Title: “Exploring the Divide: Traditional Normative Ethics vs. Empirical Moral Psychology” Ethics has been a central topic of philosophical inquiry for centuries, with various normative frameworks such as deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics

Most of the ethical prescriiptions of normative moral philosophy tend to fall into one of the following three categories: deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics. Each of these categories puts emphasis on a different normative standard for judging what constitutes right and wrong actions.
By contrast, moral psychologists and behavioral economists such as Jonathan Haidt and Dan Ariely take a different approach, focusing not on a prescriiptive normative ethical framework but rather on the psychological foundations of moral intuition and on the limitations that our human frailty places on real-world honesty, decency, and ethical commitments.
In this context, write a short essay (minimum 400 words) on what you see as the most important differences between the traditional normative philosophical approaches and the more recent empirical approach of moral psychology when it comes to ethics. As part of your answer, also make sure that you discuss the implications of these differences.