Here is his most succinct statement of his interpretation:
Individuals, on the CCT account, behave not as expected-utility weighers—rational or irrational—but rather as cultural evaluators of risk information (Kahan, Slovic, Braman & Gastil 2006). The beliefs any individual forms on societal risks like climate change—whether right or wrong—do not meaningfully affect his or her personal exposure to those risks. However, precisely because positions on those issues are commonly understood to cohere with allegiance to one or another cultural style, taking a position at odds with the dominant view in his or her cultural group is likely to compromise that individual’s relationship with others on whom that individual depends for emotional and material support. As individuals, citizens are thus likely to do better in their daily lives when they adopt toward putative hazards the stances that express their commitment to values that they share with others, irrespective of the fit between those beliefs and the actuarial magnitudes and probabilities of those risks.
So it is the <cost/value/risk> tradeoff which he projects onto individuals, and he claims that the social groupings associated with an individual steer her belief systems into conformance with the group’s opinions, regardless of the validity of those beliefs.
If that hypothesis is true, then a modeled human-like avatar would also switch her beliefs depending on who she was interacting with that session. That means said avatar would understand your personal prejudices, easily agree with them no matter what happens, until you change them. Then she would agree with your new beliefs.
That is a portrait of a brown nosed avatar, slopping flattery on you, at one extreme. At the other extreme, she just wouldn’t discuss issues with you even where she believes your prejudices are misleading you. Somewhere between those two extremes should be a workable script for avatariae.
-Rich
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:34 AM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Motivated Cognition
Dear Christopher and John,
John wrote: By the way, the pointers in that article lead to the "Cultural
Cognition Project" at Yale: http://culturalcognition.squarespace.com/
Reviewing that page I find: " Cultural cognition refers to the tendency of individuals to conform their beliefs about disputed matters of fact (e.g., whether global warming is a serious threat; whether the death penalty deters murder; whether gun control makes society more safe or less) to values that define their cultural identities."
Using the experiences we have discussed on this list, it seems to me that we split in our opinions along purely political orientations, rather than “cultural identities”, but otherwise, it seems a reasonable statement.
The thing that stands out to me is our split along the global warming axis; those who have liberal political beliefs seem to be for it, even though they have no idea if the science work has been done properly by the UNPCC “scientists”. But it isn’t just that one issue, it happens in each and every seam that distinguishes liberal from conservative. The entire country has become much more polarized in the last fourteen years. And the line-up seems to continue through the years; those who believe the liberal (conservative) line tend to stay that way for a long, long time and to automatically take the party line whenever a new issue is raised.
To me that is a lot more interesting than whether a paramecium gets her last meal before being ground between two molars.
-Rich
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 10:14 AM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Motivated Cognition
Christopher and Rich,
Motivations can be good or bad. With no motivations at all, we'd
be dead. Note that teachers try to motivate their students in order
to help them learn.
CS
> As reader "James in NJ" remarks... "don’t we already have a word
> for the phenomenon of “motivated cognition”; namely “prejudice”?
Other terms include 'hunch', 'best guess', 'hypothesis', or 'issue'.
Another pattern: "I'm inspired. You're motivated. He's prejudiced."
RC
> "motivated cognition", by which the author designates the use
> of goal seeking (presumably self-seeking)
Cognition is just one aspect that requires motivation. The four Fs --
Feeding, Fighting, Fleeing, and Sex -- are considered more basic.
The word 'self' is sometimes redundant and sometimes misleading.
There are many organisms, such as bacteria, plants, and simple animals,
that don't have a notion of 'self'. But they do have some version
of the four Fs -- and often complex ways of facilitating them.
Furthermore, all organisms from bacteria on up can only thrive in a
community, and a very large amount of their motivation (or whatever
you want to call it) is devoted to maintaining the environment for
themselves and their community.
Bacteria, for example, are fragile creatures that can't survive long
in isolation. They form protective colonies, such as the plaque on
teeth, and communicate by a wide range of signals.
Many of these communities involve multiple species in symbiosis,
such as lichens, which combine algae and fungi. As you move to higher
organisms, the number and kinds of relationships become more complex.
For example, a beaver dam can transform a muddy stream through a field
into a thriving woodland.
By the way, the pointers in that article lead to the "Cultural
Cognition Project" at Yale: http://culturalcognition.squarespace.com/
John
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J