Difference between revisions of "Tem"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
m
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
==6: SEP 17==
+
==11: OCT 6==
  
 
===Assigned===
 
===Assigned===
  
−
:*Sapolsky, Chapter 10: The Evolution of Human Behavior 328-387 (59).  For this class read only pages 354-387.  Use notes above also for part two of this chapter.
+
:*Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality" (17)
−
:*Writing: Sapolsky Question
+
:*Writing exercise: How WEIRD is Morality?
  
−
===Short Writing Assignment #1: Evolution and Social Behavior (600 words)===
+
===Brief Survey on Student Engagement in Hybrid course delivery===
  
−
:*'''Stage 1''': Please write an 600 word maximum answer to the following question by '''September 21, 2020 11:59pm.'''
+
:*Please take the following anonymous [https://gonzaga.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3I98g1ecsTe59ZP survey].
−
::*Topic: In "The Evolution of Social Behavior," Robert Sapolsky reviews the resources in evolutionary theory for explaining social behaviors like cooperation and group behavior. In a 600 word essay, answer this question: "Drawing on resources from this chapter, how does an evolutionist explain how cooperation and other moral behaviors start and are sustained in a human community?"  Give examples of processes which promote or impede moral behaviors. Be sure to consider how humans both fit and do not fit evolutionary patterns which apply to other animals. How does Sapolsky explain this? 
 
  
−
:*'''Advice about collaboration''': I encourage you to collaborate with other students, but only up to the point of sharing ideas, references to class notes, and your own notes.  Collaboration is part of the academic process and the intellectual world that college courses are based on, so it is important to me that you have the possibility to collaborate.  It's a great way to make sure that a high average level of learning and development occurs.  The best way to avoid plagiarism is to NOT share text of draft answers or outlines of your answer.  Keep it verbal.  Generate your own examples. 
+
===Final Stage of Sapolsky Writing Assignment===
  
−
:*Prepare your answer and submit it in the following way:
+
:*'''Stage 4''': Back-evaluation: After you receive your peer comments and my evaluation, take a few minutes to fill out this quick "back evaluation" rating form: [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdgKCYITDTSOOHcvC3TAVNK-EZDsP4jiiyPj-7jdpRoNUsLPA/viewform?usp=sf_link].  '''Fill out the form for each reviewer, but not Alfino.''' Up to 10 points, in Points.
−
::# '''Do not put your name in the file or filename'''.  You may put your student id number in the file.  Put a word count in the file.
 
−
::# In Word, check "File" and "Options" to make sure your name does not appear as author.  You may want to change this to "anon" for this document.
 
−
::# Format your answer in double spaced text in a 12 point font, using normal margins. 
 
−
::# Save the file in the ".docx" file format using the file name "Sapolsky".
 
−
::# Log in to courses.alfino.org.  Upload your file to the '''Points dropbox'''.
 
  
−
:*'''Stage 2''': Please evaluate '''four''' student answers and provide brief comments and a score. Review the [[Assignment Rubric]] for this exercise.  We will be using the Flow and Content areas of the rubric for this assignment. Complete your evaluations and scoring by '''TBD, 11:59pm.''' 
+
::*Back evaluations are due '''Thursday, October 8, 11:59pm'''.
−
::*Use [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf1_WeGn0XsNxLPgHixmA88gbNp4lLcYxvxIs0bSEVLgHvP8A/viewform?usp=sf_link this Google Form] to evaluate '''four''' peer papers.  The papers will be in our shared folder, but please '''do not''' edit or add comments to the papers directly.  This will compromise your anonymity.
 
  
−
::*To determine the papers you need to peer review, I will send you a key with animal names in alphabetically order, along with saint names.  You will find your animal name and review the next four (4) animals' work. 
+
===Some samples from Henrich's, "The Weirdest People on Earth"===
  
−
::*Some papers may arrive late. If you are in line to review a missing paper, allow a day or two for it to show up. If it does not show up, go ahead and review enough papers to get to four reviews. This assures that you will get enough "back evaluations" of your work to get a good average for your peer review credit. (You will also have an opportunity to challenge a back evaluation score of your reviewing that is out of line with the others.)
+
:*p. 25: "Who Am I?" task.  Show charts
 +
:*p. 28: sociocentric vs. individualistic
 +
:*p. 34: guilt vs. shame
 +
:*p. 44: impersonal honesty research (recall Ariely).
  
−
:*'''Stage 3''': I will grade and briefly comment on your writing using the peer scores as an initial ranking.  Assuming the process works normally, I will give you the higher of the two grades.  Up to 14 points.
+
===Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality"===
  
−
:*'''Stage 4''': Back-evaluation: After you receive your peer comments and my evaluation, take a few minutes to fill out this quick "back evaluation" rating form: [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kD1wkd1G0UuLIvtSPhEw4RUxZuJtLQJ31ZWkKA63WU4/edit].  '''Fill out the form for each reviewer, but not Alfino.''' Up to 10 points, in Points.
+
====WEIRD Morality====
 +
:*WEIRD morality is the morality of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic cultures
 +
::*just as likely to be bothered by taboo violations, but more likely to set aside feelings of disgust and allow violations
 +
::*only group with majority allowing chicken story violation.
 +
::*"the weirder you are the more likely you are to see the world in terms of separate objects, rather than relationships"  "sociocentric" moralities vs. individualistic moralities; Enlightenment moralities of Kant and Mill are rationalist, individualist, and universalist. 
 +
::*survey data on East/West differences in sentence completion: "I am..."
 +
::*framed-line task 97
 +
:*Kantian and Millian ethical thought is rationalist, rule based, and universalist.  Just the ethical theory you would expect from the culture.   
  
−
::*Back evaluations are due '''TBD, 11:59pm'''.
+
====A 3 channel moral matrix====
 +
:*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
 +
::*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.)
  
−
===Sapolsky, Chapter 10: The Evolution of Human Behavior 354-387===
+
====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 work.  Stop 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)
 +
:*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 Shweder's view.  Social conservatives made more sense to him after studying in India.
 +
 
 +
===Small Group Discussion===
 +
:*Discussion questions:
 +
::*Does it make sense to talk about "stepping out of a matrix"?  Is this a temporary thing?  What value might it have in your experience?
 +
::*Do you have a parallel story to Haidt's?  (Mention travel experiences.)

Latest revision as of 19:51, 6 October 2020

11: OCT 6

Assigned

  • Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality" (17)
  • Writing exercise: How WEIRD is Morality?

Brief Survey on Student Engagement in Hybrid course delivery

  • Please take the following anonymous survey.

Final Stage of Sapolsky Writing Assignment

  • Stage 4: Back-evaluation: After you receive your peer comments and my evaluation, take a few minutes to fill out this quick "back evaluation" rating form: [1]. Fill out the form for each reviewer, but not Alfino. Up to 10 points, in Points.
  • Back evaluations are due Thursday, October 8, 11:59pm.

Some samples from Henrich's, "The Weirdest People on Earth"

  • p. 25: "Who Am I?" task. Show charts
  • p. 28: sociocentric vs. individualistic
  • p. 34: guilt vs. shame
  • p. 44: impersonal honesty research (recall Ariely).

Haidt, Chapter 5, "Beyond WEIRD Morality"

WEIRD Morality

  • WEIRD morality is the morality of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic cultures
  • just as likely to be bothered by taboo violations, but more likely to set aside feelings of disgust and allow violations
  • only group with majority allowing chicken story violation.
  • "the weirder you are the more likely you are to see the world in terms of separate objects, rather than relationships" "sociocentric" moralities vs. individualistic moralities; Enlightenment moralities of Kant and Mill are rationalist, individualist, and universalist.
  • survey data on East/West differences in sentence completion: "I am..."
  • framed-line task 97
  • Kantian and Millian ethical thought is rationalist, rule based, and universalist. Just the ethical theory you would expect from the culture.

A 3 channel moral matrix

  • 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
  • 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 work. Stop 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)
  • 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 Shweder's view. Social conservatives made more sense to him after studying in India.

Small Group Discussion

  • Discussion questions:
  • Does it make sense to talk about "stepping out of a matrix"? Is this a temporary thing? What value might it have in your experience?
  • Do you have a parallel story to Haidt's? (Mention travel experiences.)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.gonzaga.edu/alfino/index.php?title=Tem&oldid=22223"