Difference between revisions of "MAR 2"
From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search (Created page with "==13: MAR 2== ===Assigned=== *Sapolsky, Chapter 13, "Culture, context, public goods games, religion" (493-509) (16) *Sandel, "The Case for Equality" p. 151-166 (25) *Rawls T...") |
m |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | ==13: MAR 2== | + | ==13: MAR 2: Some Cultural Evolutionary Theory== |
===Assigned=== | ===Assigned=== | ||
− | * | + | :*Henrich, Joe. Prelude and Chapter 1, "WEIRD Psychology" from ''The WEIRDEST People in the World'' (21-58) |
− | + | ||
− | *Rawls Theory of Justice | + | :*Rawls' Theory of Justice |
::*16 minute video focsued on Rawls: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6k08C699zI&feature=youtu.be]. | ::*16 minute video focsued on Rawls: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6k08C699zI&feature=youtu.be]. | ||
::*6 minute video, PBS series: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0CTHVCkm90&feature=youtu.be] | ::*6 minute video, PBS series: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0CTHVCkm90&feature=youtu.be] | ||
− | === | + | ===In-class=== |
− | + | :*Rawls' Theory of Justice | |
− | :*Rawls' | + | :*Take home personal survey: What's your Justice Number? |
− | :* | ||
− | |||
− | + | ===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." |
− | ::* | + | ::*The ‘letterbox’ in your brain |
+ | ::*Literacy in Western Europe - a “cultural package” that includes abilities, but also attitudes toward education, technologies of literacy like printing. | ||
+ | ::*Note how a “culture of literacy” can cut across other cultures. Right hemisphere bias in facial recognition common to university students across cultures. | ||
+ | ::*1517: 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 drove female literacy and public education. | ||
+ | ::*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 Catholic church. | ||
+ | ::*The movement of “sola scriptura” led to an explosion of literacy, which had numerous cultural effects, but the bigger story of how we became WEIRD starts with the Catholic Churches’ “Marriage and Family Plan” (Chapter 1). | ||
− | + | :*'''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". |
− | :* | + | :*'''Really, who are you?''' |
+ | ::*"Who Am I? task by culture | ||
+ | ::*Mapping the Individualism Complex vs. Kin-based institutions | ||
+ | :::*Might be ''obligated'' to avenge a murder, | ||
+ | :::*''Prohibited'' from marrying a stranger / ''privileged'' to marry mother’s brother’s daughters. | ||
+ | :::*''Responsible'' to carry out expensive ancestor rituals. | ||
+ | :::*''Liable'' for family members crimes. | ||
+ | :::*Note the italicized moral terms. Moral culture changes with sociocentrism/individualism, as in Haidt. | ||
+ | ::*Contrast on p. 28. In the Industrial World "everyone is shopping for better relationships." Read specific contrasts. | ||
+ | ::*Hofstede's scale for measuring individualism/sociocentrism - | ||
+ | ::*Economic prosperity and Individualism may be in two way causal relationship. | ||
+ | ::*Note caveats to this research on p. 31. 1. As with physio-politics, '''not''' say one cultural package is objectively better than another. [Arguably, individualism and markets got us to the crisi of climate change.] 2. As with physio-politics, the categories mask numerous continuous differences. | ||
− | :* | + | :*'''Cultivating the WEIRD self''' |
+ | ::*Research showing individualists 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, not a universal cognitive bias. WEIRD people suffer more from cognitive dissonance because of the type of consistency valued in WEIRD culture. | ||
+ | ::*Guilt vs. Shame | ||
+ | ::*Conformity - Solom Asch's experiments in which confederates give incorrect answers to test conformity. WEIRD cultures show lowest conformity. 37-38. | ||
− | + | :*'''Marshmallows Come to Those Who Wait''' | |
+ | ::*"Discounting" as a measure of '''patience''' - "temporal discounting" widely researched through "choice" studies: "Would you rather X now or X+Y later?" Patience correlated with better socio-economic outcomes. Larger construct: "self-control" "self-regulation - Marshmallow studies. [https://youtu.be/QX_oy9614HQ] | ||
+ | ::*'''Impersonal Honesty''' -- | ||
+ | :::*UN Diplomats' parking violations research. Natural experiment on existing parking violations. Volume of tickets correlates with country's standing on "corruption index". | ||
+ | :::*Impersonal Honesty Game, like the Matrix research from Ariely, normed against probability of each die roll. Also correlates with corruption index. (results at p. 44). "quintessentially WEIRD experiment as there is no person affected by the dishonesty. In some cultures, you would be criticized for not taking advantage of the experiment to help your family. | ||
+ | ::*'''Universalism and Non-relationalism''' -- Research using the "Passengers Dilemma" -- does your friend have a right to expect you to lie to help him evade a parking fine? related results: willingness to give insider information, lie about medical exam to lower insurance rates, write a fake review of a friend's restaurant. Measures also importance of '''impartial rules''' | ||
+ | ::*'''Trusting Strangers''' - "Generalized Trust Question" (GTQ) survey instrument. measures impersonal trust vs. trust in relationship based networks. Norway: 70% Trinidad 4-5% Interesting variation in the US. Northern Italy 49% Sicily 26%. [Interesting discussion of forms of trust. Countries can report high trust on the GTQ, but it may not be impersonal trust. To get at that you have to ask specifically about trusting strangers.] | ||
+ | ::*'''Impersonal Prosociality''' roughly, "how we feel toward a person who is not tied into our social network" - correlated with national wealth, better government, less corruption, faster innovation. | ||
+ | ::*'''Obsessed with intentions''' -- Bob/Rob and Andy vignette research. The "Bob" condition involves intent. Barrett and Laurence research. Focus on intentional dishonesty correlates with WEIRD culture. Independent research on Japanese (less focused on intentions), suggests that other factors about Japan's culture affect outcomes. | ||
+ | ::*'''Analytic vs. Holistic thinking'''. Triad Task. (read 53) Abstract rule-based vs. Functional relationship. Analytics focus on rules, types, continuity. Example: Would you match "rabbit" with "carrot" or "cat"? 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. | ||
− | :* | + | :*Henrich's larger argument: |
+ | ::*The Catholic Church, through it "Marriage and Family Plan" (started around 600 a.d.), started the process that made us WEIRD. See Henrich, C14, "The Dark Matter of History" for summary of the book's argument. (In shared folder.) | ||
+ | ::*Movement from kin and clan based European culture, to "voluntary associations (guilds, charter towns, universities) drove the expansion of impersonal markets, and spurred the rapid growth of cities. | ||
+ | ::*Key elements of the Church's "Marriage and Family Plan" | ||
+ | :::*Monogamous marriages only | ||
+ | :::*No kin marriage | ||
+ | :::*No arranged marriage | ||
+ | :::*Neolocal residence (married couples move out of parents' house) | ||
+ | :::*Inheritance by testament | ||
+ | :::*Individual property | ||
+ | :::*No adoption | ||
− | + | ====Rawls Theory of Justice ==== | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | :* | + | ::*16 minute video focsued on Rawls: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6k08C699zI&feature=youtu.be]. |
+ | ::*6 minute video, PBS series: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0CTHVCkm90&feature=youtu.be] | ||
− | :* | + | :*PBS short video on Rawls |
+ | :*Justice as fairness - Ancient Greeks: harmony. Range of goals: liberty, caring for needs, etc. | ||
+ | :*Justice is about distribution of goods. “Distributive justice”. Examples: equality, needs, merit (getting what you deserve), Rawls- Justice is fairness. Response to natural inequalities. This is a form of needs based justice. Life is unfair, justice is a remedy for that. | ||
+ | :*Nozick (Libertarian) objects: Wilt Chamberlain thought experiment. Unjust not to even out the playing field. As long as we don’t get our stuff by unjust means. | ||
+ | :*Negative rights v positive rights. “Freedom from interference” v “Right to some goods” | ||
+ | :*We see this in theories of punishment — getting what you deserve (tit for tat) v. Public welfare approaches (rehab and self-protection). | ||
− | :* | + | :*”Then and Now” video |
+ | ::*Rawls’ Theory of Justice 1972 | ||
+ | ::*Responding to utilitarian views of justice. Criticism of utilitarianism. Might not protect rights sufficiently. Slavery example. | ||
+ | ::*Rawls want to mix a rights view with distributive justice. Rights are not directly utilitarian (though possibly indirectly) | ||
− | + | :*Original Social Contract tradition. Another Enlightenment philosophical product! See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract Social Contract wiki]. | |
+ | ::*Social contract tradition. Original position. '''What rules and principles would it be rational to choose?''' | ||
+ | :*Rawls' basic method: Principles of justice should be chosen by following a kind of thought experiment in which you imagine yourself not knowing specific things about your identity and social circumstances. Adopting this special stance is what Rawls calls the "veil of ignorance" (parallel in Social Contract tradition) | ||
+ | :*Original Position in Rawls' thought: Choosing principles of justice under a "veil of ignorance" (simple intuition about fairness: How do you divide the last piece of cake? | ||
+ | ::*Note how this realizes a basic condition of moral thought: neutrality, universalization, fairness. | ||
− | :* | + | ::*In the original position: |
− | :* | + | :::*You still know: human psychology, human history, economics, the general types of possible situations in which humans can find themselves. |
+ | :::*You don't know: your place in society, your class, social status, for tu in in natural assets and abilities, sex, race, physical handicaps, generation, social class of our parents, whether you are part of a discriminated group, etc. | ||
− | :* | + | ::*Note Rawls' argument for choosing things you don't know. He considers them "morally arbitrary." You don't deserve to be treated better or worse for your ethnicity, talents, health status, orientation, etc. Recall historically arbitrary differences like noble birth that we used to treat as morally significant. |
− | :* | + | ::*A conservative theorist might object. If a healthy person can earn more money and the freedom to earn money is a matter of moral consequence, then maybe health isn't morally arbitrary? On the other hand, you might be hard pressed to claim that you “deserve” more money because you had healthier genes. For Rawls, it might still be just for you to earn more, but you should also acknowledge that you are benefiting from “morally arbitrary” features of your existence while others are suffering from morally arbitrary deficits. |
− | :* | + | :*So, what principles would it be rational to choose? |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | ::* | + | :*Rawls claims we would choose the following two principles |
+ | ::*1) '''Principle of Equal Liberty''': Each person has an equal right to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties for all. | ||
+ | ::*Basic liberties 11:46. Play. Freedom from: right to vote, speech, assembly, freedom of thought, property, from arbitrary arrest, from discrimination. Positive: Opportunities, basic education. (Egalitarian about rights.) | ||
+ | ::*2) '''Difference Principle''': Social and economic inequalities should be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged persons, and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of equality of opportunity. (Welfare principle for distribution of goods.). “Maximin” strategy maximizing the minimum possible position. Based on a risk calculation. (Note: people have different risk tolerance. Could be a criticism.) | ||
− | + | :*The core intuition behind Rawls' approach is that some things are "morally arbitrary". The veil is an attempt to exclude them. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |
Latest revision as of 20:03, 2 March 2023
Contents
13: MAR 2: Some Cultural Evolutionary Theory
Assigned
- Henrich, Joe. Prelude and Chapter 1, "WEIRD Psychology" from The WEIRDEST People in the World (21-58)
In-class
- Rawls' Theory of Justice
- Take home personal survey: What's your Justice Number?
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."
- The ‘letterbox’ in your brain
- Literacy in Western Europe - a “cultural package” that includes abilities, but also attitudes toward education, technologies of literacy like printing.
- Note how a “culture of literacy” can cut across other cultures. Right hemisphere bias in facial recognition common to university students across cultures.
- 1517: 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 drove female literacy and public education.
- 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 Catholic church.
- The movement of “sola scriptura” led to an explosion of literacy, which had numerous cultural effects, but the bigger story of how we became WEIRD starts with the Catholic Churches’ “Marriage and Family Plan” (Chapter 1).
- 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".
- Really, who are you?
- "Who Am I? task by culture
- Mapping the Individualism Complex vs. Kin-based institutions
- Might be obligated to avenge a murder,
- Prohibited from marrying a stranger / privileged to marry mother’s brother’s daughters.
- Responsible to carry out expensive ancestor rituals.
- Liable for family members crimes.
- Note the italicized moral terms. Moral culture changes with sociocentrism/individualism, as in Haidt.
- Contrast on p. 28. In the Industrial World "everyone is shopping for better relationships." Read specific contrasts.
- Hofstede's scale for measuring individualism/sociocentrism -
- Economic prosperity and Individualism may be in two way causal relationship.
- Note caveats to this research on p. 31. 1. As with physio-politics, not say one cultural package is objectively better than another. [Arguably, individualism and markets got us to the crisi of climate change.] 2. As with physio-politics, the categories mask numerous continuous differences.
- Cultivating the WEIRD self
- Research showing individualists 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, not a universal cognitive bias. WEIRD people suffer more from cognitive dissonance because of the type of consistency valued in WEIRD culture.
- Guilt vs. Shame
- Conformity - Solom Asch's experiments in which confederates give incorrect answers to test conformity. WEIRD cultures show lowest conformity. 37-38.
- Marshmallows Come to Those Who Wait
- "Discounting" as a measure of patience - "temporal discounting" widely researched through "choice" studies: "Would you rather X now or X+Y later?" Patience correlated with better socio-economic outcomes. Larger construct: "self-control" "self-regulation - Marshmallow studies. [3]
- Impersonal Honesty --
- UN Diplomats' parking violations research. Natural experiment on existing parking violations. Volume of tickets correlates with country's standing on "corruption index".
- Impersonal Honesty Game, like the Matrix research from Ariely, normed against probability of each die roll. Also correlates with corruption index. (results at p. 44). "quintessentially WEIRD experiment as there is no person affected by the dishonesty. In some cultures, you would be criticized for not taking advantage of the experiment to help your family.
- Universalism and Non-relationalism -- Research using the "Passengers Dilemma" -- does your friend have a right to expect you to lie to help him evade a parking fine? related results: willingness to give insider information, lie about medical exam to lower insurance rates, write a fake review of a friend's restaurant. Measures also importance of impartial rules
- Trusting Strangers - "Generalized Trust Question" (GTQ) survey instrument. measures impersonal trust vs. trust in relationship based networks. Norway: 70% Trinidad 4-5% Interesting variation in the US. Northern Italy 49% Sicily 26%. [Interesting discussion of forms of trust. Countries can report high trust on the GTQ, but it may not be impersonal trust. To get at that you have to ask specifically about trusting strangers.]
- Impersonal Prosociality roughly, "how we feel toward a person who is not tied into our social network" - correlated with national wealth, better government, less corruption, faster innovation.
- Obsessed with intentions -- Bob/Rob and Andy vignette research. The "Bob" condition involves intent. Barrett and Laurence research. Focus on intentional dishonesty correlates with WEIRD culture. Independent research on Japanese (less focused on intentions), suggests that other factors about Japan's culture affect outcomes.
- Analytic vs. Holistic thinking. Triad Task. (read 53) Abstract rule-based vs. Functional relationship. Analytics focus on rules, types, continuity. Example: Would you match "rabbit" with "carrot" or "cat"? 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.
- Henrich's larger argument:
- The Catholic Church, through it "Marriage and Family Plan" (started around 600 a.d.), started the process that made us WEIRD. See Henrich, C14, "The Dark Matter of History" for summary of the book's argument. (In shared folder.)
- Movement from kin and clan based European culture, to "voluntary associations (guilds, charter towns, universities) drove the expansion of impersonal markets, and spurred the rapid growth of cities.
- Key elements of the Church's "Marriage and Family Plan"
- Monogamous marriages only
- No kin marriage
- No arranged marriage
- Neolocal residence (married couples move out of parents' house)
- Inheritance by testament
- Individual property
- No adoption
Rawls Theory of Justice
- PBS short video on Rawls
- Justice as fairness - Ancient Greeks: harmony. Range of goals: liberty, caring for needs, etc.
- Justice is about distribution of goods. “Distributive justice”. Examples: equality, needs, merit (getting what you deserve), Rawls- Justice is fairness. Response to natural inequalities. This is a form of needs based justice. Life is unfair, justice is a remedy for that.
- Nozick (Libertarian) objects: Wilt Chamberlain thought experiment. Unjust not to even out the playing field. As long as we don’t get our stuff by unjust means.
- Negative rights v positive rights. “Freedom from interference” v “Right to some goods”
- We see this in theories of punishment — getting what you deserve (tit for tat) v. Public welfare approaches (rehab and self-protection).
- ”Then and Now” video
- Rawls’ Theory of Justice 1972
- Responding to utilitarian views of justice. Criticism of utilitarianism. Might not protect rights sufficiently. Slavery example.
- Rawls want to mix a rights view with distributive justice. Rights are not directly utilitarian (though possibly indirectly)
- Original Social Contract tradition. Another Enlightenment philosophical product! See Social Contract wiki.
- Social contract tradition. Original position. What rules and principles would it be rational to choose?
- Rawls' basic method: Principles of justice should be chosen by following a kind of thought experiment in which you imagine yourself not knowing specific things about your identity and social circumstances. Adopting this special stance is what Rawls calls the "veil of ignorance" (parallel in Social Contract tradition)
- Original Position in Rawls' thought: Choosing principles of justice under a "veil of ignorance" (simple intuition about fairness: How do you divide the last piece of cake?
- Note how this realizes a basic condition of moral thought: neutrality, universalization, fairness.
- In the original position:
- You still know: human psychology, human history, economics, the general types of possible situations in which humans can find themselves.
- You don't know: your place in society, your class, social status, for tu in in natural assets and abilities, sex, race, physical handicaps, generation, social class of our parents, whether you are part of a discriminated group, etc.
- Note Rawls' argument for choosing things you don't know. He considers them "morally arbitrary." You don't deserve to be treated better or worse for your ethnicity, talents, health status, orientation, etc. Recall historically arbitrary differences like noble birth that we used to treat as morally significant.
- A conservative theorist might object. If a healthy person can earn more money and the freedom to earn money is a matter of moral consequence, then maybe health isn't morally arbitrary? On the other hand, you might be hard pressed to claim that you “deserve” more money because you had healthier genes. For Rawls, it might still be just for you to earn more, but you should also acknowledge that you are benefiting from “morally arbitrary” features of your existence while others are suffering from morally arbitrary deficits.
- So, what principles would it be rational to choose?
- Rawls claims we would choose the following two principles
- 1) Principle of Equal Liberty: Each person has an equal right to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties for all.
- Basic liberties 11:46. Play. Freedom from: right to vote, speech, assembly, freedom of thought, property, from arbitrary arrest, from discrimination. Positive: Opportunities, basic education. (Egalitarian about rights.)
- 2) Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities should be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged persons, and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of equality of opportunity. (Welfare principle for distribution of goods.). “Maximin” strategy maximizing the minimum possible position. Based on a risk calculation. (Note: people have different risk tolerance. Could be a criticism.)
- The core intuition behind Rawls' approach is that some things are "morally arbitrary". The veil is an attempt to exclude them.