This man doesn't understand his role. He's a psychologist, but by the end of his article, he's making moral judgments. He has every right to make moral judgments, just as everyone else does, but he has no right to make moral judgments in the context of an article about the science of human emotion. He is inviting people to infer normative expertise from his factual expertise.
What am I suggesting? Either (1) the author should refrain from making moral judgments in the article or (2) he should caution his readers that his moral judgments have nothing to do with his scientific expertise. In other words, he should bend over backwards to prevent his readers from committing the fallacious appeal to authority.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 