 Why is this question important? Turiel and other social domain theorists maintain that the moral/conventional task enables us to identify genuine moral judgments, and Haidt, Shweder, and Royzman agree, though each focuses on a somewhat different version of the  task.[21]  If that’s right, then determining the sort of transgressions that the task classifies as moral will enable us to characterize the content of moral judgments. So, for example, if Royzman and colleagues are right, then all moral judgments are about behaviors that are taken to be harmful, and normative judgments that are not about behaviors taken to be harmful are not moral  judgments.[22]  Moreover, if it’s true that the moral/conventional task picks out genuine moral judgments, this fact would be of enormous importance for psychologists and neuroscientists who want to study the processes underlying moral judgments and the factors that can influence them, since it gives these researchers a way of identifying the judgments they want to  study.[23]  And, as we’ll see in the following section, a test that enables us to identify genuine moral judgments can also be a valuable tool for philosophers, since a number of philosophical arguments turn on the claim that various categories of people—including children and psychopaths—can, or can’t, make genuine moral judgments.