Jonathan Haidt: Reasons Do Matter. The Stone is a forum for contemporary philosophers and other thinkers on issues both timely and timeless. This post by the psychologist Jonathan Haidt is a response to two previous articles in The Stone — one by Gary Gutting, the other by Michael P. Lynch — which argued against certain views on reason found in Haidt’s recent book, “The Righteous Mind.” Among the most memorable scenes in movie history is Toto’s revelation that the thundering head of the Wizard of Oz is actually animated by a small man behind a curtain, who lamely says, “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.” Modern psychology has, to some extent, pulled the curtain back on human reasoning and shown it to be much less impressive than it sometimes pretends to be, and much more driven by the hidden force of intuition. I never said that reasons were irrelevant. I said that they were no match for intuition. In separate essays in The Stone last week, Michael P.
Leif Parsons. Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) Christopher Hitchens Advice for Writers. In Colbert 101, Students Study Comic’s Inner Socrates. Stephen Colbert, host of "The Colbert Report," is seen on the set at the University of Pennsylvania in 2008. (AP) BOSTON — If you pay any attention to pop culture, you’ve heard of Stephen Colbert and “The Colbert Report.” And maybe you think of him mostly as a witty, politically minded comic who spoofs on right-wing talk show hosts. But when Michael Rodriguez watches the popular Central Central show, he sees something more. Rodriguez teaches literature at Boston University, and he says Colbert’s work constantly pulls from some of history’s great thinkers — so much so that he’s started a writing course that uses Colbert to teach sophisticated literary devices such as satire and syllogism and logical fallacy. Colbert’s show is “not just any television show,” Rodriguez says.
Boston University Prof. Rodriguez also says there are clear similarities between Colbert’s approach and classical writings from ancient philosophy. Kevin Flynn, 18, is an engineering student in the class. Jonathan Haidt, Authors at Google. Alicia Keys on ‘Girl on Fire’ - Video. The Psych Approach. The Hunger Games and Philosophy: A Critique of Pure Treason. Other Men's Flowers and the Art of Persuasion. Jonathan Haidt: Religion, evolution, and the ecstasy of self-transcendence.
Duncan Davidson: Why do we hate seeing photos of ourselves? Why Mental Pictures Can Sway Your Moral Judgment. iStockphoto.com When we think about morality, many of us think about religion or what our parents taught us when we were young. Those influences are powerful, but many scientists now think of the brain as a more basic source for our moral instincts. The tools scientists use to study how the brain makes moral decisions are often stories, said Joshua Greene, a Harvard psychologist, citing one well-known example: "A trolley is headed toward five people, and the only way you can save them is to hit a switch that will turn the trolley away from the five and onto a side track, but if you turn it onto the side track, it will run over one person.
" It's a moral dilemma. Greene and other researchers have presented this dilemma to research volunteers. Most people say they would flip the switch and divert the trolley. What this shows is that people resolve the moral dilemma by doing a cost-benefit analysis. In other words, people are what philosophers would call utilitarians. Intro. The Righteous Mind. Hunger Games.