Introduction

Important changes are occurring in the realms of philosophical ethics, moral psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. Although it used to be taboo to mix morality and science based primarily on the “is-ought distinction” and the “naturalistic fallacy,” there is now a burgeoning literature in the scientific study of morality. ¹ Investigators in this field, and philosophers interested in it, argue that the research itself has implications for the “oughts” of moral philosophy and theology. Joshua Greene has argued that fMRI research on brain activation during moral decision-making provides evidence for a utilitarian approach to philosophical ethics. ² Following in the footsteps of David Hume, Jonathan Haidt has influenced many with his theory that moral decision-making is primarily based on an intuitive and emotional evaluation of events and that rationality is an ad hoc justification of our emotional responses. ³ Owen Flanagan proposes a new science of ethics (eudaimonics) based on contemporary moral psychology and neuroscience, which will provide an authoritative and objective description of the factors that constitute human flourishing in a fully naturalized worldview. ⁴