Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Jul 09, 2020 2:08 am





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Part 1: Two Systems 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Atop the Piled Books


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 19 times in 14 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
There is a very large literature on dual system theories of cognition, including an ever growing body of literature from neuroimaging studies. Here are some examples:

Rational choice involves assessing the probability of events and combining that with their utility. The choice that is most likely to give you what you want is the best choice. When people are making choices while undergoing fMRI scanning, these two types are reasoning can be seen to take place in different parts of the brain (probability estimation in the frontal lobes, utility in the striatum and other areas that comprise the brains reward circuitry). When people make risky choices, there is usually greater activity in the latter than the former.

When making moral judgments, processing takes place in areas associated with emotion and in areas associated with deliberative reasoning. People who have sustained damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (which processes emotion) make moral judgments strictly on the basis of objective "greater good" considerations, ignoring emotional aspects of situations that give an intact person moral qualms. Simple (and oft used) example: An out of control trolley is headed for 5 people. If you push a switch, it will divert the trolley onto another track where only one person is standing. Should you do it? Most people say yes. What if instead of a switch, there is a very obese man standing there who could be pushed onto the tracks to stop the trolley. He would be killed but the 5 people would be saved. Should you do it? Most people (and people with other kinds of brain damage) say no. But VMPFC patients see no difference between these scenarios;


_________________
Denise Cummins, PhD
Author and Experimental Psychologist
http://www.goodthinkingbooks.com
http://www.denisecummins.com


The following user would like to thank denisecummins for this post:
DWill, Penelope
Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:10 pm
Profile Email
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One with Books

Silver Contributor

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2751
Thanks: 2298
Thanked: 731 times in 626 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Quote:
What if instead of a switch, there is a very obese man standing there who could be pushed onto the tracks to stop the trolley. He would be killed but the 5 people would be saved. Should you do it?


if the very obese man were a banker or a corporate overlord the decision would be requiring much less deliberation :D

perhaps in the heat of the moment one might throw ones own body onto the tracks and thus save fatty AND the five. 8)

if the five were all members of nickelback it would be fatties lucky day :lol:



Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:20 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One more post ought to do it.

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3258
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 329
Thanked: 678 times in 522 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
It makes you deliberate though doesn't?

Does one trust to non-interference and let the trolley go its own way? Trust to the Karmic Law?

Does one imagine that fate has placed you there to derail and divert the trolley? Trust to the Karmic Law?

Or does one make a brave decision as Sir Winston Churchill was called to do, by letting the enemy bomb Coventry, even though he knew they were about to do so. He couldn't allow them, at that stage in the war, to know we had radar, or that we had broken the enigma code. (I went on a tour of Bletchley Park last week, the hub of the codebreakers during the war, which was extremely interesting. I couldn't stop taking photos, hence this instance is lodged in my mind.)

An awful decision for Churchill to be forced to make.


_________________
Only those become weary of angling who bring nothing to it but the idea of catching fish.

He was born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world is mad....

Rafael Sabatini


Sun Aug 26, 2012 4:43 am
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One with Books

Silver Contributor

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2751
Thanks: 2298
Thanked: 731 times in 626 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Quote:
Does one trust to non-interference and let the trolley go its own way? Trust to the Karmic Law?


well you know no matter what i did, i would be thinking of 600,000 cambodians, many of who's only crime was to be in front of a US forces carpet bombing trolley.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osKkRmLIldE

short memory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmoyu4VO5LE

forgotten years

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9eap_cKLP4



Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:01 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One more post ought to do it.

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3258
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 329
Thanked: 678 times in 522 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
I suppose the people of Coventry were equally innocent.

However, Churchill had that decision to make. I don't know that I'd have been brave enough, but brave it certainly was.

When I read John Fowles' novel, 'The Magus' I felt as though I'd never be quite the same again. The man in the novel, lived in a Greek village and was forced by the enemy occupying Greece at the time, to decide whether to betray the village, or loose his own family. Also, the book 'Sophie's Choice', where she was forced to choose between her son and her daughter, which one stayed with her and which went to the concentration camps. Such cruel decisions could make a person insane. There is no way one could make such decisions rationally. We are human beings.....and not rational by nature. I think we are emotional by nature.

If we were completely rational, we would dispose of all babies born with defects, because that weakness carries on through procreation. If we were completely rational, we would be like Hitler and try to produce a master race by only allowing the strongest to live. Thank goodness, we have this natural tendency to care for the weak and vulnerable. It isn't rational.....but it is the best part of humanity. And I hate to imagine what the world would become if we were completely rational.


_________________
Only those become weary of angling who bring nothing to it but the idea of catching fish.

He was born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world is mad....

Rafael Sabatini


Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:18 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Atop the Piled Books


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 19 times in 14 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
I agree Penelope. Although some interpretations of dual process theories of morality is that rationality is needed to override emotion-based moral judgments, not everyone subscribes to that. Detaching moral judgment from compassion typically has disastrous consequences, such as witch burning. Incidentally, Sophie's Choice is one of the moral dilemmas used in current psychological and neuroscience studies of moral judgment.


_________________
Denise Cummins, PhD
Author and Experimental Psychologist
http://www.goodthinkingbooks.com
http://www.denisecummins.com


The following user would like to thank denisecummins for this post:
Penelope
Sun Aug 26, 2012 1:44 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One more post ought to do it.

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3258
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 329
Thanked: 678 times in 522 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Quote:
denisecummins wrote: Although some interpretations of dual process theories of morality is that rationality is needed to override emotion-based moral judgments, not everyone subscribes to that.


Well, I have encountered this dilemma before. We need to have a foot in both worlds don't we?

I was once accused of being 'so heavenly minded that I was no earthly good'. And I understand that. Fortunately, the person who accused me, was a person for whom I had the utmost respect, so I attempted to deal with the problem.

Some people come into our lives as blessings, and some come into our lives as lessons. :wink:


_________________
Only those become weary of angling who bring nothing to it but the idea of catching fish.

He was born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world is mad....

Rafael Sabatini


Sun Aug 26, 2012 2:22 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Atop the Piled Books


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 19 times in 14 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
I agree, but have always wondered why lessons have to be painful. Or maybe we just try to lesson the pain by chalking up the experience as a lesson. I guess the blessings could be lessons as well, just pleasant ones!


_________________
Denise Cummins, PhD
Author and Experimental Psychologist
http://www.goodthinkingbooks.com
http://www.denisecummins.com


Sun Aug 26, 2012 2:50 pm
Profile Email
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One with Books

Silver Contributor

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2751
Thanks: 2298
Thanked: 731 times in 626 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
i was doing some looking around to see who got the trolley heading for coventry and came across this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cofRWpRhD6I

small world

this one is really telling

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D5oOtzn ... re=related

another side of the story

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/m ... entry-burn



Sun Aug 26, 2012 7:45 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Atop the Piled Books


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 19 times in 14 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
FYI, the trolley problem was first proposed by philosopher Phillipa Foot in 1967: The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect in Virtues and Vices (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1978)(originally appeared in the Oxford Review, Number 5, 1967.)


_________________
Denise Cummins, PhD
Author and Experimental Psychologist
http://www.goodthinkingbooks.com
http://www.denisecummins.com


The following user would like to thank denisecummins for this post:
Chris OConnor, youkrst
Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:09 pm
Profile Email
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One with Books

Silver Contributor

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2751
Thanks: 2298
Thanked: 731 times in 626 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
fascinating

Quote:
Foot's original formulation of the problem ran as follows:[1]

Suppose that a judge or magistrate is faced with rioters demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime and threatening otherwise to take their own bloody revenge on a particular section of the community. The real culprit being unknown, the judge sees himself as able to prevent the bloodshed only by framing some innocent person and having him executed.


when i read

Quote:
the judge sees himself as able to prevent the bloodshed only by framing some innocent person and having him executed.


i couldnt help but be reminded of the verse in the bible that says

John 11:50
Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

:lol:

truly an absurd predicament!

literalism as always is the enemy, when i am confronted with the trolley problem i immediately want to find out why these fools are standing on the track, and who is responsible for this ridiculous scenario in the first place.

whether the five die or not, whether the 500 odd in coventry die or not we simply are dwarfed by the millions or rather billions that are the victims of the cosmic trolley pusher.

well no doubt we'll all wake up from this nightmare anon and think, thank god it was just a horrible nightmare. unless of course we lost dear ones in coventry. in which case some will be hoping i am the fat man and will take great delight in pushing me in front of the trolley.... and who can blame them! :lol:

BTW:

the trolleys are coming! the trolleys are coming!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxLry57s ... ults_video

those who do not understand trolley's are doomed to be run over by them. :D

but boy howdy auto-cat it takes education.



Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:22 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Atop the Piled Books


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 19 times in 14 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Here's the full quote from Foot (1967): Suppose that a judge or magistrate is faced with rioters
demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime and threatening otherwise to take their own bloody
revenge on a particular section of the community. The real culprit being unknown, the judge sees himself
as able to prevent the bloodshed only by framing some innocent person and having him executed. Beside
this example is placed another in which a pilot whose aeroplane is about to crash is deciding whether to
steer from a more to a less inhabited area. To make the parallel as close as possible it may rather be
supposed that he is the driver of a runaway tram which he can only steer from one narrow track on to
another; five men are working on one track and one man on the other; anyone on the track he enters is
bound to be killed.

Judy Jarvis Thompson posed the "fat man" trolley problem in 1985 as follows:

As before, a trolley is hurtling down a track towards five people. You are on a bridge under which it will pass, and you can stop it by dropping a heavy weight in front of it. As it happens, there is a very fat man next to you – your only way to stop the trolley is to push him over the bridge and onto the track, killing him to save five. Should you proceed?

Thomson, J.J. (1985). The Trolley Problem, Yale Law Journal, 94, 1395–1415.


_________________
Denise Cummins, PhD
Author and Experimental Psychologist
http://www.goodthinkingbooks.com
http://www.denisecummins.com


The following user would like to thank denisecummins for this post:
youkrst
Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:42 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7116
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1096
Thanked: 2115 times in 1690 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Is the fat man a nobel prize winner, with the five others being convicted child molesters? Many of the moral quandaries are good intuition pumps to uncover how we operate, but are usually too idealistic. In real life, there would be a host of factors with varying degrees of value attributed, both positive and negative. We do "value-math" pretty fast in real life, but armchair quarterbacking the same situations lacks the detail that makes it realistic.

Experiments are better, if controlled correctly. The experiment where people deliver shocks to subjects for answering incorrectly comes to mind. Where the voltage is incrementally increased until it's deadly. The shock was fake, but people still delivered it. I wonder if those who favor the value of 'authority' would on average deliver a higher maximum shock. Don't conservatives value 'authority' more than liberals? :twisted:


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:30 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Atop the Piled Books


Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 19 times in 14 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Good point! Foot and Jarvis were philosophers. They didn't do experiments. But experimental psychologists and neuroscientists have indeed explored exactly the kinds of questions you are raising for the reasons you describe.

Characteristics of the victim do indeed matter. For example, if the victim is a child (even a terminally ill one), people are less likely to endorse switching the trolley to the single victim's track. In a parallel scenario, toxic and fatal fumes must be redirected away from a hospital room where five patients are recovering to a room where one is recovering. Like the standard trolley problem, about 65%-75% of people agree to redirect, but if the single recovering patient is a friend of theirs, the rate drops to about 35%. In a set of studies by Petrinovich, O'Neill, & Jorgensen (1993), they found that people valued humans over non-human animals (Speciesism), Abhorrent Political Philosophy (e.g., Nazism), Inclusive Fitness (kin over strangers), Social Contract (e.g., victim is a railroad worker) and Number of Individuals.

In another study by Cikara and colleagues (2010), people were more willing to endorse sacrificing victims who were elderly, disabled, homeless, or drug addicted than victims who were students, wealthy, professionals. Given that the participants were Princeton students, the authors concluded that this was evidence not just of social valuation but of in-group bias. They also did fMRI scanning while the students made these judgments and found that areas associated with decision-making and conflict resolution were more likely to be recruited when evaluating whether to sacrifice "high value, in-group" individuals.


_________________
Denise Cummins, PhD
Author and Experimental Psychologist
http://www.goodthinkingbooks.com
http://www.denisecummins.com


Mon Aug 27, 2012 11:18 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7116
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1096
Thanked: 2115 times in 1690 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Part 1: Two Systems
Quote:
Given that the participants were Princeton students, the authors concluded that this was evidence not just of social valuation but of in-group bias.


From the little info you've provided, it seems their conclusion is unjustified. It would require another study using a different set of participants, to see if their sacrificial candidates correlate to their own positions. Would elderly folk still sacrifice elderly folk? Something tells me they would. Would poor folk sacrifice other poor folk, or would they be less influenced by relative positions on the income spectrum? I'd be most interested to see what the drug addicts would do.


Quote:
Characteristics of the victim do indeed matter. For example, if the victim is a child (even a terminally ill one), people are less likely to endorse switching the trolley to the single victim's track. In a parallel scenario, toxic and fatal fumes must be redirected away from a hospital room where five patients are recovering to a room where one is recovering. Like the standard trolley problem, about 65%-75% of people agree to redirect, but if the single recovering patient is a friend of theirs, the rate drops to about 35%.


Such a study shows that there are factors that influence such a decision, but in reality I think there are a tremendous amount. Many of them so minor that they can't be studied, which poses a problem for this type of speculation. Placing value on a person so that you may decide how to act towards them is likely an undecipherable algorithm within our heads. We pull from a lifetime of experience for each valuation.

It could be that we favor one person over the next due to similarities to one of our siblings(even if we don't consciously make the connection). Perhaps the male we mean to sacrifice has an abundance of testosterone, which is shown to make other males more aggressive. Perhaps we were recently dumped by a mate, and have a slightly negative disposition towards the opposite sex for a brief time. Perhaps we're simply in a bad mood, where we're at a point halfway between cigarette breaks and needing a release.

Each of these minor influences could be enough to tip one persons decision to one side or the other. Even with an army of controls in place during experiments, some influences would still leak through.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
heledd
Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:51 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Announcements 

• Promote Your FICTION Book on BookTalk.org
Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:33 pm

• Promote Your NON-FICTION Book on BookTalk.org
Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:18 pm



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Community Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Book Discussion Leaders

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Coming Soon!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Coming Soon!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
Promote your FICTION book
Promote your NON-FICTION book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2019. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank