Money is the anthem,
god you're so handsome,
Matthew S. told me a few things about the nature of decision making, and I must expound on why the concept of 'integrity' is so outdated.
We are a product of discrete neurological processes, most of which are learned and conditioned by outside influences. We apply principles like "integrity' to acts that we deem noble, but that nobility is not the basis for our actions. The basis for our actions is a product of cause and effect, and reward valuation. There is no natural tendency toward integrity or justice or so many of these so-called virtues. Now the idea of harm factoring into this is complicated, because we supposedly want to minimize harm that is done to others. However, minimization of harm is not necessarily tied to our sense of reward, nor can we help it if we do not have affective empathy. Our minds do not even really comprehend the suffering of others, because we are emotionally selfish on an instinctive, evolutionary level.
We discussed the concept of things in the brain 'misfiring' as a reason for why our reward/punishment deductions may often be incorrect and we make 'bad decisions' in the eyes of others.
The particularly irrational mind is often (forgivably) weak at normative thought and processing.
Now comes the issue of 'trying to fix' what has been 'wronged'. We do not actively decide to 'take the right step' if we do not cognitively process things correctly. If our brains do not fully comprehend the decisions we are told to make, it does not seem to be a correctly calculated decision, and thus we have no desire to make them. "Why am I doing this?" Because it is the correct decision, they say. No, not that easy. If we have to be told to make a decision that is deemed correct by arbitrary standards, then we still do not interpret it as 'correct' if those standards do not coincide with the ones we have learned. We are effectively forced into a decision based on a set of 'should's. This is not only about a difference in philosophical or ethical values among people. Not at all - we would gladly adopt the ethical values of others if it were simply that easy. Unfortunately, the root of the problem is largely beyond the simple idea of making a choice. We are not masters of our free will.
I'm writing all of this down because my mental function is beginning to take the hit for my pursuit of happiness..
god you're so handsome,
Matthew S. told me a few things about the nature of decision making, and I must expound on why the concept of 'integrity' is so outdated.
We are a product of discrete neurological processes, most of which are learned and conditioned by outside influences. We apply principles like "integrity' to acts that we deem noble, but that nobility is not the basis for our actions. The basis for our actions is a product of cause and effect, and reward valuation. There is no natural tendency toward integrity or justice or so many of these so-called virtues. Now the idea of harm factoring into this is complicated, because we supposedly want to minimize harm that is done to others. However, minimization of harm is not necessarily tied to our sense of reward, nor can we help it if we do not have affective empathy. Our minds do not even really comprehend the suffering of others, because we are emotionally selfish on an instinctive, evolutionary level.
We discussed the concept of things in the brain 'misfiring' as a reason for why our reward/punishment deductions may often be incorrect and we make 'bad decisions' in the eyes of others.
The particularly irrational mind is often (forgivably) weak at normative thought and processing.
Now comes the issue of 'trying to fix' what has been 'wronged'. We do not actively decide to 'take the right step' if we do not cognitively process things correctly. If our brains do not fully comprehend the decisions we are told to make, it does not seem to be a correctly calculated decision, and thus we have no desire to make them. "Why am I doing this?" Because it is the correct decision, they say. No, not that easy. If we have to be told to make a decision that is deemed correct by arbitrary standards, then we still do not interpret it as 'correct' if those standards do not coincide with the ones we have learned. We are effectively forced into a decision based on a set of 'should's. This is not only about a difference in philosophical or ethical values among people. Not at all - we would gladly adopt the ethical values of others if it were simply that easy. Unfortunately, the root of the problem is largely beyond the simple idea of making a choice. We are not masters of our free will.
I'm writing all of this down because my mental function is beginning to take the hit for my pursuit of happiness..
No comments:
Post a Comment