the moral dumbfounding literature is so cursed
This is a particular metamoral stance about what constitutes “acceptable” grounds for pushing a strong judgment, treated as an objective fact 😜😜 
They felt too many participants were choosing the “unacceptable” justification so they “solved” this by more firmly baking their metamoral position into the study questions 😜😜😜😜
Why are people so resistant to changing their mind about whether incest is wrong when a interviewer keeps saying “but it didn’t hurt anyone” while they try to complete their study participation credit for psych 101
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
