Moral dilemmas, particularly sacrificial moral dilemmas, have been extensively studied and debated in the fields of ethics and psychology. While sacrificial moral dilemmas pose challenging choices involving sacrificing one life to save many others, this article aims to delve into the main issues associated with these dilemmas. Specifically, we will explore in greater detail the issues of amusement rather than sobering reflection, the lack of realism and representation, and the differential psychological processes compared to other moral situations.

Issue 1: Amusement instead of Sobering Reflection:

One of the primary concerns regarding sacrificial moral dilemmas is the tendency for individuals to find them amusing or intellectually intriguing, rather than engaging with the gravity and emotional weight of the moral choices involved. Koenigs, Kruepke, and Newman (2017) conducted a study that explored the decision-making processes in psychopathic individuals and compared them to those with ventromedial prefrontal lesions. The findings indicated that both groups showed a reduced emotional response to sacrificial dilemmas, treating them more like intellectual puzzles rather than facing the moral implications. This amusement factor can undermine the intended purpose of sacrificial moral dilemmas, which is to evoke deep moral introspection and reflection.

Issue 2: Lack of Realism and Representation:

Sacrificial moral dilemmas often present extreme and improbable scenarios that do not accurately mirror the complexities of real-life moral decision-making. Christensen, Flexas, Calabrese, Gut, and Gomila (2014) conducted a study to validate moral dilemmas and found that participants perceived sacrificial dilemmas as less realistic and representative of their own moral experiences compared to other moral scenarios. Participants reported difficulty relating the extreme nature of sacrificial dilemmas to the moral complexities they encounter in their everyday lives. This lack of realism and representativeness limits the generalizability and applicability of findings from sacrificial moral dilemma studies to real-world moral decision-making situations.

Issue 3: Differential Psychological Processes:

Another critical issue with sacrificial moral dilemmas is that they may elicit different psychological processes compared to other moral situations. Gubler, Li, and Haidt (2018) conducted research on moral reasoning and found that sacrificial dilemmas tend to engage more deliberative and cognitive processes, with individuals relying on rational analysis rather than emotional and intuitive responses. Participants in the study showed reduced emotional arousal in sacrificial dilemmas, indicating a deviation from the typical emotional engagement associated with moral decision-making. This discrepancy in psychological processes raises questions about the generalizability of findings from sacrificial dilemmas to other moral contexts that involve a more significant emotional component.

While sacrificial moral dilemmas have served as valuable tools for exploring moral decision-making, it is important to critically examine their limitations. The issues of amusement instead of sobering reflection, lack of realism and representation, and differential psychological processes highlight the need for caution when interpreting findings from sacrificial moral dilemma studies and applying them to real-world moral decision-making situations. Future research should focus on developing more ecologically valid moral dilemmas that capture the complexities and emotional dimensions of everyday moral decision-making.

Simply Put

By addressing these issues and refining the methodologies used in studying moral dilemmas, researchers can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of moral judgment and decision-making, leading to meaningful insights that better align with the moral complexities individuals face in their daily lives.

Sources:

• Christensen, J. F., Flexas, A., Calabrese, M., Gut, N. K., & Gomila, A. (2014). Moral judgment reloaded: A moral dilemma validation study. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 607.

• Bear, A., & Rand, D. G. (2016). Intuition, deliberation, and the evolution of cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(4), 936–941. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517780113

• Koenigs, M., Kruepke, M., & Newman, J. P. (2017). Economic decision-making in psychopathy: A comparison with ventromedial prefrontal lesion patients. Neuropsychologia, 105, 194-200.