Nonconsequentialist decisions |
|||||||||||||
|
Baron, Jonathan Nonconsequentialist decisions.
Short Abstract:Consequentialism, in a simple form, holds that we should make decisions according to our judgments of their consequences for achievement of our goals. Our goals give each of us reason to endorse consequentialism as a standard of decision making. I suggest that nonconsequentialist principles arise from overgeneralization of rules that are consistent with consequentialism in a limited set of cases. Commitment to such rules is detached from their original purposes. Long Abstract:Consequentialism, in a simple form, holds that we should make decisions according to our judgments of their consequences for achievement of our goals. Our goals give each of us reason to endorse consequentialism as a standard of decision making. Alternative standards are bound to frustrate goal achievement by leading to consequences that are less good in this sense. In fact, however, some people knowingly follow decision rules that violate consequentialism. For example, they prefer harmful omissions to less harmful acts, they favor the status-quo over alternatives that they would otherwise judge to be better, they provide third-party compensation on the basis of the cause of an injury rather than the benefit from the compensation, they ignore deterrent effects in decisions about punishment, and they resist coercive reforms that they judge to be beneficial. I suggest that nonconsequentialist principles arise from overgeneralization of rules that are consistent with consequentialism in a limited set of cases. Commitment to such rules is detached from their original purposes. The existence of such nonconsequentialist decision biases has implications for philosophical and experimental methodology, the relation between psychology and public policy, and education.
Contact site administrator at: support@bbsonline.org |
||||||||||||