Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-l4t7p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T00:28:50.971Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The divided we and multiple obligations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2020

Bradley Franks Open the ORCID record for Bradley Franks [Opens in a new window]  and
Andrew Stewart
Bradley Franks
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, LondonWC2A 2AEUnited Kingdom. b.franks@lse.ac.uka.stewart1@lse.ac.ukhttp://www.lse.ac.uk/PBS/People/Professor-Bradley-Frankshttp://www.lse.ac.uk/PBS/People/Andy-Stewart
Andrew Stewart
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, LondonWC2A 2AEUnited Kingdom. b.franks@lse.ac.uka.stewart1@lse.ac.ukhttp://www.lse.ac.uk/PBS/People/Professor-Bradley-Frankshttp://www.lse.ac.uk/PBS/People/Andy-Stewart
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tomasello's account of the origins and nature of moral obligation rightly emphasises the key roles of social relations and a cooperative sense of “we.” However, we suggest that it overlooks the complexity of those social relations and the resulting prevalence of a divided “we” in moral social groups. We argue that the social identity dynamics that arise can lead to competing obligations in a single group, and this has implications for the evolution of obligation.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 43 , 2020 , e70
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aquino, K. & Reed, I. I. (2002) The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83(6):1423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapais, B. (2008) Primeval Kinship: How pair-bonding gave birth to human society. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Chapais, B. (2011) The deep social structure of human kind. Science 331:1276–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foot, P. (1967) The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review 5:1–7.Google Scholar
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P. & Ditto, P. H. (2013) Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In: Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 47, pp. 55–130. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Greene, J. D. (2013) Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. Atlantic Books.Google Scholar
Hall, M. S., Franks, B., Bauer, M. & Bangerter, A. (2019, in preparation) The coexistence of commonsense and conspiracist views in conspiratorial worldviews. Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Hill, K. R., Walker, R. S., Božičević, M., Eder, J., Headland, T., Hewlett, B., Hurtado, A. M., Marlowe, F., Wiessner, P. & Wood, A. (2011) Co-residence patterns in hunter-gatherer societies show unique human social structure. Science 331:1286–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legare, C. H. & Gelman, S. A. (2008) Bewitchment, biology, or both: The co-existence of natural and supernatural explanatory frameworks across development. Cognitive Science 32(4):607–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richerson, P., Baldini, R., Bell, A. V., Demps, K., Frost, K., Hillis, V., Mathew, S., Newton, E. K., Naar, N., Newson, L., Ross, C., Smaldino, P. E., Waring, T. M. & Zefferman, M. (2016) Cultural group selection plays and essential role in explaining human cooperation: A sketch of the evidence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 39:1–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, A. (2016) The Trolley problem and me: A study of identity and its effect on moral decision-making. Unpublished MSc Dissertation, Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Stewart, A., Franks, B. & Gleibs, I. (2019, in preparation) The divided we and moral choices: How shifts within an identity can change decision making. Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Thomson, J. J. (1985) The trolley problem. Yale Law Journal 94:1395–1415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Tongeren, D. R., Newbound, H. & Johnson, E. (2016) The interactive effects of religiosity and priming religion following recall of a values violation. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity 23(2–3):211–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Tongeren, D. R., Welch, R. D., Davis, D. E., Green, J. D. & Worthington, E. L. Jr. (2012) Priming virtue: Forgiveness and justice elicit divergent moral judgments among religious individuals. The Journal of Positive Psychology 7:405–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar