Intentionality, Evaluative Judgments, and Causal Structure
نویسندگان
چکیده
The results from a number of recent studies suggest that ascriptions of intentionality are based on evaluative considerations: specifically, that the likelihood of viewing a person’s actions as intentional is greater when the outcome is bad than good (see Knobe, 2006, 2010). In this research we provide an alternative explanation for these findings, one based on the idea that ascriptions of intentionality depend on causal structure. As predicted by the causal structure view, we observed that actions leading to bad outcomes are associated with negative social pressures (Experiment 1), that these negative pressures give rise to a specific kind of causal structure (Experiment 2), and that when these causal structures are pitted against the badness of the outcome, intentionality judgments track with causal structure and not badness (Experiment 3). While the badness of an outcome may have an indirect effect on judgments of intentionality, our results suggest that the factors that affect judgments of intentionality most directly are non-evaluative and objective.
منابع مشابه
Asymmetries in Judgments of Responsibility and Intentional Action
Recent experimental research on the ‘Knobe effect’ suggests, somewhat surprisingly, that there is a bi-directional relation between attributions of intentional action and evaluative considerations. We defend a novel account of this phenomenon that exploits two factors: (i) an intuitive asymmetry in judgments of responsibility (e.g., praise/blame) and (ii) the fact that intentionality commonly c...
متن کاملMoral asymmetries in judgments of agency withstand ludicrous causal deviance
Americans have been shown to attribute greater intentionality to immoral than to amoral actions in cases of causal deviance, that is, cases where a goal is satisfied in a way that deviates from initially planned means (e.g., a gunman wants to hit a target and his hand slips, but the bullet ricochets off a rock into the target). However, past research has yet to assess whether this asymmetry per...
متن کاملAccidental Proximal Events of Teleological Scenarios Increase Counterfactual Reasoning
Participants were asked to rate the sufficiency and the necessity of the distal and the proximal causes of two scenarios which involve double prevention, to test the idea of causal explanatory pluralism (Lombrozo, 2010) which emphasizes the mode of explanation, and the judgment dissociation theory (Mandel, 2003) which emphasizes the goal of causal reasoning. The events in one scenario were rela...
متن کاملFolk Judgments of Normality: Part Statistical, Part Evaluative
Existing research has emphasized the importance of normality judgments in many aspects of cognition and life (e.g., causal cognition, gradable adjectives, cooperative behavior). Yet little work has explored how people actually come to understand what sorts of things are normal. We argue that people’s normality intuitions reflect a mixture of statistical and evaluative considerations. Specifical...
متن کاملThe Role of the Primary Effect in the Assessment of Intentionality and Morality
In moral dilemmas performing an action often leads to both a good primary and a bad secondary effect. In such cases, how do people judge whether the bad secondary effect was brought about intentionally, and how do they assess the moral value of the act leading to the secondary effect? Various theories have been proposed that either focus on the causal role or on the moral valence of the seconda...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013