英文摘要 |
The theory of ethical decision-making (EDM) can be divided into two distinct paradigms, rationalism and empiricism, according to the degree of involvement of rationality. The issues about the most appropriate criteria of decision-making and judgment involve the debate between coherence metatheory and correspondence metatheory. Among them, coherence can be approximately understood as rationality, which is roughly equivalent to rationalism. Consistency can be approximately understood as correctness, which is roughly equivalent to empiricism. Those mean criteria of decision-making involve both cognition and environment. Correspondence and coherence are rival decision-making criteria, however there are some theories that attempt to fully explain human decision-making behavior, so an attempt must be made to accommodate both. This study believes that Social Judgment Theory and Heuristics and Biases have the characteristics as above. Since in Social Judgment Theory, correspondence and coherence can be distinguished clearly, unethical decision-making may come from individual inconsistency, that is, the bias of the cognitive system; it may also come from disagreement with objective standards, that is, the lack of knowledge of the real world. And if the decision-making uses Heuristics and Biases as the framework of ethical decision-making, the ethical decision-making bias formed by the defects of human mental structure can be explored. |