In this paper I attempt a critical examination of the multi-system or dual-process view of moral judgment. This view aims to provide a psychological explanation of moral sensitivity, and in particular an explanation of conflicting moral sensitivities in dilemma cases such as the crying baby scenario. I argue that proponents of the multi-system view owe us a satisfactory account of the mechanisms underlying “consequentialist” responses to such scenarios. For one thing, the “cognitive” processes involved in consequentialist reasoning only seem to play a subserving role with respect to the final judgment (providing non-moral inputs to judgment, or exerting additional strength to override the immediate “deontological” response). In this sense, Greene and colleagues fail to identify a peculiar system of moral judgment specularly opposed to the affective “deontological” one. For another, Greene and colleagues’ work on the emotion-cognition dichotomy and the distinction between alarm-bell and currency emotions, though promising, still falls short of providing an adequate and consistent picture of the psychological mechanisms underlying “cognitive” evaluations and verdicts in dilemma scenarios. It is suggested that alongside further experimental work, proponents of this view should pay more attention to the conceptual underpinnings of their distinctions.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.


Cushman, F. A. & Greene, J. D. in press. ‘Finding faults: How moral dilemmas illuminate cognitive structure’. In J. Decety & J. Cacioppo (eds.) ‘The Handbook of Social Neuroscience’, 269–279. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cushman, F. A. & Young, A. W. 2009. 'The psychology of dilemmas and the philosophy of morality'. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12, no. 1: 9–24.

Cushman, F. A., Young, L. & Greene, J. 2010. ‘Multi-system Moral Psychology’. In J. Doris et al. (ed.) ‘The Oxford Handbook of Moral Psychology’, 46–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Greene, J. 2007. ‘The secret joke of Kant’s soul’. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.) ‘Moral Psychology (Vol. 3)’, 35–117. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Greene, J., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M. & Cohen, J. D. 2001. 'An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment'. Science 293: 2105–2108.

Greene, J., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J. M. & Cohen, J. D. 2004. 'The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment'. Neuron 44: 389–400.

Greene, J., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E. & Cohen, J. D. 2008. 'Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment'. Cognition 107: 1144–1154.
PMid:18158145 PMCid:2429958

Haidt, J. 2001. 'The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment'. Psychological Review 108: 814–834.

Miller, E.K. & Cohen, J.D. 2001. 'An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function'. Annual review of neuroscience 24, no. 1: 167–202.

Nichols, S. 2004. Sentimental Rules: On the Natural Foundations of Moral Judgment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.