 The studies just mentioned involve results that suggest that the content of intuitions varies along some normatively irrelevant dimension. Another source of evidence for the negative program draws on results regarding the cognitive mechanisms underlying or generating intuitions themselves. For example, studies that suggest that deontological intuitions are driven by emotional aversions to harming others have been used to argue that we ought to discount our deontological intuitions in favor of consequentialist principles—an idea discussed in more detail below (see Singer 2005; Wiegman 2017). In several experiments, Kneer and Machery (2019) show that judgments about moral luck result from the hindsight bias, i.e., the tendency to overestimate the probability that events known to have happened would happen. Thus, the probability that the unlucky event in a bad luck situation (e.g., a car accident involving a drunk driver) would happen is overestimated and the agent is judged to have been more negligent than her counterpart in a lucky situation (the drunk driver who did not get into any accident). This psychological account is then used to undermine the philosophical significance of intuitions about moral luck: If the asymmetry between good and back luck situations is due to a psychological bias, it should not bear on philosophical theorizing.