Moral philosophy – Ethical decision making
Philosophes, theologians and in more recent history psychologists, psychiatrist and medical researchers have attempted to explain how and why we humans behave as we do. Those responsible for branding and marketing products are also very interested in what motivates humans to behave in various situations.
Shankar Vedantam the host of the podcast Hidden Brain on May 18, 2020 explores some aspect of this issue with Sam Bowles, a behavioral economist and author of The Moral Economy; Why Good Incentives Are No Substitutes for Good Citizens. I urge the reader of this blog to regularly listen to Hidden Brain.
In this country policy makers seem to believe that humans are fundamentally bad. Many believe if one catches and punishes people who break the laws then not only the law breaker but other citizens will be motivated to not break the law. At every government level an enormous amount of money is spent attempting to catch and punish the law breaker. The laws are based upon beliefs about morality, personal property and personal rights. Thus it is illegal to murder another person, take the property of another person or engage in a behavior which otherwise infringes on the rights on others. There are also laws designed to punish behavior which some in the community find personally offensive.
Questions about motivation and the relative effectiveness of attempts to limit or control behavior are very relevant. We also need to know from a scientific perspective if all the money being spent on identifying and prosecuting those who do not behave in a way which is consistent with the laws is well spent.
Sam Bowles designed an experiment with his children. His children consistently helped with household chores. Since they frequently wanted toys, clothing or other items which cost money he decided (with them) to pay them for performing household tasks. They began to only do tasks if they wanted money for some items. They did fewer household tasks than previously. Mr. Bowels thinks that his was because the systems had switched from moral or ethical one to a cost benefit one. Many other more scientifically designed experiments validate his theory.
Current research seems to show parts of the brain process cost benefit equations and other parts process ethical ones. Cost benefit equations are not necessarily based on what is best for the community. When Mr. Bowles children felt as if they were doing chores as a part of a family they willingly did them. When they were doing them merely to earn money to purchase something they wanted they only did them if the benefit outweigh the physical cost of labor.
Treating individuals as outlaws/bad people/criminal does not makes them feel an important member of the community or a member of the community at all. Their decisions on how to respond is likely to be based on the same cost benefit equation as was used to punish them.
It would seem axiomatic that if we want individuals to act as part of a community and to behave in a way which enhances the life of all in the community we might want to explore ways to making them believe and feel they are part of the larger community. This may be true in the family and at the local, community, state, national and international level.
Whether in response to covid-19, addiction, or other behavior which is not healthy for the individual or larger community it may be important to use what we are learning from scientific research. Basing decisions on feelings or poorly validated economic theories might not bring about the results which ensure the community can survive and thrive.
Written May 21, 2020
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
Philosophes, theologians and in more recent history psychologists, psychiatrist and medical researchers have attempted to explain how and why we humans behave as we do. Those responsible for branding and marketing products are also very interested in what motivates humans to behave in various situations.
Shankar Vedantam the host of the podcast Hidden Brain on May 18, 2020 explores some aspect of this issue with Sam Bowles, a behavioral economist and author of The Moral Economy; Why Good Incentives Are No Substitutes for Good Citizens. I urge the reader of this blog to regularly listen to Hidden Brain.
In this country policy makers seem to believe that humans are fundamentally bad. Many believe if one catches and punishes people who break the laws then not only the law breaker but other citizens will be motivated to not break the law. At every government level an enormous amount of money is spent attempting to catch and punish the law breaker. The laws are based upon beliefs about morality, personal property and personal rights. Thus it is illegal to murder another person, take the property of another person or engage in a behavior which otherwise infringes on the rights on others. There are also laws designed to punish behavior which some in the community find personally offensive.
Questions about motivation and the relative effectiveness of attempts to limit or control behavior are very relevant. We also need to know from a scientific perspective if all the money being spent on identifying and prosecuting those who do not behave in a way which is consistent with the laws is well spent.
Sam Bowles designed an experiment with his children. His children consistently helped with household chores. Since they frequently wanted toys, clothing or other items which cost money he decided (with them) to pay them for performing household tasks. They began to only do tasks if they wanted money for some items. They did fewer household tasks than previously. Mr. Bowels thinks that his was because the systems had switched from moral or ethical one to a cost benefit one. Many other more scientifically designed experiments validate his theory.
Current research seems to show parts of the brain process cost benefit equations and other parts process ethical ones. Cost benefit equations are not necessarily based on what is best for the community. When Mr. Bowles children felt as if they were doing chores as a part of a family they willingly did them. When they were doing them merely to earn money to purchase something they wanted they only did them if the benefit outweigh the physical cost of labor.
Treating individuals as outlaws/bad people/criminal does not makes them feel an important member of the community or a member of the community at all. Their decisions on how to respond is likely to be based on the same cost benefit equation as was used to punish them.
It would seem axiomatic that if we want individuals to act as part of a community and to behave in a way which enhances the life of all in the community we might want to explore ways to making them believe and feel they are part of the larger community. This may be true in the family and at the local, community, state, national and international level.
Whether in response to covid-19, addiction, or other behavior which is not healthy for the individual or larger community it may be important to use what we are learning from scientific research. Basing decisions on feelings or poorly validated economic theories might not bring about the results which ensure the community can survive and thrive.
Written May 21, 2020
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
RSS Feed