It is widely acknowledged that, in the realm of factual judgments, people often rely on heuristics (quick, intuitive rules of thumb) that, though fast, frugal, and frequently accurate, may lead to systematic errors. Taking the traditional heuristics and biases approach as its point of departure, this seminar will explore the nature and the putatively corrupting influence of "moral heuristics" on everyday moral judgment as well as their implications for decision-making in the areas of public policy, medicine, and law. The topics will include (among others) the "doing/allowing effect" (a.k.a., the "omission bias"), the "moral luck" effect (a.k.a., the "outcome bias"), the preference for indirect harm effect (a.k.a., the "point of intervention bias"), the "natural is good" ("don't temper with nature") bias, and the affect-as-information bias. The class format will vary to encompass lectures, student-led discussions, video screenings, and in-class exercises. Student evaluations will be based on class participation, exercises, on-line "reaction blogs", and a final paper. Preference given to senior psych majors and senior PPE majors. Department permission required.