Sacred values resist cost-benefit correction unlike ordinary preferences

Evidence

Progress in the fields of moral psychology and philosophy has mostly focused on universal Golden Rule principles of fairness and reciprocity emotionally supported by empathy and consolation (Baumard, André, and Sperber 2013; Van Slyke 2014). This is in contrast to whatDarwin referred to as the primary virtue of “morality … patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy” with which winning groups are better endowed in history’s spiraling competition for survival and dominance (Darwin 1871:163; cf. Greene 2009). Nevertheless, a smaller body of research (Baron and Spranca 1997; Fiske and Tetlock 2002; Tetlock 2003) suggests that people resist attempts to compromise sacred values no matter the cost to themselves or others. In the last decade or so, experimental work that goes beyond the morality of fairness and harm suggests that religious and transcendental beliefs consolidate “community” (Rozin et al. 1999), lead to “binding” (Graham et al. 2011), provide “unity motivation” (Ray and Fiske 2011), and mobilize parochial altruists, such as suicide bombers, to give their lives for the group (Ginges, Hansen, and Norenzayan 2009; cf. Atran 2003). … The devoted actor framework integrates two hitherto independent research programs in cognitive theory, sacred values Scott Atran is Directeur de Recherche of the Institut Jean Nicod, Ecole normale supérieure of the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS; Pavillon Jardin, 29 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France), Research Professor of the Gerald Ford School of Public Policy and InstituteforSocial ResearchattheUniversityofMichigan(satran@umich . — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor, 4

Categorization

• XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s devoted-actor research question on whether unconditional commitment to sacred values is resistant to rational/moral correction — this opening defines the framework as the integration point for sacred values theory. — connects to: Sacralized values resist material incentives and cause offer-driven concessions to backfire — Hammad Sheikh and Jeremy Ginges and Alin Coman and Scott Atran, Religion, group threat and sacred values, 5; Sacred values are measured by refusal to trade a preference for money — Hammad Sheikh and Jeremy Ginges and Alin Coman and Scott Atran, Religion, group threat and sacred values, 24; Sacred values resist tradeoffs because communities set them apart as nonfungible moral imperatives. — Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges, Sacred Values and Cultural Conflict, 4 (+14 more)
• QUESTION: The gap between Golden Rule empathy-based morality and Darwin’s group-binding virtues is precisely the tension the reader is probing about manufactured external enemies sustaining group solidarity.

Related

• Sacred values resist material incentives and are best countered only by rival sacred values. (similarity 0.88)
• Defending sacred values defies material cost-benefit prediction across decision contexts. (similarity 0.88)
• Sacred values resist tradeoffs because communities set them apart as nonfungible moral imperatives. (similarity 0.87)
• Sacred-value commitment produces costly sacrifice that lets weak groups beat stronger foes. (similarity 0.86)
• Sacred values are processed as unconditional rules, not cost-benefit calculations. (similarity 0.86)
• Sacred values engage deontic rule processing, not utilitarian cost-benefit calculation (similarity 0.86)
• Sacred-values-driven violence is insensitive to cost-benefit scope. (similarity 0.86)
• Sacralized values resist material incentives and cause offer-driven concessions to backfire (similarity 0.85)
• Sacred values are measured by refusal to trade a preference for money (similarity 0.85)
• Devoted actor behavior resists instrumental cost-benefit reasoning. (similarity 0.85)
• Material incentives for relinquishing sacred values backfire and harden resistance (similarity 0.84)
• Moral commitment to sacred values leverages movements lacking material means against stronger opposition. (similarity 0.83)
• Sacred values and identity fusion interact to drive sacrificial self-interest. (similarity 0.83)
• Sacred values resist trade-offs and override rational self-interest in decision making. (similarity 0.83)
• Offering material incentives for sacred-value compromises backfires and increases hostility (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Defending sacred values defies material cost-benefit prediction across decision contexts. #corroborates (0.92) — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor, 22
• Sacred values resist trade-offs and override rational self-interest in decision making. #corroborates (0.90) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 545
• Sacred values are inviolable in conviction yet flexible in application due to interpretive ambiguity #qualifies (0.85) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 549
• Genuine moral commitments resist monetary incentives to switch #exemplifies (0.82) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 303
• Material incentives harden sacred-value conflicts while symbolic gestures soften them #expands (0.78)
• Material incentives backfire on sacred values while symbolic recognition softens opposition. #expands (0.78) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 547
• Mere contemplation of sacred trade-offs produces opposite moral reactions for taboo versus tragic cases #expands (0.72) — Philip E. Tetlock, Thinking the unthinkable, 24