Taking Responsibility
I have a bone to pick, related to “The Power to Persuade,” by Kevin Dutton. Too often people blame others for their bad decisions. In Mariette DiChristina’s comments in her column From the Editor, she says that she could not figure out what the art salesperson had done to “make” her buy the pen-and-ink set, implying that she had had no option but to buy it. Persuasion may be potent, but it is not helpful to allow people to excuse themselves for not making a better decision. It reminds me of Flip Wilson’s old line, “The devil made me do it!”
Sally Comer
via e-mail
A Sick Populace?
If more than one fourth of the population is considered ill by the psychiatric community, as Robert Epstein wrote in his article “Are You Mentally Healthy?” perhaps the definition of illness should be more carefully examined. For a bacterial infection, it is a patient’s impaired functioning—not just the presence of bacteria in the body—that signals treatment is necessary. If my medical doctor continuously treated infections that created no disability, I’d eventually seek a second opinion.
“jtdwyer”
commenting at www.ScientificAmerican.com/Mind
Wolf Justice
I think Marc Bekoff and Jessica Pierce’s argument in “The Ethical Dog” that canine fair play can give insight into human morality is a good one, but I would limit the comparison to early humans living in small hunter-gathering bands. Once groups start to get larger, altering the tight interdependence necessary for survival, patterns of group behavior change. In other words, when you can start to benefit from my losses, I must play by different rules.
“scots”
commenting at www.ScientificAmerican.com/Mind
When I started this article, I thought, “Humans have spent millennia selecting dogs for certain behavioral traits. What dogs do is not reflective of wild animals.” When I saw that the study included widespread moral behavior in other canids, such as wolves and coyotes, I asked myself, “Have dogs influenced the selection of human behavioral traits?” In some societies, for example the Inuits of North America, dogs played an essential role in the survival of the people they lived with. Could these dogs have made choices, at critical moments, to help or abandon people that did not play by the rules of dog fairness?
Clearly, the power of dogs to select for human traits is not as strong as the power humans have over the breeding of dogs, but perhaps the influence is not negligible.
Spencer Murray
Saint Laurent, Quebec
BEKOFF REPLIES: I think it is conceivable that during the course of the domestication of dogs, humans observed the way wolves socially interacted—and perhaps people noted that these wolves played fairly and abided by clear rules of social engagement. Although the idea is not testable in any empirical way, I think it is possible that early humans saw the animals’ fairness, cooperation, empathy and other positive social behavior patterns and may have used these “social lessons” in their own interactions.
A Manageable Illness
Thank you for the article “Living with Schizophrenia,” by Scott O. Lilienfeld and Hal Arkowitz, which conveyed the important social message that many schizophrenics can experience significant recovery and go on to lead relatively normal lives. It is good to state that even when patients do decline, the symptoms need not devastate friendships—and to point out that those patients with schizophrenia who unfortunately never fully recover should not be blamed for their condition.
Greg Westlake
Norfolk, England
See what we're tweeting about
4 Comments
Add CommentCheck out proSeed: - a journal of environmental finance. It's a weekly publication which reports on the environmental finance space. In future journals we will continue to provide compelling information, relevant news, interviews with industry professionals, and a whole lot of other interesting material. http://proseedjournal.blogspot.com/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIMO, Beckoff cries 'wolf' when he states (with proper disclaimers):
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"...I think it is possible that early humans saw the animals’ fairness, cooperation, empathy and other positive social behavior patterns and may have used these “social lessons” in their own interactions."
Other primate species also have sophisticated social behaviors strongly featuring fairness, cooperation and especially empathy. Why would humanity have had to learn these behaviors from canines after hundreds of thousands of years? I think Beckoff is a true dog lover.
Fairness, Honesty, and the blaming game
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHerbert uses research articles findings documenting persons wearing the so called knockoffs triggered dishonesty in his article Faking It. He then laments that counterfeiting is a serious economical and social problem and wearing the fakes makes people cynic and has hidden social costs.
These results can also be explained by thinking that wearing fakes made Jane Doe more aware of the possibility of getting away with cheating corporations who they consider cheaters. Arent the corporations making eyeglass frame cheating by making them costlier than gold? Arent corporate executives cheating by garnering ever- expanding extravagant benefits? When reminded of corporation logos such as Beyond Petroleum B. P., it is easy to be a cynic. Also if she is cynical about psychological studies, she might cheat to feel the thrill of getting away with cheating psychologists.
I think the research results show that there is need for research on why people covet costly designer products and how psychologists aids the marketing of nearly useless or even potentially harmful ideas and products. The society will served better if psychologists would help Jane avoid psychological marketing traps and thus make the playing field more level.
Furthermore, to decrease cynicism felt by Jane, psychologists could research corporate management and even super-persons corporations themselves to tally the hidden moral cost and suggest ways to make them fairer and more honest.
Fairness, Honesty, and the blaming game
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHerbert uses research articles findings documenting persons wearing the so called knockoffs triggered dishonesty in his article “Faking It.” He then laments that counterfeiting is a serious economical and social problem and wearing the fakes makes people cynic and has hidden social costs.
These results can also be explained by thinking that wearing fakes made Jane Doe more aware of the possibility of getting away with cheating corporations who they consider cheaters. Aren’t the corporations making eyeglass frame cheating by making them costlier than gold? Aren’t corporate executives cheating by garnering ever- expanding extravagant benefits? When reminded of corporation logos such as Beyond Petroleum B. P., it is easy to be a cynic. Also if she is cynical about psychological studies, she might cheat to feel the thrill of getting away with cheating psychologists.
I think the research results show that there is need for research on why people covet costly designer products and how psychologists aids the marketing of nearly useless or even potentially harmful ideas and products. The society will served better if psychologists would help Jane avoid psychological marketing traps and thus make the playing field more level.
Furthermore, to decrease cynicism felt by Jane, psychologists could research corporate management and even super-persons corporations themselves to tally the hidden moral cost and suggest ways to make them fairer and more honest.