The Dark Side of Morality: Group Polarization and Moral Epistemology

Abstract

This paper shows that philosophers and laypeople commonly conceptualize moral truths as discoverable through intuition, argument, or some other process. It then argues that three empirically-supported theories of group polarization suggest that this Discovery Model of morality likely plays a substantial role in causing polarization-a phenomenon known to produce a wide variety of disturbing social effects, including increasing prejudice, selfishness, divisiveness, mistrust, and violence. This paper then uses the same three empirical theories to argue that an alternative Negotiation Model of morality-according to which moral truths are instead created by negotiationpromises to not only mitigate polarization but perhaps even foster its opposite: a progressive willingness to "work across the aisle to settle contentious moral issues cooperatively. Finally, I outline avenues for further empirical and philosophical research. Most of us are accustomed to thinking of morality in a positive light. Morality, we say, is a matter of "doing good" and treating ourselves and each other "rightly." However, moral beliefs and discourse also plausibly play a role in group polarization, the tendency of social groups to divide into progressively more extreme factions, each of which regards other groups to be "wrong." 1 Group polarization often occurs along moral lines 2 , and is known to have many disturbing effects, increasing racial prejudice among the already moderately prejudiced 3 , leading group decisions to be more selfish, competitive, less trusting, and less altruistic than individual decisions 4 , eroding public trust 5 , leading juries to impose more 1