首页> 外文OA文献 >Negotiating Human Rights Abuses through the Moral Foundations Theory: An Attempt to Understand the Moral Motivations behind the Male Guardianship System in Saudi Arabia, Female Genital Modification, and Child Marriage.
【2h】

Negotiating Human Rights Abuses through the Moral Foundations Theory: An Attempt to Understand the Moral Motivations behind the Male Guardianship System in Saudi Arabia, Female Genital Modification, and Child Marriage.

机译:通过道德基础理论谈判侵犯人权:试图理解沙特阿拉伯男性监护制度,女性生殖器改造和童婚背后的道德动机。

摘要

The idea that there are universal human rights that can, and should, be enforced has been an increasingly wide-spread and popular belief, as well as a controversial one. Concerns of cultural relativism contrasted with stances of universalism spark an impassioned debate that permeates the dialogue of human rights today in all spheres: social, academic, and even those professional spheres that are tasked with creating and enforcing the laws regarding these issues. What does psychology have to say about this? After all, if it is a universal phenomenon, it must span across time, culture, and difference, and there must be trends in our human nature or similarities in our psychology that allow us to claim universality. One psychological theory, the Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) can help shed light on this issue. MFT holds that universally, as human beings, we share five grounds of moral foundations on which we make our judgments and take action: Care/Harm, Fairness/Cheating, Authority/Submissiveness, Sanctity/Degradation, and Loyalty/Betrayal. While we are all born with the capability to act and reason on these, our cultures shape us to emphasize different foundations and it is in that shift that conflict arises. What one group sees as right, and based in moral justification, another sees as wrong and as a violation of human rights. This paper attempts to use MFT to understand the moral foundations underlying three case studies of practices internationally seen as human rights abuses, female genital modification, child marriage, and male guardianship in Saudi Arabia, and provides suggestions for methods of effective intervention based in MFT.
机译:存在可以而且应该执行的普遍人权的观念已经越来越广泛地被人们所接受,并且是一种有争议的观念。对文化相对主义的关注与普遍主义的立场形成对比,引发了一场充满激情的辩论,这场辩论贯穿了当今所有领域的人权对话:社会,学术,甚至是负责制定和执行有关这些问题的法律的专业领域。心理学对此要说些什么?毕竟,如果这是一种普遍现象,它必须跨越时间,文化和差异,并且我们人类的天性或心理学上的相似之处必须允许我们主张普遍性。一种心理学理论,道德基础理论(MFT)可以帮助阐明这一问题。 MFT坚持认为,作为人类,我们共有五个道德基础,我们可以根据这些基础做出判断并采取行动:关怀/伤害,公平/作弊,权威/顺从,圣洁/侮辱和忠诚/背叛。虽然我们天生就有采取行动和推理的能力,但我们的文化使我们强调不同的基础,并且正是在这种转变中产生了冲突。一个群体认为是正确的,并基于道德理由,另一群体则认为是错误的,是对人权的侵犯。本文试图利用MFT来理解在国际上被视为沙特阿拉伯的侵犯人权,女性生殖器改造,童婚和男性监护权的三个案例研究的道德基础,并为基于MFT的有效干预方法提供建议。

著录项

  • 作者

    Baghdassarian Anoush;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号