Publications
Publications
- May 2017
- American Economic Review
Sacred versus Pseudo-sacred Values: How People Cope with Taboo Trade-Offs
By: Philip E. Tetlock, Barbara A. Mellers and J. Peter Scoblic
Abstract
Psychologists have documented widespread public deference to "sacred values" that communities, formally or informally, exempt from tradeoffs with secular limits, like money. This work has, however, been largely confined to low-stakes settings. As the stakes rise, deference must decline because people can't write blank checks for every "sacred" cause. Shadow pricing is inevitable which sets the stage for political blame-games of varying sophistication. In a rational world, citizens would accept the necessity of such tradeoffs, but the attraction to moral absolutes is strong--perhaps even essential for social cohesion.
Keywords
Citation
Tetlock, Philip E., Barbara A. Mellers, and J. Peter Scoblic. "Sacred versus Pseudo-sacred Values: How People Cope with Taboo Trade-Offs." American Economic Review 107, no. 5 (May 2017): 96–99.