3. Producción

Browse

Settings

Language: search.filters.language.EnglishSubject: search.filters.subject.Morality

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    High Economic Inequality Is Linked to Greater Moralization
    (2023-03-30)
    Throughout the 21st century, economic inequality is predicted to increase as we face new challenges, from changes in the technological landscape to the growing climate crisis. It is crucial we understand how these changes in inequality may affect how people think and behave. We propose that economic inequality threatens the social fabric of society, in turn increasing moralization – that is, the greater tendency to employ or emphasize morality in everyday life – as an attempt to restore order and control. Using longitudinal data from X, formerly known as Twitter, our first study demonstrates that high economic inequality is associated with greater use of moral language online (e.g., the use of words such as ‘disgust’, ‘hurt’ and ‘respect’). Study 2 then examined data from 41 regions around the world, generally showing that higher inequality has a small association with harsher moral judgments of people’s everyday actions. Together these findings demonstrate that economic inequality is linked to the tendency to see the world through a moral lens.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Everyday norms have become more permissive over time and vary across cultures
    (2025-10-07)
    Every social situation that people encounter in their daily lives comes with a set of unwritten rules about what behavior is considered appropriate or inappropriate. These everyday norms can vary across societies: some societies may have more permissive norms in general or for certain behaviors, or for certain behaviors in specific situations. In a preregistered survey of 25,422 participants across 90 societies, we map societal differences in 150 everyday norms and show that they can be explained by how societies prioritize individualizing moral foundations such as care and liberty versus binding moral foundations such as purity. Specifically, societies with more individualistic morality tend to have more permissive norms in general (greater liberty) and especially for behaviors deemed vulgar (less purity), but they exhibit less permissive norms for behaviors perceived to have negative consequences in specific situations (greater care). By comparing our data with available data collected twenty years ago, we find a global pattern of change toward more permissive norms overall but less permissive norms for the most vulgar and inconsiderate behaviors. This study explains how social norms vary across behaviors, situations, societies, and time.
      1
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Against the Myth of Methodological Neutrality: The Philosophical-Political and Moral Assumptions of Law and Economics
    (Springer Nature, 2025-01-01)
    The 1990s were the Golden Age of Economic Analysis of Law (EAL) in Peru and other Latin American countries. It entered law faculties not only through the direct incorporation of law courses but also through the adoption of its teaching methodology in other courses. Simultaneously, EAL gained ground in Public Administration and, especially, in the newly established regulatory, consumer protection, and competition law bodies. Although the advocacy for EAL has diminished over time and some of its initial proposals have been moderated, its methodology continues to be used without acknowledging the underlying political and moral philosophical assumptions. EAL carries a set of assumptions that should not remain concealed under the guise of methodological neutrality. The pronounced economism of more traditional EAL trends, its tendency to consider individual preferences as the starting point for welfare valuations, its strong skepticism or ethical subjectivism, and its critical view of the regulatory or promotional role of the State—along with its consequentialist approach—prompt us to examine the theoretical assumptions influencing postulates from utilitarian or libertarian schools. This document aims to uncover and critically analyze these assumptions. Finally, some EAL theses have been evaluated within the context of a Constitutional State of Law and their potential compatibility with the principles it upholds.
      2