"The psychologist Piercarlo Valdesolo and I have demonstrated this phenomenon (read article) in several experiments. In one of them, we gave participants a coin to flip that would determine whether they would have to complete an enjoyable task or an onerous one. We then left them “alone” to flip it (while secretly monitoring them). Ninety percent of them did not flip the coin (or they kept flipping it until they got the answer they wanted) and unfairly assigned themselves the preferable task."
All the participants in our sample had earlier stated that cheating on the task would be immoral. But when evaluating their actions afterward, most not only continued to view themselves as fair even when they weren’t, but also readily condemned others for cheating in the same way. Their minds quickly whitewashed their own untrustworthy actions. They didn’t ignore what they did; they just created a story for why it was O.K.
This article resonated with me yesterday, so much so, I brought it up in conversation with someone, but, I found I couldn't keep from sounding wishy washy. Maybe there is another way of saying to someone "stop trusting yourself" that would be more palatably substantive. My exit strategy was to recommend the article. I told the guy it was very short, which it is... trust me.
11 comments:
IMO, on a very fundamental level, the ability to see yourself as you really are is extremely difficult, for just about everyone. It's almost impossible to do it without going into denial, or freaking out, or reverting into uselss self-castigation.
To see yourself nonjudgmentally, as you really are...there's an achievement.
Yes, phx, so very true! That's why I can't wait for tactile 3-d internet sim systems! :)
There's a quote attributed to Ernest Hemingway, I think, about a writer needing a built in, bullet proof bullshit detector.
I doubt he was talking about having the courage to stand up to other people.
That's not trust, that's honor and the Gray Lady is surprised a lot of people have lost their sense of it?
Sure.
This is the result of 50 years of Leftist indoctrination.
I do not get it. Seriously. This article is talking jabberwocky. I'm pretty sure these academics have never had their lives on the line where personal trust, honor actually, was an issue. I recommend they read Marcus Luttrell's book.
There really are people who do things just because...no excuses. That is my goal for myself, however difficult....and I may never achieve it, but trying is important.
“What does he do, Clarice? What is the first and principal thing he does, what need does he serve by killing? He covets. How do we begin to covet? We begin by coveting what we see every day.”
That is the source of all of it - coveting. It's also what keeps us alive and moving forward. It's the most basic of drives. To be human rather than animal is to resist it, but isn't that just coveting something else?
At this point in my life, I want for nothing other than more time to enjoy what is already just waiting for me to pay attention to. Who can I steal time from? I'm afraid that finding that someone would lead me to evil.
That's right, I'm looking at you. What's your blood type?
So if everyone falls short when left to monitor themselves the NSA should spy on everyone! Except for the nomenklatura. Who answer to a higher morality...or something.
The lady or the tiger. Most of us choose the lady, and can give compelling moral reasons for our choice whilst the tiger behind the other door chows down on babies instead of us.
ricpic said...
So if everyone falls short when left to monitor themselves ...
That is the fallacy, both intellectual and scientific. Not everyone falls short, I'm not convinced even a majority fall short...but the advocates of over weening government would like us to think this is the case. Then they have their argument for overseeing everything.
The entire concept is crap dressed up as science. It is nonsense...candidates selected from what kind of population, etc...?
Don't trust yourself because... our brains are designed to lie to us. They lie and lie.
I think it's part and parcel to what makes us sentient. I don't think you can get one without the other. After all, what is the abstract but a fictional construction? What is anticipation of the future and future events? But without that ability to fill in the bits of reality between the little bits we concretely know, to have a brain that *can* do this... would we be able to theorize anything? I don't think so.
And to answer Ari... I think that's where moral codes and discipline come in to it. A strong sense of Honor that defines what we do when no one is looking as the center of our integrity, or a God who sees what we do in secret... those things aren't our natural state. They're practiced and strengthened and learned. A discipline is about circumventing human nature and refusing the comforting lies our brains are so very good at telling.
I think we lost a lot when people started to insist that children are born innocent, that humans in their natural state are "good".
We used to admire men with strength of character, by how well they controlled their desires and whims. Subdue the flesh. Delay gratification.
Now "everyone does this" is an excuse. Everyone cheats so...? Everyone steals or takes advantage of mislabeled prices... Everyone tells white lies...
It's not even true.
It's just more lies your brain tells you in order to explain why you did what you did and why it wasn't wrong.
Post a Comment