Difference between revisions of "NOV 30"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "==23: NOV 30. Unit 6: Gastronomy, Satisfaction, and Dietary Change== ===Assigned Reading=== :*Gordon Shepherd, ''Neurogastronomy'' Chapters 2, 7, 11, 18, 19, 21, 27 (67) ==...")
 
m
Line 1: Line 1:
−
==23: NOV 30. Unit 6: Gastronomy, Satisfaction, and Dietary Change==
+
==25: NOV 30==
  
−
===Assigned Reading===
+
===Assigned===
 +
:*Sapolsky, Chapter 16: Biology, the Criminal Justice System, and (Oh, Why Not?) Free Will (580-613)  (Part Two 600-613)
 +
:*Henrich, Joseph, "Hell, Free Will, and Moral Universalism" from ''The WEIRDEST People on Earth'' p. 146-148, (2)
  
−
:*Gordon Shepherd, ''Neurogastronomy'' Chapters 2, 7, 11, 18, 19, 21, 27 (67)
+
===In-class===
  
−
===Final Paper Advice===
+
:*Lecture: Does Having a view of Free Will help you think about Moral Responsibility?
  
−
:*My Philosophy of Food -- First steps
+
===Free Will, Cultural Evolution, and ordinary language===
−
:*Final Research paper -- Topic suggestions.
 
  
−
:*Please turn in Final Papers by '''December 16th.'''
+
:*Sapolsky made short work of the problem of free will with his “biology or homunculus” approach.
  
−
:*Setting your grade weight for either "Final Research Paper" or "My Philosophy of Food"  - Minimums on courses.alfino.org are set at 0 so that you can set one of the two assignments to zero, but please do not set the other one below 15%.
+
:*'''Free Will and Moral Responsibility''':
 +
:*1. Traditional View of Free Will from Dualist Tradition.  Modern Version: Libertarian.
 +
::*Examples of argument threads:
 +
:::*1. The "incompatibilist intuition": If we do not have "metaphysically real" FW, then we cannot be held responsible.  If the world is deterministic, then we do not have FW and cannot be MR. Because we are MR, we must have FW. (problems)
 +
:::*2. If we have a soul, then maybe the choosy part of us isn't controlled by nature. ...
 +
:::*3. Libertarian version: Kane's theory.  Or, if it feels like we inaugurate causal chains, then maybe we do.
  
−
===Food Media Search===
+
:*2. Compatibilist and Contemporary Naturalist (Cultural Evolutionist) Approaches.
 +
::*What we have, in normal circumstances is "agency." '''Agency is "an ability to act in the world and to make myself '''accountable''' to others."''' I do this by conforming my behavior to the idea of a "normally competent agent."
 +
::*This sort of agency can have a completely naturalist account, especially if you include cultural evolution in your explanatory domain. The "normally competent agent" is also a product of culture. Since both nature and culture can be product of a deterministic universe, free will is compatible with determinism.
 +
::*Some compatibilist want to keep moral responsibility talk, while others want
  
−
:*Some great submissions from this exercise.  We will take a brief look at the spreadsheet under Shared Content.  I have separated Saint names from entries so that some of you can comments on items without compromising your saintly nature.
+
:*'''The View from Cultural Evolution'''
  
−
===Another 50cent egg lesson===
+
:*Is Free Will a culturally defined concept for understanding our agency?
  
−
:*Recall the 50cent egg lesson on food value
+
::*Free will and MR as a cultural concept.  Evidence from Henrich and others. Part of a cultural package that weakened kin bonds that might not have been seen as "choose-able".  Promotes idea of ''choosing'' a creed or code of conduct.
 +
::*If FW and MR are cultural adaptations, some questions might follow:
 +
:::*Does this conception of free will still serve us well, especially in light of new knowledge about human (mis)behavior?
 +
:::*Since we've "evolved" our ideas of hell and eternal damnation, shouldn't we "evolve" or ideas of MR and Punishment?
  
−
:*Prego vs. Cento
+
::*Sapolsky's example of biology in the leg fracture vs. other disorders. But different levels of biology: behavior and culture are involved in our thinking about responsibility.
−
::*[https://www.campbellsoup.ca/product/prego-original-pasta-sauce-645-ml/#:~:text=TOMATO%20PASTE%2C%20WATER%2C%20DICED%20TOMATOES,FOR%20TARTNESS)%20AND%20PARSLEY%20FLAKES. Prego] nutrition and ingredients from Campbell's.
 
−
::*[https://www.target.com/p/prego-tomato-basil-garlic-italian-sauce-24-oz/-/A-14779701?ref=tgt_adv_XS000000&AFID=google_pla_df&fndsrc=tgtao&DFA=71700000012510691&CPNG=PLA_Grocery%2BShopping&adgroup=SC_Grocery&LID=700000001170770pgs&LNM=PRODUCT_GROUP&network=g&device=c&location=9033781&targetid=pla-539547531724&ds_rl=1246978&ds_rl=1248099&gclid=Cj0KCQiAzZL-BRDnARIsAPCJs73oZKlMjaBKWEueXoW8VXo-o9ZsSMbAXMPCSSuUFov4vulGXQxdqRcaAmP0EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds Prego Ingredients label]
 
−
::*No mention of added sugar [https://www.whatsinmyfood.com/product/prego/ here]
 
−
::*[https://www.walmart.com/ip/Cento-Plum-Tomatoes-28-Ounce-Cans-Pack-of-12/934576204?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=101024647&&adid=22222222227386344490&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=477418116381&wl4=aud-1025747331336:pla-1004491995590&wl5=9033781&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=235832879&wl11=online&wl12=934576204&veh=sem&gclid=Cj0KCQiAzZL-BRDnARIsAPCJs71Gi-1rueserPNdsmFuTG0URq-XlZErL9mQIzw75IuLVAh_yQvDEvAaAuXlEALw_wcB Cento nutrition label]
 
  
−
::*Prego: 67 oz 4.37 - 11 6 oz servings -- .39 cents a serving
+
:*'''How do we actually talk about Free Will?''' Ordinary language analysis to the rescue...
−
::*Cento: 28 oz.3.50 - 4.6 6 oz servings -- .76 cents a serving.
 
  
−
::*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prego How prego is made]
+
:*Ordinary language analysis -- We know what we mean by free will, whether it exists in libertarian form or not!  Maybe it's a cultural artefact.  Maybe we use mental modules related to Theory of Mind and governing "animate" objects. 
−
::*[https://www.wine4food.com/food/a-jarring-discovery-the-good-and-the-bad-of-store-bought-pasta-sauce/ More on sauce gastronomy].
+
::*To warm up your intuitions that FW is a cultural concept, consider how adept we are in understanding these sentences: "ordinary language analysis"
 +
::*I may choose to take up painting as a hobby.
 +
::*I cannot choose to become a concert violinists at this point in my life.
 +
::*I can choose whether or not I get ready for class.  
 +
::*I have no choice, I have to turn you in to the police.
 +
::*I can't choose not to love you, but I can't see you any more.
 +
::*I've decided I don't love you any more. (aww...)
  
−
===Gordon Shepherd, ''Neurogastronomy'' Chapters 2, 7, 11, 18, 19, 21, 27===
+
===Small Group Discussion===
  
−
:C2: Dogs, Humans, and Retronasal Smell
+
:*You now have a range of reasonable choices for thinking about moral responsibility and free will.  We've discussed the "MR and deserved punishment" view, the "Accountability and Penalties" view.  While these line up roughly with traditional and naturalist views of free will, plenty of compatibilists believe in MR and punishment.  We've considered MR from a cultural evolutionist perspective as well.  Can you identify yourself among these choices?
 +
:*Return to the Potter and Guyger cases.  Does punishment or penalty talk work best in these cases? 
 +
::*Kimberly Potter - the police officer who meant to tase Duante Wright, but mistakenly grabbed her gun and killed him instead.
 +
::*Amber Guyger - the police officer, off duty, who mistook her neighbor, Botham Jean, for an intruder and killed him.
 +
:*More cases:
 +
::*A man has a heart attack / epileptic attack while driving and kills a pedestrian.  (Consider variations.)
 +
::*A man is working two jobs to support a family, nods off at the wheel and kills a pedestrian.
 +
::*A man knows his car is close to a dangerous malfunction.  When it occurs, he loses control and kills a pedestrian.
  
−
:*comparison of dog’s snout and sniffing with human.  Import how motor functions and anatomy are integrated to behavior.  Mice sniff up to 10x a second!
+
===Some Ways of Thinking about Just Punishment===
−
:*Inside the snout:  modern mammals engage in ortho and retronasal olfaction.  Receptors in nasal bulb direct to brain. 
 
−
:*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 possible without the snout.  Human olfaction favors retronasal vs. Dogs.  Retronasal 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?  Bipedalism increased our range and exposure to food varieties.  Cooking.  Origins of “cuisine” in emergence of cooking 400,000 years ago.  (Note both are food explanations.)
 
  
−
:C7:  Images of Smell
+
:*Some options for Theories of Punishment
  
−
:*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. 
+
::*'''Retributive punishment''' / retributive deterrence.  Requires very strong concept of MR and FW to be just.  Retribution is justified by "moral desert".  It can also involve "social exclusion" -- making it hard for offenders to vote or hold a job.   
−
:*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.  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.  Started to fill in a “map” of the receptor sites on the bulb.  1990s.   
 
  
−
:C11 Creating, Learning, and Remembering Smell
+
::*'''Utilitarian models''' of punishment: General principle: Reducing harm to public and offender. 
  
−
:*lateral olfactory tract — context output from the bulb to the olfactory cortex in the brain.  Long in humans.  What is its role? 
+
:::*Versions include: Public Health-Quarantine Model, Community welfare model (crime is a kind of welfare issue, also for communities), Rehabilitative approaches, Restorative justice.  These models can overlap and tend to assume that crime has natural causes that can either be mitigated through preventative welfare measures (addressing poverty and homelessness, for example) or through rehabilitation, confinement, and/or monitoring.  Does not require a strong position on FW or MR, but these approaches can trigger liberty objections.  (Present discussion option here! Could you imagine a criminal insisting on being treated retributively? Maybe.)
−
:*importance of pyramidal cells.  100: capable of feedback excitation to stimulating cells.  Thought important to memory.  Damaged in dimentica patients.
 
−
:*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.   
 
−
:*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.
+
::*Distinguishing retributive punishment from penalties.  Punishment is about pain.  Penalties (like speeding and parking tickets) might also hurt, but they can be justified on utilitarian grounds (fewer accidents, etc.).
  
−
:C18 Putting it all Together: The Human Brain Flavor System
+
::*Grounding punishment in the consent of the punished.  "Thanks! I needed that!"
 +
::*Try the "veil of ignorance" approach to finding just principles of punishment. (mention law review article)
  
−
:*opening summary of the "human brain flavor system." 
+
:*We will be looking at how these models of punishment correlate with different political economies in Cavadino reading next time.
−
:*reference and quote from Brillat-Savarin, the first “gastronome” .  Nice continuity between early language and neurogastronomy. 
 
−
:*sensory system vs action system
 
−
:*sensory system:
 
−
::*flavor also produced by smell, taste, mouth-sense, sight, sound. 
 
−
::*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....”  [Think about this a minute....]
 
−
:*action system
 
−
::*chart on p. 161 matching brain structures to aspects of flavor perception.  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
+
===Sapolsky, Chapter 16: Biology, the Criminal Justice System, and (Oh, Why Not?) Free Will (Part Two)===
  
−
:*emotions moves us toward action, but also reflect our internal state of desiring and wanting.  What is diff between want and craving?
+
:*Biology and neuroscience are explanatory, but not necessarily predictive of individual behaviors.   
 +
:*See notes for part two above, especially '''Sapolsky's Warning''' at the end of the chapter.
  
−
:*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. 
+
===Henrich, Joseph, "Hell, Free Will, and Moral Universalism"===
  
−
:*[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.  ]
+
:*This excerpt from ''The WEIRDEST People in the World'' comes in the context of a section on "universal moralizing gods" which characterize the major world religions (though Buddhism requires some discussion).  H's theory is that this cultural innovation in religions allows societies to grow, solving the problems associated with living with so many strangers, something our evolved psychology did not really prepare us for.   
  
−
:*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.
+
:*The three innovations of moralizing religions are:
 +
::*contingent afterlife:
 +
::*free will: encouraged follower to believe they could comply with moral code by acts of choice and will.  
 +
::*moral universalism:
  
−
:C21: Flavor and Obesity
+
:*The rest of the excerpt goes into evidence of the effects of each feature on social life.  The research related to free will is at top of p. 148.
  
−
:*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'''.
+
:*What consequences, if any, does this research have for our thinking about the modern problems of free will and moral responsibility?
−
 
+
::*1. Cultural variants on ways of thinking about agency make (or made, in the past) real differences in social morality.
−
:*Overeating:
+
::*2. Free will has its origins in psychological adaptations that allow us to live in large societies.  But the concept seems to be at an extreme when it leads us to blame without desert.
−
::*sensory overload;
+
::*3. The philosopher's concern with the metaphysical problem of free will is hard to reconcile with the cultural utility of a belief in free will.  If FW is cultural why do we care about it's metaphysical grounding? It's grounded in evolved human social behaviors (culture).
−
::*caloric density; reduced roughage.
+
::*4. When you tell your future kids "You can do it if you try.  Don't let other people control your decisions.  What do you want to do with your life?" you may really be motivating them to take up a particular set of values to approach challenges.  But notice this is only valuable motivationally.
−
::*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.
 

Revision as of 21:06, 30 November 2021

25: NOV 30

Assigned

  • Sapolsky, Chapter 16: Biology, the Criminal Justice System, and (Oh, Why Not?) Free Will (580-613) (Part Two 600-613)
  • Henrich, Joseph, "Hell, Free Will, and Moral Universalism" from The WEIRDEST People on Earth p. 146-148, (2)

In-class

  • Lecture: Does Having a view of Free Will help you think about Moral Responsibility?

Free Will, Cultural Evolution, and ordinary language

  • Sapolsky made short work of the problem of free will with his “biology or homunculus” approach.
  • Free Will and Moral Responsibility:
  • 1. Traditional View of Free Will from Dualist Tradition. Modern Version: Libertarian.
  • Examples of argument threads:
  • 1. The "incompatibilist intuition": If we do not have "metaphysically real" FW, then we cannot be held responsible. If the world is deterministic, then we do not have FW and cannot be MR. Because we are MR, we must have FW. (problems)
  • 2. If we have a soul, then maybe the choosy part of us isn't controlled by nature. ...
  • 3. Libertarian version: Kane's theory. Or, if it feels like we inaugurate causal chains, then maybe we do.
  • 2. Compatibilist and Contemporary Naturalist (Cultural Evolutionist) Approaches.
  • What we have, in normal circumstances is "agency." Agency is "an ability to act in the world and to make myself accountable to others." I do this by conforming my behavior to the idea of a "normally competent agent."
  • This sort of agency can have a completely naturalist account, especially if you include cultural evolution in your explanatory domain. The "normally competent agent" is also a product of culture. Since both nature and culture can be product of a deterministic universe, free will is compatible with determinism.
  • Some compatibilist want to keep moral responsibility talk, while others want
  • The View from Cultural Evolution
  • Is Free Will a culturally defined concept for understanding our agency?
  • Free will and MR as a cultural concept. Evidence from Henrich and others. Part of a cultural package that weakened kin bonds that might not have been seen as "choose-able". Promotes idea of choosing a creed or code of conduct.
  • If FW and MR are cultural adaptations, some questions might follow:
  • Does this conception of free will still serve us well, especially in light of new knowledge about human (mis)behavior?
  • Since we've "evolved" our ideas of hell and eternal damnation, shouldn't we "evolve" or ideas of MR and Punishment?
  • Sapolsky's example of biology in the leg fracture vs. other disorders. But different levels of biology: behavior and culture are involved in our thinking about responsibility.
  • How do we actually talk about Free Will? Ordinary language analysis to the rescue...
  • Ordinary language analysis -- We know what we mean by free will, whether it exists in libertarian form or not! Maybe it's a cultural artefact. Maybe we use mental modules related to Theory of Mind and governing "animate" objects.
  • To warm up your intuitions that FW is a cultural concept, consider how adept we are in understanding these sentences: "ordinary language analysis"
  • I may choose to take up painting as a hobby.
  • I cannot choose to become a concert violinists at this point in my life.
  • I can choose whether or not I get ready for class.
  • I have no choice, I have to turn you in to the police.
  • I can't choose not to love you, but I can't see you any more.
  • I've decided I don't love you any more. (aww...)

Small Group Discussion

  • You now have a range of reasonable choices for thinking about moral responsibility and free will. We've discussed the "MR and deserved punishment" view, the "Accountability and Penalties" view. While these line up roughly with traditional and naturalist views of free will, plenty of compatibilists believe in MR and punishment. We've considered MR from a cultural evolutionist perspective as well. Can you identify yourself among these choices?
  • Return to the Potter and Guyger cases. Does punishment or penalty talk work best in these cases?
  • Kimberly Potter - the police officer who meant to tase Duante Wright, but mistakenly grabbed her gun and killed him instead.
  • Amber Guyger - the police officer, off duty, who mistook her neighbor, Botham Jean, for an intruder and killed him.
  • More cases:
  • A man has a heart attack / epileptic attack while driving and kills a pedestrian. (Consider variations.)
  • A man is working two jobs to support a family, nods off at the wheel and kills a pedestrian.
  • A man knows his car is close to a dangerous malfunction. When it occurs, he loses control and kills a pedestrian.

Some Ways of Thinking about Just Punishment

  • Some options for Theories of Punishment
  • Retributive punishment / retributive deterrence. Requires very strong concept of MR and FW to be just. Retribution is justified by "moral desert". It can also involve "social exclusion" -- making it hard for offenders to vote or hold a job.
  • Utilitarian models of punishment: General principle: Reducing harm to public and offender.
  • Versions include: Public Health-Quarantine Model, Community welfare model (crime is a kind of welfare issue, also for communities), Rehabilitative approaches, Restorative justice. These models can overlap and tend to assume that crime has natural causes that can either be mitigated through preventative welfare measures (addressing poverty and homelessness, for example) or through rehabilitation, confinement, and/or monitoring. Does not require a strong position on FW or MR, but these approaches can trigger liberty objections. (Present discussion option here! Could you imagine a criminal insisting on being treated retributively? Maybe.)
  • Distinguishing retributive punishment from penalties. Punishment is about pain. Penalties (like speeding and parking tickets) might also hurt, but they can be justified on utilitarian grounds (fewer accidents, etc.).
  • Grounding punishment in the consent of the punished. "Thanks! I needed that!"
  • Try the "veil of ignorance" approach to finding just principles of punishment. (mention law review article)
  • We will be looking at how these models of punishment correlate with different political economies in Cavadino reading next time.

Sapolsky, Chapter 16: Biology, the Criminal Justice System, and (Oh, Why Not?) Free Will (Part Two)

  • Biology and neuroscience are explanatory, but not necessarily predictive of individual behaviors.
  • See notes for part two above, especially Sapolsky's Warning at the end of the chapter.

Henrich, Joseph, "Hell, Free Will, and Moral Universalism"

  • This excerpt from The WEIRDEST People in the World comes in the context of a section on "universal moralizing gods" which characterize the major world religions (though Buddhism requires some discussion). H's theory is that this cultural innovation in religions allows societies to grow, solving the problems associated with living with so many strangers, something our evolved psychology did not really prepare us for.
  • The three innovations of moralizing religions are:
  • contingent afterlife:
  • free will: encouraged follower to believe they could comply with moral code by acts of choice and will.
  • moral universalism:
  • The rest of the excerpt goes into evidence of the effects of each feature on social life. The research related to free will is at top of p. 148.
  • What consequences, if any, does this research have for our thinking about the modern problems of free will and moral responsibility?
  • 1. Cultural variants on ways of thinking about agency make (or made, in the past) real differences in social morality.
  • 2. Free will has its origins in psychological adaptations that allow us to live in large societies. But the concept seems to be at an extreme when it leads us to blame without desert.
  • 3. The philosopher's concern with the metaphysical problem of free will is hard to reconcile with the cultural utility of a belief in free will. If FW is cultural why do we care about it's metaphysical grounding? It's grounded in evolved human social behaviors (culture).
  • 4. When you tell your future kids "You can do it if you try. Don't let other people control your decisions. What do you want to do with your life?" you may really be motivating them to take up a particular set of values to approach challenges. But notice this is only valuable motivationally.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.gonzaga.edu/alfino/index.php?title=NOV_30&oldid=24338"