent les deux. Dans ce travail nous nous efforçons d'apporter les arguments théoriques et expérimentaux démontrant que les processus qui conduisent au jugement et ceux conduisant au choix moral sont dissociés. Et que de plus, le jugement repose sur la génération d'émotions secondaires par des processus cognitifs complexes (raisonnés) et le choix sur des émotions plus automatiques. Pour pouvoir l'expliquer nous proposons un modèle plus général de l'évaluation et de la décision morale reposant non plus sur deux, mais trois types de processus. / The cognitive dualistic model of moral judgment based on the opposition reason-emotion and in which the reason would control the emotions is still largely dominant (Greene, Sommerville et al. 2001). However, the idea of rational control of emotions, especially when solving social dilemmas, has been questioned (Knoch, Pascual-Leone et al. 2006). As suggested by Jorge Moll, offering a much more integrated approach, the decision in a moral context may not be limited to the contrast between emotional and rationnal process (Moll, Zahn et al. 2005). Moreover, when resolving moral dilemmas, what is called the judgment seems to be dissociated from the choice of action, but to date, most published studies confuse the two. In this work, we strive to provide the theoretical and experimental evidences that the processes that lead to the judgment and to the moral choice are dissociated. And moreover, the judgment is based on the generation of secondary emotions by complex cognitive processes (rational) and the choice based on more automatic emotions. To explain this we propose a more general model of evaluation and moral decision based not on two, but three types of processes.

Como julgar um evento político? Com o advento da Revolução Francesa duas perspectivas se abriram aos intelectuais alemães diante desta pergunta: uma em nome da prudência, fundada na história empírica; outra em nome da liberdade, fundada na moral. Na primeira perspectiva, Rehberg, inspirado em Burke, acusou os revolucionários de aplicarem uma \"teoria pura\" na prática política e, por isso mesmo, confundirem a vontade de todos, conceito empírico, com a vontade geral, conceito teórico e puro. Na segunda perspectiva, dois filósofos se opuseram, Kant e Fichte, assumindo como pressuposto comum que a política deve ser julgada à luz do sentido moral da história. Para tanto, partiram de uma ligação estreita entre vontade e razão a partir da qual os conceitos de liberdade e finalidade deveriam ser pensados juntos numa espécie de escatologia moral. Mas, ao transporem a política da Historie para a Weltgeschichte, do plano dos eventos empíricos para o plano do sentido necessário da história, uma segunda questão se pôs: a política deve ser corrigida em nome da moral por meio de reforma ou por meio de revolução? Embora Kant tenha visto a Revolução Francesa como signo histórico do progresso moral da humanidade, isto não o impediu de condená-la juridicamente em nome do princípio da publicidade - que, segundo ele, toda revolução contra o poder constituído acaba por violar. Fichte, por outro lado, ora defende o direito de revolução dos indivíduos contra o estado despótico, ora defende certo despotismo estatal, no que diz respeito ao funcionamento da economia, tolhendo o arbítrio individual dos cidadãos. Posições contraditórias e ao sabor das circunstâncias? Não creio. Sustento que a diferença entre estes dois juízos políticos de Fichte não impede que eles mantenham certa identidade de base. Mas se é sempre em nome da liberdade que a política deve ser julgada, certamente não é a liberdade dos indivíduos que conta do ponto de vista da razão, e sim a libertação da espécie - porquanto cada indivíduo só pode assumir sua identidade no confronto e reconhecimento recíproco com os outros. Ao pretender erigir um \"sistema da liberdade\", fundar a razão numa atividade livre de autodeterminação, a Doutrina-da-ciência abriu caminho para que a liberdade moral se transformasse em libertação social e para que o \"reino dos fins\" chegasse à Terra - mediante uma \"escatologia da imanência\" que operou uma reforma da revolução. / How can one judge a political event? The French Revolution opened up two perspectives for the German intellectuals of the period to answer such question: one under the token of prudence, grounded on empirical history; the other brandishing the flag of liberty, grounded on morals. From the former,A. W. Rehberg, inspired by E. Burke, charged the revolutionaries of applying a \"pure theory\" to political practice, and, due to the same reason, of confusing the will of all, an empirical concept, with the general will, a pure and theoretical concept. From the latter perspective, Kant and Fichte, mutually opposed, assumed as a common premise that politics ought to be judged under the light of the moral meaning of history. In order to accomplish this, they both started from a close link between will and reason from which the conceptions of liberty and finality ought to be thought in connection in a kind of moral Eschatology. However, when they transposed politics from Historie to Weltgeschichte, that is, from the domaine of empirical events to the one of the necessary meaning of history, a second question had to be answered: should politics be corrected for the sake of morals by means of a reformation or of a revolution? Even though Kant saw French Revolution as a historical sign of the moral progress of humanity, such a fact didn\'t prevent him from issuing a legal condemnation of it in defense of the principle of publicity - a principle which, in his view, every revolution fledged against established sovereignty comes to violate. Fichte, on the other hand, sometimes defends the right of individuals to rise revolutionarily against the despotic state, but also seems to approve of certain forms of despotic guidance, concerning the working out of the economy, in the restriction of the individual will of the citizens. Could these be contradictory postions, suggested only by the vicissitudes of the circumstances? I don\'t believe so. I maintain that the difference that lie between these diverse Fichtean political judgments does not hinder the fact that they maintain a certain fundamental identity. But if it is always for the sake of liberty that politics ought to be judged, from the standpoint of reason it certainly is not the liberty of the individuals that counts, but rather the liberation of the species - for each individual can only assume his or her identity in contrast with and through reciprocal recognition of the others. By intending to build up a \"system of liberty\" and to ground reason on an activity free of self-determination, the Doctrine of Science opened up the road for the transformation of moral liberty into social liberation and for the \"kindom of ends\" to come to Earth - by means of a \"Eschatology of immanence\" that operated a reformation of the revolution.

This thesis talks about the pupil's moral development. It is focused primarily on possibilities of the moral development in drama education, eventually in some dramatic activities used during other lessons. The thesis is divided into two parts - theoretical and practical. At the beginning of the theoretical part it acquaints readers with basic information about the moral consciousness and behavior, analysis of the moral judgement of the child and possibilities of its measuring. It also presents drama education as a separated subject its principles and methods and it outlines the possibilities of the drama education in the pupil's moral development. The practical part contains the analysis of the primary school age pupil's moral judgement and comparison outcomes of the pupils who are taught using the methods of drama education and pupils, who have never experienced drama education. The goal of the empirical survey is to find out whether and to what extent the drama education influences the development of moral judgement of the pupils.

Recent studies have shown that different free will beliefs affect moral behavior. The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether different free will beliefs also influence moral judgment. College students (N = 56) were randomly assigned to one of three framing manipulations: free will, determinism, or neutral. They then read three morally questionable scenarios that differed by situational context. Following each scenario, participants completed a moral judgment questionnaire that measured four moral constructs: moral evaluation, moral responsibility, justification, and punishment. Finally, participants completed a Free Will & Determinism Questionnaire (FWD-Q) that measured their lay beliefs in free will and determinism. For analysis, we grouped participants according to their reported FWD-Q scores into one of three groups: free will, determinism, or compatibilism. We found that different free will beliefs influenced moral judgment to a small degree, but not in the ways that we predicted. Our results show that situational context affects moral judgment much more than lay philosophical beliefs regarding free will. Future studies should examine whether this still holds true for older adults with more developed worldviews.

Como julgar um evento político? Com o advento da Revolução Francesa duas perspectivas se abriram aos intelectuais alemães diante desta pergunta: uma em nome da prudência, fundada na história empírica; outra em nome da liberdade, fundada na moral. Na primeira perspectiva, Rehberg, inspirado em Burke, acusou os revolucionários de aplicarem uma \"teoria pura\" na prática política e, por isso mesmo, confundirem a vontade de todos, conceito empírico, com a vontade geral, conceito teórico e puro. Na segunda perspectiva, dois filósofos se opuseram, Kant e Fichte, assumindo como pressuposto comum que a política deve ser julgada à luz do sentido moral da história. Para tanto, partiram de uma ligação estreita entre vontade e razão a partir da qual os conceitos de liberdade e finalidade deveriam ser pensados juntos numa espécie de escatologia moral. Mas, ao transporem a política da Historie para a Weltgeschichte, do plano dos eventos empíricos para o plano do sentido necessário da história, uma segunda questão se pôs: a política deve ser corrigida em nome da moral por meio de reforma ou por meio de revolução? Embora Kant tenha visto a Revolução Francesa como signo histórico do progresso moral da humanidade, isto não o impediu de condená-la juridicamente em nome do princípio da publicidade - que, segundo ele, toda revolução contra o poder constituído acaba por violar. Fichte, por outro lado, ora defende o direito de revolução dos indivíduos contra o estado despótico, ora defende certo despotismo estatal, no que diz respeito ao funcionamento da economia, tolhendo o arbítrio individual dos cidadãos. Posições contraditórias e ao sabor das circunstâncias? Não creio. Sustento que a diferença entre estes dois juízos políticos de Fichte não impede que eles mantenham certa identidade de base. Mas se é sempre em nome da liberdade que a política deve ser julgada, certamente não é a liberdade dos indivíduos que conta do ponto de vista da razão, e sim a libertação da espécie - porquanto cada indivíduo só pode assumir sua identidade no confronto e reconhecimento recíproco com os outros. Ao pretender erigir um \"sistema da liberdade\", fundar a razão numa atividade livre de autodeterminação, a Doutrina-da-ciência abriu caminho para que a liberdade moral se transformasse em libertação social e para que o \"reino dos fins\" chegasse à Terra - mediante uma \"escatologia da imanência\" que operou uma reforma da revolução. / How can one judge a political event? The French Revolution opened up two perspectives for the German intellectuals of the period to answer such question: one under the token of prudence, grounded on empirical history; the other brandishing the flag of liberty, grounded on morals. From the former,A. W. Rehberg, inspired by E. Burke, charged the revolutionaries of applying a \"pure theory\" to political practice, and, due to the same reason, of confusing the will of all, an empirical concept, with the general will, a pure and theoretical concept. From the latter perspective, Kant and Fichte, mutually opposed, assumed as a common premise that politics ought to be judged under the light of the moral meaning of history. In order to accomplish this, they both started from a close link between will and reason from which the conceptions of liberty and finality ought to be thought in connection in a kind of moral Eschatology. However, when they transposed politics from Historie to Weltgeschichte, that is, from the domaine of empirical events to the one of the necessary meaning of history, a second question had to be answered: should politics be corrected for the sake of morals by means of a reformation or of a revolution? Even though Kant saw French Revolution as a historical sign of the moral progress of humanity, such a fact didn\'t prevent him from issuing a legal condemnation of it in defense of the principle of publicity - a principle which, in his view, every revolution fledged against established sovereignty comes to violate. Fichte, on the other hand, sometimes defends the right of individuals to rise revolutionarily against the despotic state, but also seems to approve of certain forms of despotic guidance, concerning the working out of the economy, in the restriction of the individual will of the citizens. Could these be contradictory postions, suggested only by the vicissitudes of the circumstances? I don\'t believe so. I maintain that the difference that lie between these diverse Fichtean political judgments does not hinder the fact that they maintain a certain fundamental identity. But if it is always for the sake of liberty that politics ought to be judged, from the standpoint of reason it certainly is not the liberty of the individuals that counts, but rather the liberation of the species - for each individual can only assume his or her identity in contrast with and through reciprocal recognition of the others. By intending to build up a \"system of liberty\" and to ground reason on an activity free of self-determination, the Doctrine of Science opened up the road for the transformation of moral liberty into social liberation and for the \"kindom of ends\" to come to Earth - by means of a \"Eschatology of immanence\" that operated a reformation of the revolution.

Humans express complex moral behaviour, from altruism to antisocial acts. The investigationof the neural and cognitive mechanisms underlying our moral minds is of profoundimportance for understanding these behaviours. By reviewing recent findings in cognitive andmoral neuroscience, along with other relevant areas of research, the current study aims to: (1)Investigate the neural correlates of moral intuition and moral reasoning, and see how thesetwo systems relate to moral judgement and moral behaviour. (2) Examine how the moralintuitive system and the moral reasoning system relate to one another. Neuroscientificevidence suggests that these two systems are supported by different areas in the brain. Whiletheir relationship is argued to be both sequential, integrative and competitive, evidenceindicates that the moral reasoning system primarily functions as a post hoc rationalization ofour intuitive-driven judgements and behaviours. While our moral intuitive system motivateskin altruism, both moral intuition and moral reasoning serve to uphold reciprocal altruism.