No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Seeing for ourselves: Insights into the development of moral behaviour from models of visual perception and misperception
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 March 2018
Abstract
Parallels from visual processing support Doris's cognitive architecture underlying moral agency. Unconscious visual processes change with conscious reflection. The sparse and partial representations of vision, its illusions, and hallucinations echo biases in moral reasoning and behaviour. Traditionally, unconscious moral processes are developed by teaching and reflection. Modern neuroscience could bypass reflection and directly influence unconscious processes, creating new dangers.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018
Target article
Précis of Talking to Our Selves: Reflection, Ignorance, and Agency
Related commentaries (28)
A limited skeptical threat
A related proposal: An interactionist perspective on reason
Acknowledging and managing deep constraints on moral agency and the self
Acting without knowledge
Agency enhancement and social psychology
Agency is realized by subpersonal mechanisms too
Another rescue mission: Does it make sense?
Getting by with a little help from our friends
Grounding responsibility in something (more) solid
Innate valuation, existential framing, and one head for multiple moral hats
Learning to talk to ourselves: Development, ignorance, and agency
Manipulation, oppression, and the deep self
Moral agency among the ruins
Negotiating responsibility
On properly characterizing moral agency
Responsibility: Cognitive fragments and collaborative coherence?
Seeing for ourselves: Insights into the development of moral behaviour from models of visual perception and misperception
Talking to others' selves: Why a valuational paradigm of agency fails to provide an adequate theoretical framework for moral responsibility, social accountability, and legal liability
Talking to others: The importance of responsibility attributions by observers
The dark side of dialog
The Nietzschean precedent for anti-reflective, dialogical agency
The participatory dimension of individual responsibility
The practice of everyday life provides supporters and inviters of morally responsible agency
The tangled web of agency
To kill a bee: The aptness and moralistic heuristics of reactive attitudes
What does agency afford the self?
Why value values?
“Defeaters” don't matter
Author response
Collaborating agents: Values, sociality, and moral responsibility