Morality and Sociality Moral Decision-Making: Personal Dilemmas Question: Are you moral? Moral Judgments: Impersonal Decisions Question: Is an act moral? Morality: Innate/Learned? Evolution? Miller, G Science 320:734.

Morality, 18 th Century David Hume Emotions  Moral Decisions “Innate” Immanuel Kant Reason (Should)  Moral Decisions Learned

Study of Morality, 21 st Century Emotion, “Reason” Interact Strong Role for Emotion Reason, Sometimes, a posteriori Justification Different Brain Centers, Networks: Emotion Affecting Moral Judgment Utilitarian Logic (Reason, Learned) Interaction of Brain Networks Different Components

Emotional Context & Moral Judgment J. Haidt (U Virginia): Empirical Approach Subjects: College Students “Your friend lied to obtain employment.” A. Student at New Desk B. Student at “Filthy, Stained” Desk Response: Moral Judgment

Emotion & Moral Judgment/ J. Haidt Friend Lied to Obtain Employment A. Student at New Desk B. Student at “Filthy, Stained” Desk Filthy Desk “More Immoral” Disgust (Emotion) Impacts Moral Judgment; Stimulus Unrelated to Moral Issue Impact Moral Decision-making?

Interaction: Emotion & Reason Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex (VPC) Network of Brain Regions: “Prosocial” Evoke Guilt, Compassion, Empathy Emotions of Morality VPC Damaged Some Moral Decisions Abnormal Less Emotional Decisions Normal, Key Impact of Reason Beyond Emotion

Learned Contribution to Moral Judgment J. Haidt: Bases Common to Different Cultures (1)Harm Done (2) “Fairness” (Equity) (3) Loyalty (4) Respect for Authority (5) Spiritual Purity “Liberal” Stress (1) & (2) [Probably Universal, Non-Human Primates] “Conservative” Value (1) thru (5) Similarly (1): Reason, (2) Emotion (Return to this)

Brosnan and de Waal (2003) Nature 425:297. Female brown capuchin (Cebus apella) Exchange token with human, receive food Grape preferred over slice of cucumber Subjects view both exchanges Subject with non-preferred reward: reject ET: EqualIT: Inequality EC: Grape/no token FC: Food only

Distributive Justice Recall, All Cultures’ Morality: (1) Reduce Harm Done (mean) (2) Promote Fairness = Equity (variance) Distributive Justice: How Trade-off Competing Objectives (1) and (2) Morality of Allocating Benefits/Costs to Others

(1) Maximize Total Good or Minimize Total Harm Objective Quasi-Independent of Distribution Among Individuals (Equity) “Utilitarian Justice” Rational Model for Distributive Justice e.g. Sum Costs Across Individuals Rational  Justice by Reason (Not Emotion)

(2) Fairness Implies Minimize Inequity/Variability in Costs Among Individuals “Moral Sentiment” Despite Quadratic Complexity, Fair vs Not Fair Modeled as Emotional

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092. Distributive Justice Efficiency   Equity  Utilitarian, Rational Fairness, Emotional Reduce (Mean) Harm Reduce Variability

Where Morality? Regions of Brain: Substrates Associated with Moral Judgments Addressed Descriptively Functional Magnet Res Imaging (fMRI) “Fishing” for Increased Activity Phases of Moral Decision Address: Context of “Distributive Justice”

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 Given Subjects Face Moral Decision (Hypothetical) Describe {Reason  Emotion} Quantitatively fMRI: Associated Neural Centers Subjects: Donors to Orphanage Exercise: Distributive Justice (Allocation)

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320: Adult Donors Hypothetical Allocation of Meals: How Many Meals Take Away From 2 Groups of Children to Feed Third Group? “Fairer”, But Less Total Fed Design: Vary Options wrt Efficiency and Equity (Recall Lack of “Ecological Validity”)

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 Neural Substrates Know Dopaminergic Regions Computation, Learning of Reward [Including Indirect Reward of Charitable Giving] (Assert) Reason: Efficiency, Utility, ~ Numerical Scale Know Insular Cortex Involved in Sense Fairness, Empathy (Assert) Emotion: Equity

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 Plot: Subjects Effects of Efficiency & Inequity; Distributive Justice Ordinate: Interaction Abscissa: Inequity Aversion Subjects With Stronger Response to Efficiency (Sum Meals) Less Responsive to Inequity Linearity too simple?

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 Locus of Activity Interaction of Efficiency & Inequity Stronger Signal: More Responsive to Totals Meals Appreciates “Rational,” But Responds to Both Efficiency AND Inequity

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 Assume Separate Neural Regions for Efficiency and Equity Bilateral (L & R) Putamen: Strong Response to Efficiency (Sum Meals); Near 0 Response to Inequity

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 L & R Putamen M C : Efficiency G C : Inequity

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 Assume Separate Neural Regions for Efficiency and Equity Bilateral Insular Cortex (“Emotional;” Seeks Fairness): Strong Response to Inequity (Variability of meals); Near 0 Response to Efficiency

Hsu et al. (2008) Science 320:1092 G: Inequity M: Efficiency

Why Morality? Morality Evolved to Promote Individual’s Social Cohesion: Advantages of Group Membership Reduce Coercion within Group Treat Kin Cooperatively? Acquire Cooperators, Reciprocal Altruists?

Morality and Sociality Morality: What, Why, Where? Hypothesis: Evolved Neural Systems Promote Individual’s Access to Benefits of Social Interaction Assembled by Natural Selection in Social Primates Combing Prosocial Emotional Capacities and Rational Calculus of Benefits & Costs

Morality and Sociality Distributive Justice Rational, Utilitarian Component Emotional, Fairness Component Similarity to Risk-sensitivity Larger Mean Rewards Reduced Variability of Reward AND “Calculated” in Different Brain Regions