The interdisciplinary approach to the empirical study of ethics and morality requires sensitivity to the correct interpretation of philosophical and scientific concepts. Although science is prone to sometimes challenging simplification of philosophical paradigms, neuroscientific findings provide a significant contribution to our understanding of mental moral processes. Both science and most philosophical traditions regard the human capacity for moral decision-making as an inherent and innate trait.
The currently most accepted dual-process theory aligns with our human experience, demonstrating that in life, we employ both rational, calculating approaches to moral decision-making as well as deontological, uncompromising approaches that recognize the absoluteness and necessity of moral norms.
We believe that the main shortcoming of current neuroscientific research is that the causes of certain types of moral decisions are not investigated in depth, that the definition of deontological or utilitarian decisions is superficial, and that the exact transition between utilitarian and deontological moral decision-making processes is not sufficiently understood.
The practical application of neuroscientific findings is possible, but particular caution is required due to the limited state of knowledge — especially when applying moral decision-making to artificial intelligence systems with specific decision-making powers (e.g. military industry, medical triage, autonomous vehicle autopilots in the event of accidents, etc.).
|
