The aim of this paper is to critically examine the theory of linguistic analogy of morality by Mikhail, Harman, Hauser, and Dwyer through a comparison with emotional theory of morality by Haidt, Greene, and Prinz. The theory of linguistic analogy argues that moral judgments come from our unconscious moral grammar. Dual process theory by Greene, on the other hand, argues that moral judgments are based on our unconscious emotional response and conscious reasoning. We argue that the action analysis model in the theory of linguistic analogy may be able to reveal an important aspect of moral judgment, but that the theory of linguistic analogy should not underestimate the role of emotion in moral judgment.
展开▼
