Moral obligation to help scales with recipient benefit relative to actor cost.

Evidence

The requirement that interaction should be mutually beneficial limits the forms of help that are likely to become standard social practices. If I can help a lot at a relatively low cost, I should. If, on the other hand, I can help only a little and at a high cost, I need not. In other words, the duty to help others depends on the costs (c) to the actor and benefits (b) to the recipient. As in standard reciprocity theories, individuals should help others only when, on average, b>c. Our obligations to help others are thus limited: we ought to help others only insofar as it is mutually advantageous to do so. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 82

Categorization

• XREF: This cost-benefit framing of moral duty connects to Baumard et al.’s mutualistic partner-choice model the reader is already using to analyze the fumi-e ritual. — connects to: Morality evolved as a propensity for fair cost-benefit sharing among cooperators. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 266; Duty-based moral cultures suppress cost-sensitivity in prosocial decisions. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 558; Incidental feelings like disgust and fatigue bias moral judgments indirectly by skewing cost evaluation. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 666 (+5 more)

Related

• Duty-based moral cultures suppress cost-sensitivity in prosocial decisions. (similarity 0.83)
• Mutualistic cost-benefit logic may explain transcendent moral sentiment. (similarity 0.82)
• Moral help extends only to where its cost stays below expected benefit. (similarity 0.81)
• Morality evolved as a propensity for fair cost-benefit sharing among cooperators. (similarity 0.81)
• Morality extends beyond fairness among strangers to relational obligations (similarity 0.80)
• Duty-based moralities subordinate the individual to maintenance of social norms. (similarity 0.80)
• Duty-based moral systems enforce asymmetric, non-proportional exchange favoring the powerful. (similarity 0.80)
• Humans hold systematic moral intuitions about proportionate sharing, helping, and punishment. (similarity 0.79)
• Morality is about fair cooperation, not maximizing welfare. (similarity 0.79)
• Morality evolved because fair partners were preferred in cooperative interactions (similarity 0.78)
• Moral conduct serves as a costly signal that pays in partner selection. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Morality evolved as a propensity for fair cost-benefit sharing among cooperators. #corroborates (0.85) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 266
• Group size determines the moral duty each person owes to another in need. #expands (0.82) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 102
• Mutualistic cost-benefit logic may explain transcendent moral sentiment. #corroborates (0.80) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 265
• Duty-based moral cultures suppress cost-sensitivity in prosocial decisions. #qualifies (0.78) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 558
• Incidental feelings like disgust and fatigue bias moral judgments indirectly by skewing cost evaluation. #complicates (0.75) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 666
• Duty-based moral systems enforce asymmetric, non-proportional exchange favoring the powerful. #qualifies (0.75) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 553
• The drone exemplifies the moral hazard of acting without bearing costs #exemplifies (0.72)