Exposure to moral relativism compromises moral behavior
- Author(s): Rai, TS
- Holyoak, KJ
- et al.
Published Web Locationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.06.008
Across two studies we investigated the relationship between moral relativism versus absolutism and moral behavior. In Experiment 1, we found that participants who read a relativist argument for tolerating female genital mutilation were more likely to cheat to win an incentivized raffle than participants who read an absolutist argument against female genital mutilation, or those in a control condition. In Experiment 2, participants who read a definition of morality phrased in absolutist terms expressed less willingness to engage in petty theft than those who read a definition of morality phrased in relativist terms, or those in a control condition. Experiment 2 also provided evidence that effects were not due to absolutist arguments signaling that fewer behaviors are morally permissible, nor to relativist arguments defending more disagreeable moral positions. Rather, the content of the philosophical positions themselves-the fact that relativism describes morality as subjective and culturally-historically contingent, whereas absolutism describes morality as objective and universal-makes individuals more likely to engage in immoral behaviors when exposed to moral relativism compared to moral absolutism. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.
Many UC-authored scholarly publications are freely available on this site because of the UC Academic Senate's Open Access Policy. Let us know how this access is important for you.