Philosophy 5 Evil Fall 2020Lecture Topic: Jonathan HaidtWrote The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail and The Righteous Mind.Moral dumbfounding. Dumbfounding experiments (incest, flag, chicken, soul sale). Haidt has done these experiments cross country and in countries like Brazil and India. He proposes these moral dumbfounding scenarios to see how the participants respond (why it is wrong). The incest story about brother and sister having sex, brother uses condom and sister on birth control pills, and don’t tell anyone. Responses including, they were wrong to have sex because they are siblings and possibly could have deformed baby. But this would not be a problem because of birth control and condom that is used. People still thought it was wrong despite not having a good reason. Those who said God forbids it, Haidt would respond why would God forbid it? Haidt thinks that people reach a fast emotional and intuitive moral judgment then when asked why it’s wronged the person starts reasoning. A rational defense occurs following the fast-emotional response. (Intuitive/emotional moral judgment first, reasoning concocted post-hoc to suit. Conjecture: same also in non-dumbfounding cases? Yes! Haidt thinks in normally, ordinary cases people will respond like this with a fast-emotional response then reasoning after their response. Moral disgust. Schnall, Haidt, Clore, and Jordan 2008: fart spray, chewed pencils, dirty pizza boxes. Haidt says what is considered wrong is usually disgusting. What is someone’s moral judgment when their visceral disgust system is turned on? Scenario with trashcans that are sprayed with fart spray (one with a lot and one with mild). People are more judgmental when they are smelling farts, but with a clean trashcan they are not as judgmental. Anotherscenario with chewed pencils and dirty pizza boxes in an office versus a clean office, and he found the same responses. Wheatley and Haidt 2005: hypnosis. He tried this with post-hypnotic individuals, who do not remember. Compare Rozin’s poo fudge and poison water. Took ordinary pieces of fudge and molded them to look like dog poop and offered it to participants. Participants refused fudge if looked like dog poop. The other experiment people labeled water or cyanide on beakers then asked if they wanted to have a drink. So, we have immediate moral and disgust reactions that precede reasoning. The moral/disgust reactions are independent of reasoning. The social intuitionist model. Haidt poses that our reason has effects, however, on other’sjudgments. Your intuition and judgment can influence and affect other peoples. The reasoning doesn’t affect your judgment because it is post-hoc, but the judgment can influence other people (social pressure exerted by vocalizing intuitive opinion).