Why are norms unduly sensitive to categorical distinctions compared to continuous variation? For instance, the norm against the use of chemical weapons considers the type of weapon used, not how much suffering was caused; human rights are conditioned on membership in the species homo spaiens not on an animal's degree of sentience; norms promoting philanthropy emphasize donating, and are relatively insensitive to the impact a donation will have. Here we present a game theoretic model, which explains why it is easier for norms to be conditioned on categorical distinctions rather than on continuous variation. We explore the robustness of our results and present evolutionary simulations. Then, in a series of experiments, we demonstrate that participants’ moral intuitions and willingness to sanction norm violations are influenced by categorical distinctions rather than by continuous variation. We show that the reliance on categorical distinctions weakens when norm enforcement plays less of a role. We discuss various applications, including territoriality, human rights, inefficient altruism, institutionalized racism, and collusion.
The last three centuries have witnessed a moral and political transformation. Groups previously denied equivalent moral standing—including propertyless men, women, ethnic and religious minorities, homosexuals, and slaves—became moral equals deserving of similar legal treatment. Here we argue that this process was driven by the reputational benefits of demonstrating commitment to individualist moral principles. These principles flourished in “fluid” social ecologies with high relational mobility and weak kinship institutions, both as individuals aimed to signal impersonal prosociality and as they strove to be governed under institutions that protected substitutable individuals unbound by formal obligations. As long as parties benefited from appearing committed to these principles, and denying rights to certain groups appeared inconsistent with these principles, then those parties were incentivized to grant those rights. Given the universalist nature of these principles, people signaling commitment were also incentivized to sanction rights-based violations in other countries, helping expand rights beyond their original context. We use this account to explain both expansions and contractions of the moral circle and reconcile the roles of ideas, markets, reasoning, reputation, the Catholic Church, argumentation, moral intuition, social organization, individual strategizing, and large-scale cultural evolution.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.