The problem (and the value) of radical moral disagreement

Journal article

Background

Contemporary societies increasingly face deep, persistent moral conflicts that resist resolution through conventional dialogue and democratic processes. While the conceptual features of moral disagreement have been extensively analysed in philosophy, there has been inadequate attention to the full complexity of moral disagreements as social and cultural phenomena. This paper introduces and analyses the concept of "radical moral disagreement" (RMD) as a phenomenon requiring urgent scholarly attention.

Methods

We conducted a conceptual analysis drawing on examples from contemporary moral conflicts including abortion debates, climate action, and pandemic responses. We identified and analysed seven defining characteristics of RMDs through theoretical examination and comparison with moral disagreements of other kinds. We developed a preliminary conceptual framework and outlined research questions spanning philosophy, history, sociology, psychology, and media studies.

Results

We identified seven key characteristics that distinguish RMDs from ordinary moral disagreements: collision of incompatible values requiring resolution e.g. in policy decisions, intransigence even under ideal conditions for resolution, emotional intensity that precludes compromise, progressive polarisation of positions, censure that limits public discourse, widespread social disruption, and contested epistemologies regarding evidence and expertise. These characteristics are primarily scalar in nature, suggesting RMDs exist along a continuum rather than as categorical states. We demonstrated that RMDs can arise around a wide range of issues when they become entangled with identity, power, and risk within specific social contexts.

Conclusions

RMDs represent complex moral and social phenomena that, while potentially destabilising social cohesion and democratic governance, may also catalyse moral progress when properly understood and navigated. The paper describes a theoretical foundation for studying RMDs and outlines relevant research questions requiring attention, spanning philosophy, history, sociology, psychology, and media studies. We propose that understanding RMDs is essential for developing effective approaches to coexistence in pluralistic yet polarised societies.

Authors: Lyreskog, D; Wilkinson, D; Atuire, C; Farrell, M; Francis, E

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: F1000Research
• Journal: Wellcome Open Research
• Volume: 10
• Article number: 495
• Publication date: 2025-09-09
• Acceptance date: 2026-01-16
• DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.24721.1
• EISSN: 2398-502X
• Language: English
• Keywords: moral epistemology; social cohesion; radical moral disagreement; democratic discourse; polarization; value conflict; ethical pluralism