Moral realism as moral motivation: The impact of meta-ethics on everyday decision-making

People disagree about whether “moral facts” are objective facts like mathematical truths (moral realism) or simply products of the human mind (moral antirealism). What is the impact of different meta-ethical views on actual behavior? In Experiment 1, a street canvasser, soliciting donations for a charitable organization dedicated to helping impoverished children, primed passersby with realism or antirealism. Participants primed with realism were twice as likely to be donors, compared to control participants and participants primed with antirealism. In Experiment 2, online participants primed with realism as opposed to antirealism reported being willing to donate more money to a charity of their choice. Considering the existence of non-negotiable moral facts may have raised the stakes and motivated participants to behave better. These results therefore reveal the impact of meta-ethics on everyday decision-making: priming a belief in moral realism improved moral behavior.

► We primed moral realism, the belief that moral facts are like mathematical truths.
► Priming meta-ethical views (realism vs. antirealism) affected actual behavior.
► Priming a belief in moral realism increased charitable giving.
► Moral realism may raise the moral stakes and motivate moral behavior.