preview

Sentimentalist Shaun Nichols And Jesse Prinz

Decent Essays
Open Document

If sentimentalists (like Jonathan Haidt, Shaun Nichols and Jesse Prinz) are correct about the causes of moral judgement, does this matter for moral philosophy? Does it answer any philosophical questions or rule out any philosophical positions? In understanding moral judgement one can argue that humans find their ability to make moral judgement from a rational or reasoned perspective, or from an emotional/empirical light. The argument of moral judgment in relation to emotion is explained well through the philosophy of sentimentalism. Specific scholars like Jonathan Haidt, Shaun Nichols and Jesse Prinz argue for the sentimentalist position which essentially states that emotions play an essential or constitutive role in moral judgement. Sentimentalism makes moral judgments essentially motivating because emotions, sentiments, or passions motivate us. …show more content…

In this scenario, the moral judgements being passed about the person who is stealing stems from emotions that the viewer feels. Therefore, the sentimentalist would argue that your judgement of the person stealing was invoked by your emotions toward the action that is taking place. In addition to emotion, cognitivism is a purely cognitive theory that takes emotions to be composed of cognitive assessments of a situation, which they typically call a judgment. Cognitivism explains the rationality of emotions, because if emotions are just like judgments or beliefs, they can be assessed in the same way as judgements or

Get Access