Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-6mz5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T00:44:39.499Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Differentiating between different forms of moral obligations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2020

Rajen A. Anderson
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY14853-7601. raa255@cornell.edudap54@cornell.eduhttp://rajenanderson.comhttp://www.peezer.net
Benjamin C. Ruisch
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, OH43210. ruisch.3@osu.eduhttp://benrusich.com
David A. Pizarro
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY14853-7601. raa255@cornell.edudap54@cornell.eduhttp://rajenanderson.comhttp://www.peezer.net

Abstract

We argue that Tomasello's account overlooks important psychological distinctions between how humans judge different types of moral obligations, such as prescriptive obligations (i.e., what one should do) and proscriptive obligations (i.e., what one should not do). Specifically, evaluating these different types of obligations rests on different psychological inputs and has distinct downstream consequences for judgments of moral character.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
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