Be mindful of your feelings

Speciesism as a moral illusion

Stijn Bruers, IARC, Esch, sept-2012

Overview

• What are moral illusions? Analogy with optical illusions

• How to detect moral illusion? • Do moral illusions exist? Yes: the trolley

problem• Can speciesism be a moral illusion?

Moral illusions

• Moral illusions are obstinate but incorrect intuitive judgments, comparable to the famous optical illusions.

• Method to detect them: – Coherentism (reflective equilibrium): mutual support

of intuitions and principles • Universalism: translating strong moral intuitions into

universalized ethical principles• Consistency

– Knowledge about moral psychological mechanisms

Coherentism

More than merely consistencyCrossword puzzle (white boxes = situations)

Universalism: words (=universal principles) instead of separate letters (=situational intuitions/rules)

Consistency: 1 letter per box

Optical illusions

1. Translation-invariance: measure sticks never change length when shifted in any direction

Optical illusions

1. Translation-invariance

2. Context-independence: influence of environment is arbitrary, artificial, fuzzy: never important

Optical illusions

1. Translation-invariance

2. Context-independence

3. Optical mechanism– 3D->2D perspective

adaptation (heuristics, D.Kahneman)

– Lateral inhibition (contrasts)

Coherent

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

A

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Action allowed: 90% of people

B

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Action allowed: 50% of people

C

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Action allowed: 10% of people

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

• A versus B and C: victim is not used as merely means

• A and B versus C: victim is not send to threat

What distinguishes B from C? The locus of intervention (at victim or at threat): “throwing bomb on a person or throwing person on a bomb?”

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Translation invariance• All individuals have– Right not to be killed– Right not to be used as merely means

• Moral status of individual is independent from locus of intervention

B C

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Context independence: erase irrelevant details

Moral illusions: the trolley problem

Psychological mechanism• Intervention myopia: “people who are

evaluating the morality of options may give victims in the background less weight than victims in the attentional spotlight.” (Waldmann & Dieterich, 2007)

• Moral heuristic: attribute substitution (Kahneman, 1982; Sunstein, 2005)

Can speciesism be a moral illusion?

• 5 arguments against speciesism (context independence)

• 5 arguments pro sentience (translation invariance)

• Essentialism and heuristics (psychological mechanism)

Against speciesism1. Who am I? I am: – white (population), – a Homo sapiens sapiens (subspecies), – a Homo sapiens (species), – a Homo (genus), – a great ape (family), – a Hominoid (super family), – a simian (infraorder), – a dry nosed primate (suborder), – a primate (order), – a placental (infra class), – a mammal (class), – a vertebrate (phylum), – an animal (kingdom)

Too arbitrary

Against speciesism

2. What is a human? What about – humanzee hybrids? – human-animal chimera? – ancestors (Homo habilis,

Australopithecus,…)? – genetically modified

humans,…?

Against speciesism

3. How is a species defined? Interbreeding and fertile offspring? – All species are connected

into one “temporal ring species”.

– Is the accidental death of intermediates relevant?

Cfr. context independence: speciesism is arbitrary, artificial, intrinsically fuzzy

Against speciesism

4. Genes and bodily properties are not relevant in situation A (e.g. racism), so should not be relevant in situation B (speciesism).

5. Speciesism is a violation of the merit principle

Sentience

1. Well-being and impartiality. Cfr. consequentialist (Singer) and contractualist (Rowlands) ethics: veil of ignorance

2. Empathy is a virtue to be developed (virtue ethics and ethics of care)

Cfr translation invariance, using empathy or the veil of ignorance to put yourself into the position of the other

Sentience

3. Rights ethics: the connection between feelings, interests and rights is not farfetched– Feelings detect interests (e.g.: pain -> bodily

integrity)– Rights protect interests

4. Consciousness is special (complex, vulnerable,…) and should be protected

5. Sentience is the only mental capacity that mentally disabled humans share with us

Essentialism

• The psychological explanation• Children and adults (from different cultures and

backgrounds) intuitively describe biological entities in essentialist terms. They think that biological categories have invisible essences (Gelman, 2003; Bloom, 2010)

• Studies about racism also demonstrates that racists think of races or ethnic groups as being essentialized natural groups (Gil-White, 2001)

• But essentialism is in contradiction with Darwinism and current biology

Speciesism as a moral illusionMoral status of animal

Moral status of human

(Morally) irrelevant properties

The ten arguments are coherent with each otherThere is no “essence” related to lines with inward pointing arrowheads

Speciesism as a moral heuristic

• Daniel Kahneman, Cass Sunstein• Attribute substitution• Target attribute: rationality, self-consciousness,…• Heuristic attribute: human• Based on – Pattern recognition skills: a human is easier to detect than a

rational being– Most humans have the target attribute

• Heuristic ‘misfires’ at mentally disabled humans• Should people keep this heuristic?