Reply to Dahl: Moral Content is Varied, and Premature Definitions Should Not Constrain It

References

• Altham, J. E. J. (1986). The legacy of Emotivism. In G. F. Macdonald & C. Wright (Eds.), Fact, science and morality: Essays on A.J. Ayer’s Language, Truth and Logic (pp. 275–288). Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. A., Ruisch, B. C., & Pizarro, D. A. (2020). Differentiating between different forms of moral obligations [Review of Differentiating between different forms of moral obligations]. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 43, e57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X19002589
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayer, A. J. (1952). Language, truth, and logic. Courier Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Beebe, J. R., & Sackris, D. (2016). Moral objectivism across the lifespan. Philosophical Psychology, 29(6), 912–929. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2016.1174843
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boisvert, D. R. (2008). Expressive-assertivism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 89(2), 169–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2008.00315.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, L. S., & Moss, D. (2020). Misunderstanding metaethics: Difficulties measuring folk objectivism and relativism. Diametros, 17(64), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.33392/diam.1495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caviola, L., Everett, J. A., & Faber, N. S. (2019). The moral standing of animals: Towards a psychology of speciesism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(6), 1011–1029. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000182
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finlay, S. (2005). Emotive theory of ethics. In Encyclopedia of philosophy. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Giner-Sorolla, R. (2012). Judging passions: Moral emotions in persons and groups. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, G. P., & Darley, J. M. (2008). The psychology of meta-ethics: exploring objectivism. Cognition, 106(3), 1339–1366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.06.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, G. P., & Darley, J. M. (2012). Why are some moral beliefs perceived to be more objective than others? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 250–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2011). Morality takes two: Dyadic morality and mind perception. In Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R., (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil (pp. 109–127). American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, K., MacCormack, J. K., Henry, T., Banks, E., Schein, C., Armstrong-Carter, E., Abrams, S., & Muscatell, K. A. (2022). The affective harm account (AHA) of moral judgment: Reconciling cognition and affect, dyadic morality and disgust, harm and purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(6), 1199–1222. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, K., Young, L., & Waytz, A. (2012). Mind perception is the essence of morality. Psychological Inquiry, 23(2), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, J. D. (2007). The biology of morality: Neuroscientists respond to Killen and Smetana. Human Development, Letters to the Editor. http://www.karger.com/hde/
   Google Scholar
• Gutierrez, R., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2007). Anger, disgust, and presumption of harm as reactions to taboo-breaking behaviors. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 7(4), 853–868. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.4.853
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Killen, M., & Smetana, J. (2015). Origins and development of morality. In M. Lamb & C. Garcia-Coll (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3). Social and emotional development (7th ed., pp. 701–749). Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Landy, J. F., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2018). Morality is personal. In K. Gray & J. Graham (Eds.), Atlas of moral psychology (pp. 121–133). Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J., Young, L., & McAuliffe, K. (2019). The psychology of partner choice. Retrieved from https://psyarxiv.com/weqhz/.
   Google Scholar
• Pizarro, D. A., & Tannenbaum, D. (2012). Bringing character back: How the motivation to evaluate character influences judgments of moral blame. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil (pp. 91–108). American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Rottman, J., & Young, L. (2015). Mechanisms of moral development. In J. Decety & T. Wheatley (Eds.), The moral brain: A multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 123–142). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rozin, P. (2001). Social psychology and science: Some lessons from Solomon Asch. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(1), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0501_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayre-McCord, G. (2021). Moral realism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/moral-realism/
   Google Scholar
• Schein, C., & Gray, K. (2018). The Theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personality and Social Psychology Review : An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 22(1), 32–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317698288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steel, D. (2004). Can a reductionist be a pluralist? Biology & Philosophy, 19(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIPH.0000013263.35121.5a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum, D., Uhlmann, E. L., & Diermeier, D. (2011). Moral signals, public outrage, and immaterial harms. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1249–1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yilmaz, O., & Bahçekapili, H. G. (2018). Meta-ethics and the mortality: Mortality salience leads people to adopt a less subjectivist morality. Cognition, 179, 171–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar