Final answer:
The idea that moral judgments are purely reflections of automatic emotional responses is false. While emotions do influence our moral intuitions, reason and reflection also play significant roles in moral decision-making, integrating our innate social instincts with rational thought processes.
Step-by-step explanation:
The assertion that moral judgements primarily reflect people's initial and automatic emotional responses is false. According to the research in neuroethics and evolutionary biology, while our inner moral faculty indeed is influenced by emotional responses, reason and conscientious reflection play a critical role in shaping moral thinking. Carol Gilligan suggested that earlier researchers into morality had overlooked the importance of sympathetic reactions in moral situations, arguing that genuine impartiality in ethical reasoning requires some level of emotional involvement.
Furthermore, emotivism, as a branch of non-cognitivism advocated by A. J. Ayer, suggests that moral claims are expressions of emotional reactions rather than statements of belief that can be deemed true or false. Nonetheless, it is not solely emotions that guide our moral judgements, as other philosophical views and neuroscientific research suggest that moral cognition is a complex interplay between emotional intuitions and rational deliberations. For instance, philosopher W.D. Ross emphasizes the role of judgment in assessing the relevance of moral duties in a given situation.