Difference between revisions of "FEB 27"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "==11. FEB 27: Unit 3: Gastronomy, Neurogastronomy, and Dietary Change== ===Assigned Work=== :*Barber, Dan. Chapter 30: "Seed" from '''The 3rd Plate''' (382-409) (27) :*The b...")
 
m
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
==11. FEB 27: Unit 3: Gastronomy, Neurogastronomy, and Dietary Change==
+
==14: FEB 27. Unit Two (Part two): Models of morality from moral psychology==
  
−
===Assigned Work===
+
===Assigned===
  
−
:*Barber, Dan. Chapter 30: "Seed" from '''The 3rd Plate''' (382-409) (27)
+
:*Churchland C5 – “I’m just that way” – (110-126; 16) – neurology and moral personality, political attitudes.
−
:*The big idea from the Land Institute:  [https://landinstitute.org/ The Land Institute], [https://landinstitute.org/big-story-short-video/ big idea in 3 minute video]
 
−
:*Gordon Shepherd, ''Neurogastronomy'' Chapters 2, 7 (17)
 
−
:*SW2: Assessing Industrial Foods
 
  
−
===In-class===
+
===In-Class===
  
−
:*Barber, Dan. Introduction ''The Third Plate: Field Notes on the Future of Food,'' (1-22). (22)
+
:*The Paradox of Moral Experience.
 +
:*Issue Commitment v Political Orientation
 +
:*Conversational Strategies for Engaging Political Difference
  
−
===Barber, "Introduction" ''The 3rd Plate''===
+
===Churchland C5 – “I’m just that way” – (110-126; 16)===
  
−
:*Browse to these three restaurants
+
:*Do personality traits partially determine how we decide something is right or wrong? 
−
::*"Blue Hill at Stone Barnes" and "Family Meal"-- as a project [[https://www.bluehillfarm.com/dine/stone-barns]]
+
:*Is political orientation partially determined by personality?
−
::*Chez Panisse [https://www.chezpanisse.com/]
+
:*Is personality partiality determined by genes?
−
::*Wild Sage in Spokane [https://www.wildsagebistro.com/menu]
+
:*If the answers are yes, yes, and yes, what are the implications?
−
::*Compare on qualities like: Farm to Table - use of Farm names to identify source. Traditional (1st / 2nd plate) vs. novel (3rd plate).  Fixed price v. entree pricing (No-choice allows more power to the chef.) Wandering Table tried this in Spokane.
 
  
−
:*Story of Eight Row flint corn at Blue Hills. sig.  "varietal restoration" "heritage cultivation"
+
:*111: Neuorological response to negative stimuli, such as rotting carcases or someone eating live worms correlates significantly with political orienation (as measured by Wilson-Patterson Attitude Inventory).
−
::*Story of the summer of corn at Blue Hills Farm when Barber was a kid.  Note diffs. 
 
−
::*planted in "Three Sisters"
 
−
::*polenta not typically thought of as high flavor experience, but in this case it was.
 
−
::*Barber says (8) that the polenta story is the kind of experience he found himself repeating.  What does he mean. What are the main features of the polenta story?
 
  
−
:*Barber's "Plates"
+
:*2014 study by Woo-Young Ahn - even response to one image is enough for better than chance prediction of political orientation.  Interestingly little correlation with reported (Sys 2) rating of images.  It's Sys 1 that betrays us...
−
::*some background on "farm to table" "artisanal eaters" "locavores" -- (another side of industrial food, esp. for a chef, is the effect of varieties and production methods on flavor).   
 
−
::*chef as activist (p. 10 reference to Paul Bocuse) -- Wolfgang Puck -- eventually industrial food system produces a version of the chef's innovation.
 
−
::*p. 11ff: Barber's critique of farm to table and the 1st and 2nd plates.  Criticizing the way we eat:  protein-centric plate, small side of veg  [http://chartsbin.com/view/1155 Protein consumption per capita by country]
 
−
::*Some detail on Blue Hills.   
 
−
:::*lamb chop story-- Problem: farm serving table.  Table is still in charge of the plate.  "cherry picking ingredients that are often ecologically demanding and expensive to grow" So, eliminate the menu!  p.14 top of 15.  Note characterization of American cuisine vs. French and Italian.  No peasant heritage to base it on.  Am: immoderation, big slabs of meat.  (Carla's story Fall 2018 - What it means to have a place based culinary identity). 
 
−
::*16: Note discussion of '''cuisine''' - based on ingredients local and sustainable. 
 
−
:::*1st, 2nd, 3rd plates 17.  Claim: "The future of cuisine will represent a paradigm shift, a new way of thinking about cooking and eating that defies Americans' ingrained expectations." 18  Note that he gives another definition of the 3rd Plate at p. 21. 
 
−
::*18: "truly delicious food is dependent on an entire system of agriculture. .... 21: the thrid plate goes beyond raising awareness about the importance of farmers and sustainable agriculture.  I helps us recognize that what we eat is part of an integrated whole, a web of relationships, that cannot be reduced to single ingredients"
 
−
::*The food "supply chain" is an ecology. The implication is that we can assess it in terms of sustainability, flavor, quality, diversity...etc.
 
  
−
===Barber, Dan. Chapter 30: "Seed" (pp. 382-409)===
+
:*Work of Hibbing (see especially Chapters 5 and 6 from previous course readings).  Physio-politics: Attentaional studies, Electrodermal studies (EDM or skin conductivity)
 +
::*Gaze cueing studies - liberals more influenced by gaze cues.
 +
::*Eye tracking - conservatives lock on to negative or threatening faces faster, longer dwell time.
 +
::*Cognitive tests - soft categorizers v hard categorizers, Beanfest!
 +
::*From Churchland also, p. 116.
  
−
:*Introductory story of the tomato fungus. fungus worse because spread from trucks, but also highlighting varietal system.  Mountain Magics resist blight fungus and still taste good.  We meet the Cornell breeders of this variety.   
+
:*Heritability of moral personality and political attitudes.
−
:*Theme of the chapter: how does the work of plant breeders affect the food system, especially flavor and yield.  Story of Flvr Savr tomato with no flavor. Calgene's gmo industrial tomato. discontinued.
+
::*MZ (identical) and DZ (fraternal) twin studies show this for traits such as personality traits like aggressiveness, traditionalism, obedience to authority.   
 +
::*Also for political attitudes.   
 +
::*Extroversion, openness to new experience, emotional stability (neuroticism), agreeableness.  Note: These are results in personality theory and research broadly.  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits]
  
−
:*Background on '''Land grant breeding programs'''.  1862, with USDA, experiment station, extension service added in 1914. Can have negative effects from success.  Breeding programs raised yields, but also lowered prices. 388: description of the work of the breeder.  Really agriculture's artists.  
+
:*How do heritable personality traits related to political orientation?
 +
::*Caveat: Traits are on a spectrum.  You can be conservative about some things and liberal about others. But:
 +
::*120: Openness predicts less traditional, more liberal.
 +
::*Conservatives relatively neophobic, liberals neophilic.
  
−
:*Terroir for wheat?  Aragon 03, kept alive in a corner of Spain, in high demand.   
+
:*Skepticism about the theory that "instinctive pathogen stress response" underlies outgroup behavior.  This might modify our theorizing about the fart spray experiment (and related results).   
−
::*[https://www.palouseheritage.com/ Palouse Heritage] -- take a look at the landrace/heirloom food system for cereal terroir in the Northwest.
 
  
−
::*Steve Jones, formerly of WSU, now Washington State Research and Extention Center, Mt Vernon (and Bread Lab)  background story - how land grant seed banks work, fateful meeting with Monsanto (p. 395), 1880 Bayh-Dole Act.  by 1990s majority funding from private industry.   
+
:*The things we get most worked up about: sexuality, intimacy, treatment of outgroups, might be the parts of our conscience and psychology that are most shaped by evolution.  (Note the issues these core challenges map onto: abortion, gay marriage, immigration, war, discrimination.)
−
:**Specialty wheat in Skagit Valley.  (So, if wheat were a fresh crop, we would also be supporting crop rotation over syn fertilizers.)
 
  
−
:*Nice narrative moment with the farmers and Jones.  Interesting point about how the flavor yield trade off occurs more in plant that have been selected for size and water.  Harder to ramp up flavor with all that water.  Also, older wheat variety had higher nutrition.  Claim of 50% more calcium, iron, and zinc.
+
===Some ways that our moral personalities show up in everyday life.===
  
−
:*Digress on Fall 2018 Florence "'''Ancient Grains Seminar'''" (Shared folder)
+
:*In intimate partnerships, we often look for “differences”.  But there are at least 3 things we look for sameness on in partner choice: religion, political orientation, and drinking behavior.
  
−
:*Jones wants to move beyond heirloom varieties. Still ways to improve and diversify strains.
+
:*Trump fridges v. Biden fridges [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/10/27/upshot/biden-trump-poll-quiz.html]
  
−
:*Steve Jones links: [http://thebreadlab.wsu.edu/dr-stephen-s-jones-director/ The Bread lab], [http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/wheat-breeder-whos-making-bread-better.html New York mag article], [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/magazine/bread-is-broken.html NYT article, "Bread is Broken"].
+
:*Cons and Libs like: different kinds of sermons, jokes, stories, decor. Cons favor Porsches, Libs Volvos
  
−
:*Land Institute project fits here.
+
===Issue Commitment v Political Orientation===
  
−
===Gordon Shepherd, ''Neurogastronomy'' Chapters 2, 7, 11, 18, 19, 21, 27===
+
:*To make practical use of this research, we need to introduce a distinction between "issue commitments" (roughly our position on the political questions of the day) vs "political orientation" (our enduring (after age 22-25) cognitive and emotional responses that predict liberal - moderate - conservative).
 +
:*Textbook examples:
 +
::*Pearl Harbor
 +
::*Americans with Disabilities Act
 +
::*Immigration - Bush republicans vs. Trump republicans
  
−
:C2: Dogs, Humans, and Retronasal Smell
+
:*Theory Contrast:  
 +
::*Old school thinking -- We decide to be liberal or conservative (under the tutelage of our dear professors). (Enlightenment connection.  Reason is independent of culture. We reason our way to our political orientation.)
 +
::*(Possible) New thinking. Political orientation is:
 +
:::*part of our identity, connected to personality, gels around age 25. 
 +
:::*orientation doesn't change, but issue commitments can.
  
−
:*comparison of dog’s snout and sniffing with human.  Important how motor functions and anatomy are integrated to behavior.  Dogs can sniff 6-8 times a second.  Mice sniff up to 10x a second!
+
:*Implications:  In light of this research:
−
:*Inside the snout:  modern mammals engage in ortho and retronasal olfaction. Receptors in nasal bulb direct to brain.
+
::*Is it bigotry to think less of someone because they have a different political orientation than you?
 +
::*Is political orientation more like other identity issues than we thought?
 +
::*Should we consider new conversational strategies (and values) to accommodate the new research?
 +
::*Should we focus more on issue commitment?
 +
::*What are the best ways to get someone with a different political orientation than you to agree on your issue commitment? Give them a path....
  
−
:*Evolution of the Human Nose: Why we don’t have snouts....bipedalism or diet.  Argued in evo theory that decline of the snout led to ascendency of vision. Stereoscopic vision only possible without the snout.  Human olfaction favors retronasal vs. Dogs.  Retro-nasal more emphasis on what we put in our mouths.  25-26: mechanics of chewing, sampling by taste buds, air flow, heating, humidification, retronasal olfaction,
 
−
:*Why would retronasal olfaction be favored in humans? 
 
−
::*1. Bipedalism increased our range and exposure to food varieties. 
 
−
::*2. Cooking.  Origins of “cuisine” in emergence of cooking 400,000 years ago.  (Note both are food explanations and they connect become “omnivores” with evolving retronasal olfaction. 
 
−
:*Conclusion: The evolution of humans as upright omnivores with retro-nasal olfaction puts more emphasis on the brain in processing and remembering flavor and odor.
 
  
−
:C7:  Images of Smell
+
==='''Paradox of Moral Experience'''===
  
−
:*The Olfactory Bulb: molecular and neural pathways at the bulb.  Glomerulus (glom) - convergence site of receptor cells.  Interneurons:  often specialized processors.  Periglomeral cells, Mitral cells, tufted cells.  Granule cells.   
+
::*The Paradox of Moral Experience involves a conflict between two "standpoints" for seeing values.  Roughly, we experience our moral positions as our "truths", but when we study morality using social science methods (objective, 3rd person), our positions look "caused".   
  
−
:*How does olfactory bulb represent smell?  Story of discovery: 1930s Edgar Adrian, hedgehogs, noticed how patterns of excitation could create an “image” of the smell, using electrophysiology techniques.
+
:The two standpoints:
−
:*Sokoloff method for tracking energy used by the brain with a marker for glucose uptake.  Important work that led to PET and fMRI.  Follows his own research from 70s in using this method to track energy use in the olfactory bulb as it is exposed to odors. 
 
−
:*Confirms idea of a “smell image” or pattern of activation in the glomeruli. Started to fill in a “map” of the receptor sites on the bulb.  1990s. 
 
−
:*Some “odor images” from the work of Michael Leon and Brett Johnson.  [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4075437/]
 
−
:*Final point: The olfactory pathways are heavily modulated - sensitive to behavioral state: appetite, aversion, openness to experience, all affect flavor perception.
 
  
−
:C11 Creating, Learning, and Remembering Smell
+
::*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 compelling.  From 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?") 
  
−
:*lateral olfactory tract — context output from the bulb to the olfactory cortex in the brain.  Long in humans.  What is its role? 
+
::*2. But, when we '''study morality objectively, 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''' -- like the accident of a history of causes. But, knowing this, why don’t we experience our own values as contingent? '''That's the paradox.'''
−
:*importance of pyramidal cells. 100: capable of feedback excitation to stimulating cells.  Thought important to memory.  Damaged in dimentia patients.
+
:::*Examples: Sociocentric / Individualist cultures, Specific histories that groups experience (Us vs. Europe vs. ...)
−
:*101: Olfactory cortex “serves as content-addressable memory for association of odor stimuli with memory traces of odors.  “.  Structures that support this claim.  Herb rule - identifies activity that suggest memory and learning.  Interesting parallels between odor recognition and face recognition. 
+
:::*In experiencing political difference, we see our opposites as "caused" by ideology or bad thinking to believe what they believe.
−
:*103: summary of functions of olfactory cortex.  Not clear if perception of smell itself arises in ol. Cortex.  Some research suggesting that it can detect the absence of the essential amino acids.
 
−
 
 
−
:*key ideas: knowledge of mechanisms for understanding memory and flavor; learning mechanism, may even detect amino acids.
 
−
 
 
−
:*[Point: Reinforcement learning takes place immediately in the olfactory cortex.  Our experience of food is not a “passive awareness”.  Because food is essential to survival, and omnivores have complex food / memory needs, learning and memory processes are crucial.  The reward structure of the brain is involved.  The olfactory cortex is smart.]
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
:C18 Putting it all Together: The Human Brain Flavor System
 
−
 
 
−
:*Opening summary of the "human brain flavor system."
 
−
:*Reference and quote from Brillat-Savarin, the first “gastronome” .  Nice continuity between early language and neurogastronomy.  “The human brain has specific capabilities that makes the appreciation of flavor of unique importance to humans.”
 
−
:*Sensory system vs action system
 
−
:*Sensory system:
 
−
::*Flavor also produced by smell, taste, mouth-sense, sight, sound. Not just “volatile molecules reaching the olfactory bulb.
 
−
::*Multi-sensory integration, or “Supra-addivtivity” involves congruent repetition of combinations of stimuli.  “internal brain image” of the flavor object.
 
−
::*read summary sentence, p. 160: “A consensus is emerging that simultaneous activation by a food of a common set of regions, including the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior insula and operculum, frontal operculum, and anterior cingulate Byrd’s, constitutes the distributed representation in our minds of a flavor object”  [Think about this a minute....]
 
−
:*Flavor-action system
 
−
::*Chart on p. 161 matching brain structures to aspects of flavor perception and desire, motivation, and action.  The action system includes emotional response, memory, decision making, plasticity (how the activity of the body/brain — in this case eating— changes the brain) Language, consciousness.  (Each treated in next section.  We sample the chapter on emotions.)
 
−
 
 
−
:C19: Flavor and Emotions
 
−
 
 
−
:*emotions moves us toward action, but also reflect our internal state of desiring and wanting.  What is diff between want and craving?
 
−
 
 
−
:*research from Monell Chemical Senses Institute.  Cravings implicated in eating disorders.  Dull diets stimulate craving.  Marcia Pelchat and colleagues looked at parallels between food cravings and drug craving.  In a study, one group of test subjects were on a monotonous diet and another on a normal diet.  In brain imaging, the monotonous eaters produced strong activation when asked to imagine a favorite food.  Supports hypothesis that there is a common circuitry to natural and pathological rewards (food and drugs).  168ff: discussion of brain structures implicated in the study.  Hippocampus, insula, caudate nucleus.  Caudate includes high concentration of dopamine.  Also part of the striatum, which involves habits (which probably involve dopamine).  When we are hungry, we can activate food memories and emotional responses in anticipation of the food. 
 
−
 
 
−
:*[An implication of this for eating is that hunger plays a key role in satisfaction.  The hungrier eater produces stronger anticipatory activation.  “Hunger is the best relish.”  “Images of desire” maybe be important to satisfaction.  But also, this research suggests that an '''unsatisfied brain''' (one on a dull diet) is more likely to produce cravings .  In a sense the brain demands satisfaction.  read at 168. Digression on question: Does the industrial diet produce real satisfactions? Mixed evidence.  ]
 
−
 
 
−
:*chocolate-satiety study (Dana Small) — test subjects eat chocolate to satiety while in imaging.  Difference in activation can be thought of as a change in the flavor image (for chocolate) under conditions of craving and satisfaction.   Mentions concept of “reward value” current in brain research.  cool idea here is that our flavor images change with our hunger states. 
 
−
 
 
−
:C21: Flavor and Obesity
 
−
 
 
−
:*considers the case of french fries in relation to the flavor perception system.  Salt, fat, and sweetness (SFS). Discusses the meat flavor from tallow, now artificially added.  Adds in the rest of the typical fast food meal.  Chased with coffee and a cookie.  Coffee has over 600 volatile molecules.  Point: the fast food meal involves '''sensory overload'''.
 
−
 
 
−
:*Overeating:  
 
−
::*sensory overload;
 
−
::*caloric density; reduced roughage. 
 
−
::*But also “Sensory-specific satiety” .  Single flavors diminish appetite while multiple flavors amplify it.  You can eat more food if it includes multiple flavors.  The complexity of industrial flavors increases our ability to overconsume them.  187
 
−
::*long-term overstimulation of skin and membranes of the lips and mouth.  Interesting research shows obese test subjects have more activation of these areas even while not eating.  [this supports the idea of a learned behavior from food conditioning]
 
−
::*Conditioned overeating:  Other research by Dana Small.  You can induce extra eating in rats with conditioned stimuli (bell). Humans have wide field of potential conditioning stimuli.
 
−
::*Other research suggests that ineffective inhibitory circuits play a role in obesity.
 
−
::*Others speculate that the reward value of food for obese is too low. The brain doesn’t register enough pleasure from a normal diet. 
 
−
::*Kessler: combination of SFS culprit (note that in Kessler’s theory several of the above theories are included.)
 
−
 
 
−
:C27: Why Flavor Matters
 
−
 
 
−
:*brief summary. 
 
−
:*Flavor at different life stages:
 
−
::*In the womb: flavors in amniotic fluid, rat study showing odor preference established pre-natally.  Diet studies with pregnant women (using anise or carrot juice for eample) show similar results. 
 
−
::*In infants: flavor and preference also communicated through breast milk
 
−
::*In childhood:  research showing kids are hyper sensitive to SFS foods. 
 
−
::*In adolescents.
 
−
::*Flavor and dieting in adults.  Doesn’t work.  238:  “key element missing in most discussions of diet is flavor”. Very important point.  Cites Brownell’s “Food Fight” (2004) and Barbara Rolls. 
 
−
::*In old age: research on loss of smell sense.
 

Latest revision as of 18:57, 27 February 2025

14: FEB 27. Unit Two (Part two): Models of morality from moral psychology

Assigned

  • Churchland C5 – “I’m just that way” – (110-126; 16) – neurology and moral personality, political attitudes.

In-Class

  • The Paradox of Moral Experience.
  • Issue Commitment v Political Orientation
  • Conversational Strategies for Engaging Political Difference

Churchland C5 – “I’m just that way” – (110-126; 16)

  • Do personality traits partially determine how we decide something is right or wrong?
  • Is political orientation partially determined by personality?
  • Is personality partiality determined by genes?
  • If the answers are yes, yes, and yes, what are the implications?
  • 111: Neuorological response to negative stimuli, such as rotting carcases or someone eating live worms correlates significantly with political orienation (as measured by Wilson-Patterson Attitude Inventory).
  • 2014 study by Woo-Young Ahn - even response to one image is enough for better than chance prediction of political orientation. Interestingly little correlation with reported (Sys 2) rating of images. It's Sys 1 that betrays us...
  • Work of Hibbing (see especially Chapters 5 and 6 from previous course readings). Physio-politics: Attentaional studies, Electrodermal studies (EDM or skin conductivity)
  • Gaze cueing studies - liberals more influenced by gaze cues.
  • Eye tracking - conservatives lock on to negative or threatening faces faster, longer dwell time.
  • Cognitive tests - soft categorizers v hard categorizers, Beanfest!
  • From Churchland also, p. 116.
  • Heritability of moral personality and political attitudes.
  • MZ (identical) and DZ (fraternal) twin studies show this for traits such as personality traits like aggressiveness, traditionalism, obedience to authority.
  • Also for political attitudes.
  • Extroversion, openness to new experience, emotional stability (neuroticism), agreeableness. Note: These are results in personality theory and research broadly. [1]
  • How do heritable personality traits related to political orientation?
  • Caveat: Traits are on a spectrum. You can be conservative about some things and liberal about others. But:
  • 120: Openness predicts less traditional, more liberal.
  • Conservatives relatively neophobic, liberals neophilic.
  • Skepticism about the theory that "instinctive pathogen stress response" underlies outgroup behavior. This might modify our theorizing about the fart spray experiment (and related results).
  • The things we get most worked up about: sexuality, intimacy, treatment of outgroups, might be the parts of our conscience and psychology that are most shaped by evolution. (Note the issues these core challenges map onto: abortion, gay marriage, immigration, war, discrimination.)

Some ways that our moral personalities show up in everyday life.

  • In intimate partnerships, we often look for “differences”. But there are at least 3 things we look for sameness on in partner choice: religion, political orientation, and drinking behavior.
  • Trump fridges v. Biden fridges [2]
  • Cons and Libs like: different kinds of sermons, jokes, stories, decor. Cons favor Porsches, Libs Volvos

Issue Commitment v Political Orientation

  • To make practical use of this research, we need to introduce a distinction between "issue commitments" (roughly our position on the political questions of the day) vs "political orientation" (our enduring (after age 22-25) cognitive and emotional responses that predict liberal - moderate - conservative).
  • Textbook examples:
  • Pearl Harbor
  • Americans with Disabilities Act
  • Immigration - Bush republicans vs. Trump republicans
  • Theory Contrast:
  • Old school thinking -- We decide to be liberal or conservative (under the tutelage of our dear professors). (Enlightenment connection. Reason is independent of culture. We reason our way to our political orientation.)
  • (Possible) New thinking. Political orientation is:
  • part of our identity, connected to personality, gels around age 25.
  • orientation doesn't change, but issue commitments can.
  • Implications: In light of this research:
  • Is it bigotry to think less of someone because they have a different political orientation than you?
  • Is political orientation more like other identity issues than we thought?
  • Should we consider new conversational strategies (and values) to accommodate the new research?
  • Should we focus more on issue commitment?
  • What are the best ways to get someone with a different political orientation than you to agree on your issue commitment? Give them a path....


Paradox of Moral Experience

  • The Paradox of Moral Experience involves a conflict between two "standpoints" for seeing values. Roughly, we experience our moral positions as our "truths", but when we study morality using social science methods (objective, 3rd person), our positions look "caused".
The two standpoints:
  • 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 compelling. From 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 objectively, 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 -- like the accident of a history of causes. But, knowing this, why don’t we experience our own values as contingent? That's the paradox.
  • Examples: Sociocentric / Individualist cultures, Specific histories that groups experience (Us vs. Europe vs. ...)
  • In experiencing political difference, we see our opposites as "caused" by ideology or bad thinking to believe what they believe.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.gonzaga.edu/alfino/index.php?title=FEB_27&oldid=29047"