Skip to content
Research Article Open access CC BY 4.0

An Ethical Review of Experimental Philosophy on Robin Hood Activities: A Comparative Analysis

Md. Ashraf Hossen

Asian Research Journal of Arts & Social Sciences · pp. 75–90 · Published 8 Sep 2022

10.9734/arjass/2022/v18i330344

Abstract

Experimental philosophy is a modern philosophical movement that uses systematic inquiry to emphasize philosophy. This means that psychology-related methods (experiments, statistical analysis, studies on development, reaction time studies, patient studies,) are generally used by experimental philosophers, although generally used to solve philosophical problems. Additionally, the primary goal of experimental philosophy is to set the public's view against the philosopher's view of the subject being studied. In this essay, I discuss the difference between philosophers and non-philosophers regarding the ethics of Robin Hood's activity. The first goal of this study is to determine what common people think about the morality of Robin Hood's deeds. 2. To identify the contrasts between philosophers and common people. In this study, an online survey method was employed. By contrasting the views of philosophers and common people on the issue of whether Robin Hood's activities are moral, experimental philosophy highlights the significance of non-philosophers opinions in philosophy. Let's examine Robin Hood's philosophy and experimental philosophy separately before getting into the specifics.

Robinhood activities ethics experimental philosophy people intuitions moral judgment utilitarianism

References (29)

  1. 1 Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions [DOI]
  2. 2 Knowledge in an Uncertain World [DOI]
  3. 3 Philosophy without Intuitions [DOI]
  4. 4 Building Better Beings [DOI]
  5. 5 Culpable causation. [DOI]
  6. 6 Causation, Norm Violation, and Culpable Control [DOI]
  7. 7 The free will inventory: Measuring beliefs about agency and responsibility [DOI]
  8. 8 Bringing Moral Responsibility Down to Earth [DOI]
  9. 9 Intentional action in ordinary language: core concept or pragmatic understanding? [DOI]
  10. 10 On intuitional stability: The clear, the strong, and the paradigmatic [DOI]
  11. 11 Experimental Philosophy [DOI]
  12. 12 Persistent bias in expert judgments about free will and moral responsibility: A test of the expertise defense [DOI]
  13. 13 Morality constrains the default representation of what is possible [DOI]
  14. 14 Experimental Philosophy [DOI]
  15. 15 Morality in high definition: Emotion differentiation calibrates the influence of incidental disgust on moral judgments [DOI]
  16. 16 Do men and women have different philosophical intuitions? Further data [DOI]
  17. 17 The Free-Will Intuitions Scale and the question of natural compatibilism [DOI]
  18. 18 Do framing effects make moral intuitions unreliable? [DOI]
  19. 19 Incompatibilism and “Bypassed” Agency [DOI]
  20. 20 Practical Interests, Relevant Alternatives, and Knowledge Attributions: an Empirical Study [DOI]
  21. 21 VARIATIONS IN ETHICAL INTUITIONS [DOI]
  22. 22 Why compatibilist intuitions are not mistaken: A reply to Feltz and Millan [DOI]
  23. 23 Moral asymmetries and the semantics of "many" [DOI]
  24. 24 Laypersons’ Beliefs and Intuitions About Free Will and Determinism [DOI]
  25. 25 Free Will Skepticism and Bypassing
  26. 26 How Do Philosophers Evaluate Natural Theological Arguments? An Experimental Philosophical Investigation [DOI]
  27. 27 Knowledge, Naturalism, and Cognitive Ethology: Kornblith’s Knowledge and its Place in Nature [DOI]
  28. 28 Robin Hood Revisited [DOI]
  29. 29 Early Modern Experimental Philosophy [DOI]

Cited by 0

No indexed citations yet.

Related research

Article metrics

Real usage data collected on this platform.

0

Page views

0

PDF downloads

0

Outbound clicks

0

Citations

Views by country

Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".

No views recorded yet.

Traffic sources

Referring site, by host.

No traffic recorded yet.

Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.