Corpus and experimental vignette analyses reveal that discrimination functions as an evaluative moral judgment, suggesting it operates as a thick concept rather than a neutral description.
This article examines whether the folk concept of discrimination is inherently evaluative or purely descriptive. Two corpus analyses reveal a historical shift, with “discrimination” evolving from a neutral to an evaluative term. The results of a cancellability test show that denying the evaluative aspect of “discriminatory” leads to contradictions, indicating the communication of moral judgment by default. In a vignette study, we demonstrate that cases often cited as examples of descriptive discrimination are judged either non-discriminatory or morally wrongful. These results support the Moralized View, challenging the Descriptive View, and propose discrimination to be a thick concept blending descriptive and evaluative content.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2026 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: