Difference between revisions of "APR 8"

Latest revision as of 17:10, 8 April 2025

22: APR 8.

Assigned

Henrich C6 – “Psychological Differences, Families, and the Church” – (193-230; 37) – psychology of kin based institutions, impersonal prosociality, out-group trust, public goods game research, impersonal punishment and revenge.

In-Class

Recap of problem of decline of religious culture in light of it's effects.

Benefits and problems of religious culture.
Evolutionary challenges to cooperation: mass shootings, homelessness, climate & environment
Evolution of religions toward universalism
Evolution of secular humanistic attitudes
The challenge of globalism. - loss of sovereignty Behind all of this — the power of individual and kin selection.

Church’s Marriage and Family Plan - chart from C14

Comment on the "weirdness" of culture as a determinant of our thinking.

The idea of culture as a determinant of our thinking.
We have pretty good evidence that many aspects of our thinking are influenced by culture. Recall the paradox of moral experience. When we study culture objectively, like Henrich et al do, it is apparent that culture “causally determines” psychology, beliefs, and attitudes. But when we ask our selves about our subjective beliefs, we think of them as our own. This is paradoxical. Which is it?
Creates the possibility of “critical distance” from our culture (Also happens when we travel.).

Henrich C6 – “Psychological Differences, Families, and the Church

Establishing the connection between “strength of kinship / prevalence of cousin marriage” and leading psychological features of WEIRD culture. KII used to rank countries, then correlation of measures of KII/cousin marriage with various WEIRD psych features.

WEIRD Psychology:

Tightness of norms and norm enforcement - prevalence of numerous, contextual, norms with strict enforcement.
Conformity - Asch Conformity test. Greater emphasis on obedience in children. (Note overlap with H&H evo psych on authority and tradition.)
Individualism - (What are strengths/weaknesses of Individualism as a cultural strategy?)
Out-In-Group Trust - My favorite!
Universalism/Loyalty - measured by Passenger’s Dilemma (note Haidt’s MFQ data here)
Prosociality - measured by PGG, blood donations
Impersonal honesty - measured by Impersonal Honesty Game, diplomat’s parking tickets
Impersonal Punishment and revenge - PGG with punishment (217) note diff effects
Intentions
Analytic Thinking

Why think the Catholic Church has anything to do with this?

Timeline of Church’s MFP in C5 -
”Duration of exposure model” for Church’s influence (224-230) Exposure to Church explains 40-60% of variation in KII.

Critical Assessment of WEIRD culture

What does WEIRD culture allow us to do that we might agree is good?

Live in cities with lots of strangers.
More willing to invest in public goods.
Increased support for universal rules that apply to everyone
Be less conformist
Internalize standards - guilt over shame
Live autonomously - less dependent on kinship obligations
Engage in market behavior due to impersonal trust, imp prosociality, imp honesty

How might WEIRD culture limit us or lead to negative (maladaptive) consequences?

Decreases the power of religion (mixed - less authoritarian norm enforcement but less norm enforcement)
Decreases loyalty to family (at least as measured by passenger’s dilemma). Family member’s suffering less likely to be addressed by kin. (Mixed since kin-based society have more corruption, unjust partiality.)
Decreases “tightness” of norm enforcement. (“No shame.”) (Mixed - good to end shaming, but norm enforcement is still important)
Increases personal isolation (WEIRD cultures are lonelier.)
Normalizing self-interest may normalize lack of concern for others.

Possible general criticisms of WEIRD culture and its other.

Atomism: We are less bonded with kin, but not really bonded to each other.
Both kin-based and WEIRD cultures are having trouble meeting challenges that transcend groups and borders, like climate change, global environmental degradation, absolute poverty.

What can we do about this? We do get a “vote” in evolution. Once we have a cultural evolution explanation for a dysfunctional cultural problem, we are in a good position to make a cultural argument for change. (Go back to the Paradox to see why) Examples:

Mass shootings.
Lack of solutions for homelessness
High incarceration rates and recidivism rates for criminal conduct.
High rates of suicide and death from addiction.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==24: APR 8. Unit Six: Criminal Justice and Moral Responsibility Skepticism==
+==22: APR 8. ==
 ===Assigned===
-:*[https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/episodes/317421-blame Radio Lab Episode on Blame and Moral Responsibility]
+:*Henrich C6 – “Psychological Differences, Families, and the Church” – (193-230; 37) – psychology of kin based institutions, impersonal prosociality, out-group trust, public goods game research, impersonal punishment and revenge.
-:*[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13554790903329182?scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=nncs20 Article abstract, "Klüver–Bucy syndrome, hypersexuality, and the law"]
-===Introduction to philosophical problems with Moral Responsibility and the Law===
+===In-Class===
-:*'''Basic Questions:'''
+:*Recap of problem of decline of religious culture in light of it's effects.
-::*1. Do we praise people for things that they don't deserve credit for and blame people for things that are not their fault?
+::*Benefits and problems of religious culture.
-::*2. Is our concept of moral responsibility (and all of the behaviors and institutions based on it) wrong somehow? Is it out of sync with ideas about free will and the brain?
+::*Evolutionary challenges to cooperation: mass shootings, homelessness, climate & environment
-::*3. What exactly do we mean when we say, "You are responsible for that"?  Start a list.  Causal, moral, both, neither.  Do you find yourself referencing some idea of a "normally competent person"?
+::*Evolution of religions toward universalism
-::*4. If we clarify our understanding of moral responsibility, will we still approach criminal punishment with retributive intent?
+::*Evolution of secular humanistic attitudes
+::*The challenge of globalism.  - loss of sovereignty Behind all of this — the power of individual and kin selection.
-:*'''Some concepts for thinking about moral responsibility:'''
+:*Church’s Marriage and Family Plan - chart from C14
-::*'''Moral Responsibility''' - The idea that people deserve praise or blame for their actions.  In the standard view, praise and blame are based on "moral desert".
-::*'''Moral desert''' - Normally, you "morally deserve" something because you did (or failed to do) something to merit it, positively or negatively. (You worked a shift and deserve to be paid. You failed to observe the speed limit...)
-:::*Moral desert can be contrasted to what you deserve just because of your status, as in rights. This is also called "'''moral standing'''".  Moral desert can also be contrasted with "morally arbitrary" (recall Rawls). So, we would say you do not deserve praise or blame for things that are "'''morally arbitrary'''":  things you did little or nothing to achieve (like an inheritance), things about you that were just your good fortune (good impulse control, a good noodle, athletic ability, at ease in social life...). Yet we clearly praise and blame people (and ourselves) for all of these things!
-::*'''Accountability vs. Morally Responsibility''' -- Giving an account of someone as having done or failed to do things we normally expect of others can be done quite apart from holding someone blameworthy. This might be an important distinction if you become a skeptic about moral responsibility.  You don't lose accountability, necessarily.
-::*'''Free will and responsibility''' -- Most people would agree that if we cannot freely will our actions, we cannot be held responsible for them.  But what sort of free will is required? Is normal choosing (neurologically described) free will or do we have to break with the causal fabric of the universe! (Libertarian Free will).  If the world is deterministic, everything has been "decided" (Including basketball games!).  Does not mean there is no free will, or just that it might not be what we think it is?
-:*'''Thought experiments on interpersonal praise and blame'''
+:*Comment on the "weirdness" of culture as a determinant of our thinking.
-::*Suppose you were raised in a good home and have acquired good habits. We would normally praise you for that.   Now, would you reassess your deservedness of praise in light of the following conditions?
+::*The idea of culture as a determinant of our thinking.
-:::*Condition 1: Compare yourself now to someone raise in a bad home, or no home, and who acquired good habits, having overcome many personal obstacles.  Are you less deserving of your praise than this person, equally, more?
+::*We have pretty good evidence that many aspects of our thinking are influenced by culture.  Recall the paradox of moral experience.  When we study culture objectively, like Henrich et al do, it is apparent that culture “causally determines” psychology, beliefs, and attitudes.  But when we ask our selves about our subjective beliefs, we think of them as our own.  This is paradoxical.  Which is it?
-:::*Condition 2: Suppose now that you look at your family and extended family and you notice that, compare to other families, yours seem to come to good habits easily.  None of you really ever do anything wrong, or much.  You notice that your friend's families have higher frequencies of bad or dysfunctional behavior.  Are you less deserving of your praise than people from these families, equally, more?
+::*Creates the possibility of “critical distance” from our culture (Also happens when we travel.).
-:*A couple of interesting philosophical arguments to take into the thought experiment:
+===Henrich C6 – “Psychological Differences, Families, and the Church===
-::*From Peter Strawson, summarized here in Waller, Against Responsibility:
+:*Establishing the connection between “strength of kinship / prevalence of cousin marriage” and leading psychological features of WEIRD culture.  KII used to rank countries, then correlation of measures of KII/cousin marriage with various WEIRD psych features.
-:::*If one is to be truly responsible for how one acts, '''one must be truly responsible for how one is''', morally speaking. To be truly responsible for how one is, one must have chosen to be the way one is. But one cannot really be said to choose (in a conscious, reasoned fashion) the way one is unless one already has some principles of choice (preferences, values, ideals etc.) in the light of which one chooses how to be. But then, to be truly responsible for one’s having those principles of choice, one must have chosen them, in a reasoned conscious fashion. But that requires that one have principles of choice. And thus the regress. (pg. 29, Waller)
-:::*Strawson's argument suggests the "impossibility" of moral responsibility.
-::*Mele’s Intentional Self-Modification Argument
+:*WEIRD Psychology:
-:::*Mele seems to accept the idea that in order to be responsible for how one acts, one must be responsible for how one is at the time of action. But he takes exception to Strawson’s claim that in order to be responsible for how one is, one must have chosen to be that way. He thinks there are cases of intentional self-modification that allow an agent to be responsible for what they do, without involving an infinite regress of choices. He makes his case by first developing the following thought experiment:
+::*Tightness of norms and norm enforcement - prevalence of numerous, contextual, norms with strict enforcement.
-:::*The Case of Betty: Betty is a six-year-old girl who is afraid of the basement in her house. She knows that no harm has come to anyone, including herself, who has entered the basement. But she is still afraid. Nevertheless, she recognizes that her fear is “babyish” and takes steps to overcome come it. She starts to make periodic visits to the basement, staying slightly longer each time until she no longer feels afraid. After following this method for a few months, she loses her irrational fear.
+::*Conformity - Asch Conformity test.  Greater emphasis on obedience in children. (Note overlap with H&H evo psych on authority and tradition.)
-:::*Mele's Intentional self-modification argument suggests that we can be held responsible for our actions because we have powers of self-modification.
+::*Individualism - (What are strengths/weaknesses of Individualism as a cultural strategy?)
-:::*But! Now imagine Benji, also afraid of the basement.  He doesn't try to conquer his fear or tries and fails.  How would you know if Benji deserves to be blamed for his failure?
+::*Out-In-Group Trust - My favorite!
-:::*Maybe Betty is a "chronic cognizer" and Benji is a "cognitive miser".  Are these traits they for which they have "moral desert"? Some people are not persuaded by Mele's argument. How far can "self-modification" go to make up for doubts about moral responsibility?
+::*Universalism/Loyalty - measured by Passenger’s Dilemma (note Haidt’s MFQ data here)
+::*Prosociality - measured by PGG, blood donations
+::*Impersonal honesty - measured by Impersonal Honesty Game, diplomat’s parking tickets
+::*Impersonal Punishment and revenge - PGG with punishment (217) note diff effects
+::*Intentions
+::*Analytic Thinking
-===Small Group Discussion: '''Thought Experiment Gym on Praise and Blame'''===
+:*Why think the Catholic Church has anything to do with this?
+::*Timeline of Church’s MFP in C5 -
+::*”Duration of exposure model” for Church’s influence (224-230) Exposure to Church explains 40-60% of variation in KII.
-:*Work through the thought experiment above, sharing your responses to Conditions 1 and 2. Do these comparisons make you less certain about the basis of moral responsibility?
+===Critical Assessment of WEIRD culture===
-:*Try to think of some clear cases in which you would blame yourself (or blame someone else) for failing a specific moral responsibility.  Make a list. (I would blame myself if I failed to prepare for class. -Alfino) In each case, try to think about what you "deserve" or "ought to have to do" in light of your failure.  Is it always a penalty (from nominal to proportion to failure)? Does it always involve "deserving blame"?  When does it?  Hopefully, this helps us think about praise and blame in actual contexts.  Please bring 1-3 items from your list back to the whole class.
+:*What does WEIRD culture allow us to do that we might agree is good?
+::# Live in cities with lots of strangers.
+::# More willing to invest in public goods.
+::# Increased support for universal rules that apply to everyone
+::# Be less conformist
+::# Internalize standards - guilt over shame
+::# Live autonomously - less dependent on kinship obligations
+::# Engage in market behavior due to impersonal trust, imp prosociality, imp honesty
-===Radio Lab Episode on Blame and Moral Responsibility===
+:*How might WEIRD culture limit us or lead to negative (maladaptive) consequences?
+::# Decreases the power of religion (mixed - less authoritarian norm enforcement but less norm enforcement)
+::# Decreases loyalty to family (at least as measured by passenger’s dilemma).  Family member’s suffering less likely to be addressed by kin. (Mixed since kin-based society have more corruption, unjust partiality.)
+::# Decreases “tightness” of norm enforcement. (“No shame.”) (Mixed - good to end shaming, but norm enforcement is still important)
+::# Increases personal isolation (WEIRD cultures are lonelier.)
+::# Normalizing self-interest may normalize lack of concern for others.
-:*'''Segment 1:''' Story of Kevin and his wife, Janet.  Kevin is arrested for child pornography.
+:*Possible general criticisms of WEIRD culture and its other.
-::*15 years earlier. Epilepsy seizures returned after surgery two years earlier. Can't drive so he meets Janet from work, who drives him to work. Romance... Still more seizures.  Another surgery. Music ability in tact.  But then his food and sexual appetite grew, played songs on the piano for hours.  Disturbing behavior.  Really disturbing behavior.
+::# Atomism: We are less bonded with kin, but not really bonded to each other.
+::# Both kin-based and WEIRD cultures are having trouble meeting challenges that transcend groups and borders, like climate change, global environmental degradation, absolute poverty.
-::*Reporter tries to get at who it was who did it.  Kevin claims compulsion.  downloads and deletes files.
+:*What can we do about this?  We do get a “vote” in evolution. Once we have a cultural evolution explanation for a dysfunctional cultural problem, we are in a good position to make a cultural argument for change.  (Go back to the Paradox to see why) Examples:
+::*Mass shootings.
-::*Orin Devinsky: neurologist testified in court that it wasn't Kevin's fault.
+::*Lack of solutions for homelessness
+::*High incarceration rates and recidivism rates for criminal conduct.
-::*Neurological dive: deep parts of our brain can generate weird thoughts, but we have a "censor".  Maybe Kevin lost that part of his brain.  Observed in post-surgery monkeys.
+::*High rates of suicide and death from addiction.
-::*Lee Vartan -- Can't be impulse control.  porn at home, but not at work.  He must have known that it was wrong.  Tourette's can be circumstantially triggered even though it is clearly neurological.  Poignant exchange with Janet about staying in the relationship.  '''Kluwer-Bucy'''.  Months before sentencing.  Medication makes him normal, but eliminates his libido.  5 yrs. - home arrest.  Judge ackn. prosecutor's point.  You could have asked for help. (Reflect on this a bit.)  26 months federal prison 25 months of house arrest.  2008-2010.
-:*'''4 minute discussion questions''': Do you agree with prosecutor's Vartan's point? Why or why not? What would your sentence have been?
-:*'''Segment 2:'''  Blame - person or brain.
-::*Nita Frahany - neurolaw professor (law and philosophy!).  Might be lots of cases.  (argument: isn't this just like blame everything else for what you do wrong?  Isn't it too easy?).  Thought experiment: deaf person, child in burning building.  "emotional inability" would also be damage to a physical structure (as in the ear).
-::*David Eagleman, neuroscientist - makes critical point: neuroscience isn't so precise.  New technologies will show us how experience is written in our brain.  (Back to Descartes.  wrong.)  Slippery slope, the brain is always involved.  Blameworthiness might be the wrong question.  Person vs. biology doesn't really make sense anymore.  The "choosey" part of the brain (the homonculus!).  36:00 minutes.  Funny exchange.  Self-modification comes up.
-::*Claim: Legal system should drop moral blame.  Adopt utilitarian approach.  Predict recidivism.  Point system exists.  Better than people (50% accurate).  System 70%. Currently there is appearance bias for example.
-::*A point system might be very predictive, but you might not want to convict someone of a future crime.  Would it be?
-::*Frahany - Blame might serve social function of articulating norms.
-:*'''4 minute discussion questions''': Frahany thinks there are lots of cases of the criminal justice system punishing unfairly.  Are you persuaded? If so, does a utilitarian approach (with or without the point system) make sense?
-:*'''Segment 3:''' Dear Hector
-::*Bianca Giaver (producer) - Hector Black.  Hector's backstory - joins civil rights movement, adopts Patricia, a neglected child.  Patricia's story (becomes a beautiful and productive person) -- Patricia is murdered.  Hector considers whether he wishes the death penalty for him. Hector's statement -- 48min. Writes a letter of forgiveness to the murderer. Ivan's story - son of schizophrenic mom, beat him, horror.  Do we still blame Ivan the same way.  Hector tells his story.  Many letters exchanged.  A strange bond.  Hector has self-doubts - sending care packages to Ivan???.  (Maybe he's just a weird guy.)
-::*Ivan tells the original story of Patricia's murder.  Ivan hears a voice that sometime comes to him.  Commits the murder. Can't make sense of it.
-:*'''4 minute discussion questions''': Does Ivan's story change your view of the kind of threat he poses -- one from choosing evil/failing a responsiblity vs. compulsion?

Difference between revisions of "APR 8"

Latest revision as of 17:10, 8 April 2025

Contents

22: APR 8.

Assigned

In-Class

Henrich C6 – “Psychological Differences, Families, and the Church

Critical Assessment of WEIRD culture

Navigation menu

Page actions

Page actions

Personal tools

Navigation

Search

Tools