Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development01:19

Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development

Kohlberg's theory of moral development uses the Heinz dilemma — a thought experiment in which a man, Heinz, must decide whether to steal an unaffordable drug to save his dying wife — to illustrate the evolution of moral reasoning. This framework, divided into three levels with two stages, highlights how individuals' understanding of right and wrong becomes increasingly complex.
Pre-Conventional Level
At the pre-conventional level, morality is primarily driven by personal consequences. In Stage...
In- and Out-Groups01:31

In- and Out-Groups

People all belong to a gender, race, age, and social economic group. These groups provide a powerful source of our identity and self-esteem (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and serve as our in-groups. An in-group is a group that we identify with or see ourselves as belonging to.
Motivational Bias01:25

Motivational Bias

Cognitive bias results from limitations in thinking and information processing, leading to systematic errors in judgment. Conversely, motivational bias stems from personal desires or emotions, causing distortions in perception to align with self-interest. Motivational bias influences how individuals perceive and attribute causes to events, often shaped by personal needs, goals, and self-esteem preservation. This bias can distort judgment, leading to inaccurate assessments of success, failure,...
Social Proof00:52

Social Proof

Social proof is a form of persuasion based on comparison and conformity. People compare their behavior and actions to what others are doing and will change to conform to do what their peers do.
Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other01:20

Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other

According to George Herbert Mead, as children progress beyond the game stage, they develop a more comprehensive understanding of societal rules and norms. This cognitive and social development enables them to internalize the expectations of the broader community, refining their ability to regulate behavior.Consistent participation in organized activities is crucial in helping children recognize that their actions are not isolated but contribute to a more significant, interconnected group effort.
Groupthink01:34

Groupthink

When in group settings, we are often influenced by the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors around us. Groupthink is another phenomenon of conformity where modification of the opinions of members in a group aligns with what they believe is the group consensus (Janis, 1972). In such situations, the group often takes action that individuals would not perform outside the group setting because groups make more extreme decisions than individuals do. Moreover, groupthink can hinder opposing trains of...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Kukla's argument against common morality as a set of precepts.

Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees·2013
Same author

A few more comments on common morality, noting some points of agreement.

Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees·2013
Same author

The OHRP and SUPPORT--another view.

The New England journal of medicine·2013
Same author

Prescribing for co-workers: practices and attitudes of faculty and residents.

The Journal of clinical ethics·2013
Same author

Reply to Marquis: how things stand with the 'future like ours' argument.

Journal of medical ethics·2012
Same author

How should risks and benefits be balanced in research involving pregnant women and fetuses?

IRB·2011
Same journal

The mechanics of epistemic justice: a response to Toding et al. and their application of my epistemic approach to dignity.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Flourishing within vulnerability: on human fragility and the conditions for a habitable environment.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Camouflaging in autism as a dual-normative construct: a philosophical critique.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

The last low whispers revisited: a reply to Sulmasy on palliative sedation.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Epistemic justice and the moral status of the dead.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Practical wisdom in medicine: defending a multidimensional, integrated view of an indispensable virtue.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 6, 2026

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

Justifying group-specific common morality.

Carson Strong1

  • 1Department of Human Values and Ethics, College of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 910 Madison Avenue, Suite 311-313, Memphis, TN 38163, USA. cstrong@utmem.edu

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
|April 9, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study argues that universal common morality is not descriptively supported. However, a group-specific common morality, particularly country-specific, is plausible and can inform bioethics.

More Related Videos

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
06:42

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 6, 2026

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
06:42

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Moral Philosophy
  • Bioethics
  • Cultural Studies

Background:

  • The concept of a universal common morality faces challenges regarding its cross-cultural and historical applicability.
  • Discussions on common morality often conflate descriptive claims (what morality exists) with normative claims (what morality ought to exist).

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically examine the arguments for and against a universal common morality.
  • To differentiate between descriptive and normative claims regarding common morality.
  • To propose and defend the concept of group-specific common morality, including country-specific versions.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of philosophical arguments concerning universal and group-specific morality.
  • Distinction between descriptive and normative ethical claims.
  • Conceptual exploration of country-specific common morality.

Main Results:

  • The claim for a descriptively universal common morality lacks sufficient defense.
  • A normative common morality does not necessitate universalism.
  • Descriptive and normative claims for country-specific common moralities are plausible.

Conclusions:

  • Universal common morality is not descriptively tenable.
  • Normative common morality can be group-specific, not necessarily universal.
  • Country-specific common moralities offer a viable foundation for national bioethics frameworks.