Difference between revisions of "OCT 5"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "==11: OCT 5 (Heavy reading day)== ===Assigned=== :*Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality" (17) :*Henrich, Joe. Prelude and Chapter 1, "WEIRD Psychology" from ''The WEIRDE...")
 
m
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==11: OCT 5 (Heavy reading day)==
+
==12: OCT 5==
  
 
===Assigned===
 
===Assigned===
  
:*Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality" (17)
+
:*Hibbing, John R., Kevin Smith, and John R. Alford, ''Predisposed'', Chapter 2, "Getting Into Bedrock with Politics". (26)
:*Henrich, Joe. Prelude and Chapter 1, "WEIRD Psychology" from ''The WEIRDEST People in the World'' (1-37)
 
  
===In-class Topics===
+
===Hibbing, et. al. ''Predisposed'' Chapter 2===
  
:*Method Point: Adding the "Cultural Frame"
+
:*Begins with allegations that universities are left-biased.  Points out counterexample in Russell.  Students can be more radical than even lefty faculty. City college story.  34ff: ironically its most lasting intellectual movement was neoconservatism.
:*The Paradox of Moral Experience
+
 +
::*Point of story:
 +
:::*1) Colleges' political orientations have little predictable effect on their students. (Think about this in relationship to Gonzaga.)
 +
:::*2) Politics and political beliefs are fungible, change dep on time and place.  No discussions these days of Stalin-Trotskyism.  Or ADA, which conservatisms opposed. True, issues and labels change, but, acc to Hibbing et al, humans vary in orientation, politics is, at its core, dealing with a constant problem, invariable.  Found in "bedrock social dilemmas" (BSDs). 
  
===Initial debrief on SW1===
+
:*Back to Aristotle
 +
::* "Man" is by nature political.  -- Politics deep in our nature. But A also speculated that town life, while natural, was not original.  An achievement of sorts, not wholly natural. 
 +
::*Evidence: GWAS (Gene wide association studies) studies suggest more influence from gene difference on political orientation than economic prefs.
 +
::*Politics and Mating: Political orientation is one of the top correlate predicting mate selection.  (39). We do look for diff personality traits in a partner, but not when it comes to pol orientation (or drinking behavior and religion!).  Considers two objections: mates become similar over time or the correlation is an effect of the selection pool "social homogamy"  But no sign of convergence of orientation over time of relationship (but views on gender roles tend to diverge! ''Nota bene''!).  Studies controlling for demographic factors undermine second objection. 
  
:*I will be sharing scoring and comments from SW1 this afternoon. We will then start the final stage of the assignment: the back-evaluation.
+
::*Politics is connected to willingness to punish political difference. (Which helps explain our sensitivity to "political prosecution".) 40-41.
  
:*Some patterns:
+
:*Differences Galore?
::*High and low scoring writing follow the rubric.  Still a good guide for you.
+
::*Need to separate issues, labels, and bedrock social dilemmas.
::*A surprising number of authors neglected any mention of Sapolsky.   
+
::*'''Issues''' arise naturally in the society, but can also be "promoted" by actors and parties.   
::*Lower scoring writing:
+
::*'''Labels''' distinguish groups contesting issues.  They organize approaches to issues by orientation.  Practically, political parties do this, but also media. Labels and parties shift over time, presumably as they compete for voters (or, "package them".
:::*Tended to organize content by Haidt's chapters.  
+
::*”Labels are simply the vocabulary employed to describe the reasonably systematic orientations toward issues that float around a polity at a given time.” 41
:::*Less likely to follow protocol for research.
+
::*Label "liberal" - today means mildly libertarian, but liberal economic policy isn't libertarian at all (involves income transfer). Mentions historical origin of Left/Right. Generally, liberals are more about equality and tolerance, but communists can be authoritarian. Generally, conservatives focus on authority, hierarchy, and order (more than libs), but they often defend rights in ways that make common cause with liberals (protections from the gov't, free speech).
:::*More likely not to use any paragraph structure.
 
:::*Less prompt savvy.
 
::*Higher scoring writing:
 
:::*Choose some of the most relevant research.
 
:::*Reported more research, using at least some of the protocol.
 
  
:*Some grade norming issues. From my assessment, we didn't quite norm of 5's as "good job".  More like 6s.  I dropped more 10s than normal.
+
::*Conclusion they are resisting: (43): political beliefs are so multidimensional and variable that left and right don't have any stable meaning. '''Ideology is fluid, but there are universals''' (regarding BSDs).  
  
:*My goal: Continue to support authors writing 13-14, but very interested in raising the 8s!  
+
:*Commonality Reigns! Political Universals
:*Advice: The learning from SW1 isn't overYou have access to dozens of examples of scored and commented writing nowMake some comparisonsPick up some tips'''Come in to discuss your writing!'''
+
::*Bedrock social dilemmas (BSD): "core preferences about the organization, structure, and conduct of mass social life" 44
 +
::*BSDS: leadership, decision-making, resource distribution, punishment, protection, and orientation to tradition vs change.
 +
::*Questions associated with BSDs: How should we make decisions? What rules to follow? What do we do with rule violators? Should we try something new or stick with tradition?
 +
::*Predispositions defined: political orientations that are biologically instantiated. these differences are more stable than labels and issues.
 +
::*Example of conceptual framework at work: attitudes toward military interventiontells the story of changing conservative views of intervention, Lindbergh and the AFCLate 20th century conservatives were interventionists (commie domino theory), but early century conservatives were isolationistsThese changes make sense in relation to the bedrock challenge of dealing with external threatsShifting analysis of threats can change policy 180 degrees.  48: Pearl Harbor!
 +
::*Example 2: Conservatives softening  on immigration after electoral defeats in 2012. Early politics leading to DACA?  Conservatives still consistently more suspicious of out groups.  (heightened threat detection)
 +
::*Note the possibilities: Same view of issue, different ideologies expressing different orientations (Vietnam).  Same orientation expressed in different ideologies and different positions on issues (Conservative isolationism before/after Pearl Harbor). 
  
 +
::*Key point in the theory is that these "bedrock dilemmas" occur once cities become too large for people to know each other.  Interesting point: We had to use principles to express ourselves about these BSDs because we couldn't influence each other directly.
  
===Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality"===
+
:*"Society works best when..."
 
+
::*Bold thesis: looking for universality as: consistent differences across time and culture.  Example: ''Optimates'' and ''populares'' in Ancient Greece.   
:*WEIRD morality is the morality of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic cultures
+
::*Left and right have deep associationsleft handed suspect.
::*just as likely to be bothered by taboo violations, but more likely to set aside feelings of disgust and allow violations
+
::*History of research on connection between core preferences on leadership, defense, punishment of norm violators, devotion to traditional behavioral standards, distribution of resources. Laponce.  Haidt's MFT.   
::*only group with majority allowing chicken story violation.
+
::*Look at the 4BSDs in relations to Haidt's MFT:  
::*"the weirder you are the more likely you are to see the world in terms of separate objects, rather than relationships" (Analytic vs. Holistic in Henrich C1) "sociocentric" moralities vs. individualistic moralities; Enlightenment moralities of Kant and Mill are rationalist, individualist, and universalist.
+
:::*1. Adherence to tradition.  (Neophobia/philia)  
::*survey data on East/West differences in sentence completion: "I am..." (also in Henrich C1)
+
:::*2. Treatment of outgroups and rule breakers (cooperation, defection, threat)  (C, F, L)
::*framed-line task 97
+
:::*3. Role of group/individual (freeriding, self-interest, social commitment) (F, L)
:*Kantian and Millian ethical thought is rationalist, rule based, and universalist.  Just the ethical theory you would expect from the culture.  (Hmm. So now we discover that some of our "tools" are culturally specific.  Is this a problem?)
+
:::*4. Authority and Leadership (Legitimate authority and hierarchy) (A)
 
+
::*"Society works best Index2007 research "Predicted issue attitudes, ideological self-placement, and party identification with astonishing accuracy" .6 correlation. Pursuing international research with SWBNote this is "synchronous" research. A snapshot of both BSD and Issue orientation.   We will see similar empirical support for the MFT in Haidt, C8.
:*A 3 channel moral matrix - or, How should we theorize (locate) our view in the larger world of human moralities?
 
:*Schweder's anthropology: ethics of autonomy, community, divinity 99-100 - gloss each...
 
::*claims Schweder's theory predicts responses on taboo violation tests, is descriptively accurate.
 
::*ethic of divinity: body as temple vs. playground. (Note: not religiosity or even spirituality, but often is.) Vegetarian eating is "clean" eating, not just because of fewer pathogens.
 
::*Vertical dimension to values.  Explains reactions to flag desecration, piss Christ, thought exp: desecration of liberal icons.  (Note connection to contemporary conflicts, such as the Charlie Hebdot massacre.)
 
 
 
:*Making Sense of Moral/Cultural Difference
 
:*'''Haidt's Bhubaneswar experience''': diverse (intense) continua of moral values related to purity. (opposite of disgust). Confusing at first, but notice that he started to like his hosts (elephant) and then started to think about how their values might workStop and think about how a mind might create this.  Detail about airline passenger.
 
:*Theorizing with Paul Rozin on the right model for thinking about moral foundations: "Our theory, in brief" (103) - most societies see a vertical dimension in social spaceman who robs a bank vs. child sex traffickers
 
:*American politics often about sense of "sacrilege", not just about defining rights (autonomy).  Not just harm, but types of moral disgust.
 
:*'''Stepping out of the Matrix''':  H's metaphor for seeing his own cultural moral values as more "contingent" than before, when it felt like the natural advocacy of what seem true and right.  Reports growing self awareness of liberal orientation of intellectual culture in relation to Schweder's view.  Social conservatives made more sense to him after studying in India.
 
 
 
===Small Group Discussion===
 
 
 
:* Haidt introduces the “Cultural Frame” with the move metaphor of “The Matrix”.  Cultures include family and kin, cultures of origin, and national cultures.
 
:*'''Questions:'''Does it make sense to talk about "stepping out of a matrix"?  Perhaps you have had this experience within US culture as you moved from family culture or the culture of your hometown to collegeOr from international travel. Do you have a parallel story to Haidt's? Share with each other some details of the “cultural frames” you inhabit.
 
 
 
===Henrich, "WEIRD Psychology," from The Weirdest People on Earth"===
 
 
 
:*Prelude: Your Brain has been modified by culture
 
 
 
::*Example of how reading alters brains.  "Literacy thus provides an example of how culture can change people biologically independent of any genetic differences."
 
::*Literacy in Western Europe - Protestantism requires literacy"sola scriptura"
 
::*Showing causal relationship with "quasi-experimental" method  "For every 100 km traveled from Wittenberg, percentage of Protestants dropped 10%. Like a "dosage".
 
::*Also seen in literacy rates of Catholic and Prot missionaries to Africa: Protestant missions produce more literacy. 
 
:*Point of his book, “The WEIRDEST People in the World,”: WEIRD psychology is the result of a set of cultural adaptations promoted by the Christian church.
 
 
 
:*Chapter 1: WEIRD Psychology
 
 
 
:*WEIRD: individualistic, self-obsessed, control-oriented, nonconformist, and analytical.  Tends to look for universal categories, analytic.  patient, takes plesure in hard work, sticks to imparial rules or principles, guilt vs. shame
 
 
 
:*Major Claim: WEIRD psychology is a product of 600-1000 years of the Catholic Church's modification of our psychology through its "Marriage and Family Plan".  
 
 
 
:*Research
 
::*"Who Am I? task by culture 25
 
::*Mapping the Individualism Complex.
 
:::*Examples of more kin based cutlures on MR: Might be obligated to avenge a murder, prohibited from marrying a stranger.  Contrast on p. 28In the Ind. World "everyone is shopping for better relationships." (Hofstede's scale for measuring ind/socio)
 
:::*Note Caveats to this research on p. 31. 
 
 
 
::*Cultivating the WEIRD self
 
:::*Research showing Inds. cultivate "consistency across relationships" vs. kin-based "consistency within relationships.
 
:::*Dispositionalism - seeing people's behavior as anchored impersonal traits that influence actions across contexts. The Fundamental Attribution Error (33) is a bias of WEIRD people.  
 
:::*Guilt vs. Shame
 
:::*Conformity - Solom Asch's experiments in which confederates give incorrect answers to test conformity.
 
:::*"Discounting" as a measure of patience
 
:::*Impersonal Honesty -- UN Diplomats research, Impersonal Honesty Game (results at p. 44)
 
:::*Universalism and Non-relationalism -- Passengers Dilemma
 
:::*Trusting Strangers - GTQ instrument.  impersonal trust vs. trust in relationship based networks.
 
:::*Impersonal prosociality - correlated with national wealth, better government, less corruption, faster innovation. 
 
:::*Obsessed with intentions -- Bob/Rob and Andy story.  Barrett and Laurence research.  Indep. research on Japanese (less focused on intentions)
 
:::*Analytic vs. Holistic thinking.  Triad Task.  abstract rule-based vs. functional relationship.  Possible that even some of the Mapuche's "analytic" answers had holistic reasoning.  pig/dog pig/husks.  Also, attention and memory studies: East Asians remember background/context better that WEIRD people.  Americans track the center of attention. 
 
 
 
::*WEIRD also have great endowment effect, overestimate our talents, self-enhance, enjoy making choices.
 
::*Summary table on p. 56.  See bot of p. 57 for a look ahead at the argument he is making about the cultural influence of the Catholic Church.
 
 
 
===Point on Method in the Course===
 
 
 
:*A way of framing the research we are reviewing:  Three Frames:
 
::*1. '''The Individual Frame'''  Differences and Structures in our individual psychology for expression moral behaviors. Intuitions vs. Reasoning.  Life experiences.
 
::*2. '''The Group/Political Frame''' How our psychology makes us groupish.  Physio-politics.
 
::*3. '''The Cultural Frame''' Differences between cultures, including, for example the remarkable emergence of WEIRD culture.  (Joe Henrich, The Weirdest People on Earth) literacy and the brain, Christianity as a driver of culture, catholic church as driver of cultural ideas (the Marriage and Family Plan, impersonal honesty and sociality, etc.)
 
 
 
:*Big question from today: How does the cultural frame complicate ethics?
 
 
 
==='''Paradox of Moral Experience'''===
 
::*The Paradox of Moral Experience involves a conflict between two "standpoints" for seeing values. 1 and 2 below:
 
 
 
::*1. We '''experience our morality''' as beliefs we hold true. They are compelling to us in a way that leads us to expect others to find them compelling. We can be surprised or frustrated that others do not see our reasons as compellingFrom this standpoint, our moral truths feel necessary rather than contingent. 
 
:::*Examples: "What's wrong with those (lib/con)s, don't they see X/Y?" "How can anyone think it's ok to act like that?")
 
 
 
::*2. But, when we '''study morality as a functional system''' that integrates people who see and interpret the world differently, it is less surprising that we often do not find each others' reasoning or choices compelling. We can also see how groups of people might develop "values cultures" that diverge on entire sets of values (or, "cooperative toolkits") while still solving some of the same underlying problems that all human societies face.  From this standpoint, the functions of morality are universal, but the specific strategies that individuals and cultures take seem very contingent. But, knowing this, why don’t we experience our own values as contingent?
 
 
 
:::*Examples: Sociocentric / Individualist cultures, Specific histories that groups experience (Us vs. Europe vs. ...)
 
::*Roughly, 1 is normal experience, when you are "in your head".  2 reflects an attempt, through knowledge, to get a "third person" experience, to "get out of your head".
 

Latest revision as of 17:01, 5 October 2023

12: OCT 5

Assigned

  • Hibbing, John R., Kevin Smith, and John R. Alford, Predisposed, Chapter 2, "Getting Into Bedrock with Politics". (26)

Hibbing, et. al. Predisposed Chapter 2

  • Begins with allegations that universities are left-biased. Points out counterexample in Russell. Students can be more radical than even lefty faculty. City college story. 34ff: ironically its most lasting intellectual movement was neoconservatism.
  • Point of story:
  • 1) Colleges' political orientations have little predictable effect on their students. (Think about this in relationship to Gonzaga.)
  • 2) Politics and political beliefs are fungible, change dep on time and place. No discussions these days of Stalin-Trotskyism. Or ADA, which conservatisms opposed. True, issues and labels change, but, acc to Hibbing et al, humans vary in orientation, politics is, at its core, dealing with a constant problem, invariable. Found in "bedrock social dilemmas" (BSDs).
  • Back to Aristotle
  • "Man" is by nature political. -- Politics deep in our nature. But A also speculated that town life, while natural, was not original. An achievement of sorts, not wholly natural.
  • Evidence: GWAS (Gene wide association studies) studies suggest more influence from gene difference on political orientation than economic prefs.
  • Politics and Mating: Political orientation is one of the top correlate predicting mate selection. (39). We do look for diff personality traits in a partner, but not when it comes to pol orientation (or drinking behavior and religion!). Considers two objections: mates become similar over time or the correlation is an effect of the selection pool "social homogamy" But no sign of convergence of orientation over time of relationship (but views on gender roles tend to diverge! Nota bene!). Studies controlling for demographic factors undermine second objection.
  • Politics is connected to willingness to punish political difference. (Which helps explain our sensitivity to "political prosecution".) 40-41.
  • Differences Galore?
  • Need to separate issues, labels, and bedrock social dilemmas.
  • Issues arise naturally in the society, but can also be "promoted" by actors and parties.
  • Labels distinguish groups contesting issues. They organize approaches to issues by orientation. Practically, political parties do this, but also media. Labels and parties shift over time, presumably as they compete for voters (or, "package them".)
  • ”Labels are simply the vocabulary employed to describe the reasonably systematic orientations toward issues that float around a polity at a given time.” 41
  • Label "liberal" - today means mildly libertarian, but liberal economic policy isn't libertarian at all (involves income transfer). Mentions historical origin of Left/Right. Generally, liberals are more about equality and tolerance, but communists can be authoritarian. Generally, conservatives focus on authority, hierarchy, and order (more than libs), but they often defend rights in ways that make common cause with liberals (protections from the gov't, free speech).
  • Conclusion they are resisting: (43): political beliefs are so multidimensional and variable that left and right don't have any stable meaning. Ideology is fluid, but there are universals (regarding BSDs).
  • Commonality Reigns! Political Universals
  • Bedrock social dilemmas (BSD): "core preferences about the organization, structure, and conduct of mass social life" 44
  • BSDS: leadership, decision-making, resource distribution, punishment, protection, and orientation to tradition vs change.
  • Questions associated with BSDs: How should we make decisions? What rules to follow? What do we do with rule violators? Should we try something new or stick with tradition?
  • Predispositions defined: political orientations that are biologically instantiated. these differences are more stable than labels and issues.
  • Example of conceptual framework at work: attitudes toward military intervention. tells the story of changing conservative views of intervention, Lindbergh and the AFC. Late 20th century conservatives were interventionists (commie domino theory), but early century conservatives were isolationists. These changes make sense in relation to the bedrock challenge of dealing with external threats. Shifting analysis of threats can change policy 180 degrees. 48: Pearl Harbor!
  • Example 2: Conservatives softening on immigration after electoral defeats in 2012. Early politics leading to DACA? Conservatives still consistently more suspicious of out groups. (heightened threat detection)
  • Note the possibilities: Same view of issue, different ideologies expressing different orientations (Vietnam). Same orientation expressed in different ideologies and different positions on issues (Conservative isolationism before/after Pearl Harbor).
  • Key point in the theory is that these "bedrock dilemmas" occur once cities become too large for people to know each other. Interesting point: We had to use principles to express ourselves about these BSDs because we couldn't influence each other directly.
  • "Society works best when..."
  • Bold thesis: looking for universality as: consistent differences across time and culture. Example: Optimates and populares in Ancient Greece.
  • Left and right have deep associations. left handed suspect.
  • History of research on connection between core preferences on leadership, defense, punishment of norm violators, devotion to traditional behavioral standards, distribution of resources. Laponce. Haidt's MFT.
  • Look at the 4BSDs in relations to Haidt's MFT:
  • 1. Adherence to tradition. (Neophobia/philia)
  • 2. Treatment of outgroups and rule breakers (cooperation, defection, threat) (C, F, L)
  • 3. Role of group/individual (freeriding, self-interest, social commitment) (F, L)
  • 4. Authority and Leadership (Legitimate authority and hierarchy) (A)
  • "Society works best Index" 2007 research "Predicted issue attitudes, ideological self-placement, and party identification with astonishing accuracy" .6 correlation. Pursuing international research with SWB. Note this is "synchronous" research. A snapshot of both BSD and Issue orientation. We will see similar empirical support for the MFT in Haidt, C8.