Distinguishing two meanings of moral exclusion: exclusion from moral principles or principled harm-doing?
Distinguishing two meanings of moral exclusion: exclusion from moral principles or principled harm-doing?
The concept of “moral exclusion” has often been used to understand harm-doing. The present studies examined two, distinct meanings that have been ascribed to this concept. First, exclusion has sometimes been conceptualized as the belief that moral principles do not apply to a target person or group (e.g., exclusion from the application of justice principles). Second, the term has been used to refer to exclusion from positive treatment that is accorded to others, which the actors believe to be morally justified, though outside observers do not. Distinguishing between these two meanings can clarify the mechanisms underlying the relation between proposed antecedents to exclusion and harm-doing. In two experiments, we obtained evidence compatible with each of these conceptualizations of exclusion, as well as preliminary evidence that certain antecedents are more likely to lead to processes indicative of one or the other conceptualization. Our findings have practical implications for the reduction of harm-doing as well as for conflict that might arise in such attempts.
365-390
Olson, James M.
36409aae-7f99-43ef-aa1d-b3dcdc15ee7d
Cheung, Irene
0b9875f1-7140-4981-b56f-604c6640eb38
Conway, Paul
765aaaf9-173f-44cf-be9a-c8ffbb51e286
Hutchison, Jessica
8f1d17a6-943a-49c0-92be-c9451978cc7b
Hafer, Carolyn L.
f9c67565-a21c-4255-89bc-8197acfe7910
1 December 2011
Olson, James M.
36409aae-7f99-43ef-aa1d-b3dcdc15ee7d
Cheung, Irene
0b9875f1-7140-4981-b56f-604c6640eb38
Conway, Paul
765aaaf9-173f-44cf-be9a-c8ffbb51e286
Hutchison, Jessica
8f1d17a6-943a-49c0-92be-c9451978cc7b
Hafer, Carolyn L.
f9c67565-a21c-4255-89bc-8197acfe7910
Olson, James M., Cheung, Irene, Conway, Paul, Hutchison, Jessica and Hafer, Carolyn L.
(2011)
Distinguishing two meanings of moral exclusion: exclusion from moral principles or principled harm-doing?
Social Justice Research, 24 (4), .
(doi:10.1007/s11211-011-0141-8).
Abstract
The concept of “moral exclusion” has often been used to understand harm-doing. The present studies examined two, distinct meanings that have been ascribed to this concept. First, exclusion has sometimes been conceptualized as the belief that moral principles do not apply to a target person or group (e.g., exclusion from the application of justice principles). Second, the term has been used to refer to exclusion from positive treatment that is accorded to others, which the actors believe to be morally justified, though outside observers do not. Distinguishing between these two meanings can clarify the mechanisms underlying the relation between proposed antecedents to exclusion and harm-doing. In two experiments, we obtained evidence compatible with each of these conceptualizations of exclusion, as well as preliminary evidence that certain antecedents are more likely to lead to processes indicative of one or the other conceptualization. Our findings have practical implications for the reduction of harm-doing as well as for conflict that might arise in such attempts.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 1 December 2011
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 473421
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/473421
ISSN: 0885-7466
PURE UUID: 2059ef93-15c4-4783-bdcc-8df740e1f02f
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 17 Jan 2023 18:07
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 04:17
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
James M. Olson
Author:
Irene Cheung
Author:
Paul Conway
Author:
Jessica Hutchison
Author:
Carolyn L. Hafer
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics