neuro test 3

Question 1

Principle

Answer 1

• a guideline that helps us decide how to act
• ex: principle of utility– suggests that the action we ought to perform in a given situation is the one that results in the most happiness or least pain

Question 2

Ethical Theory

Answer 2

• a framework in which moral agents can reflect on the acceptability of actions and decide which actions are good / bad. Usually centers around a principle and provides further framework and support around it.
• ex: Utilitarianism– an ethical theory that explains whose and what happiness should be prioritized for the greater good, and how net pleasure is measured.

Question 3

Intuition

Answer 3

“spontaneous intellectual seemings” that arise when considering a circumstance that usually, but not always lead to a corresponding belief
- tortured baby ex -> most people spontaneously arrive to the conclusion that torturing babies is bad
- not a gut feeling ex -> it is cognitive

Question 4

what role do intuitions play in moral theories

Answer 4

while they appeal differently, “all moral theories seem to be based ultimately on moral intuition”

Question 5

By Rawls, what is the relationship between moral theories / principles, and our moral intuititions

Answer 5

Moral theories and principles are tested by seeking moral equilibrium between intuititions and those ethical theories and principles

Question 6

reflective equilibrium

Answer 6

a principle / set of principles that harmonizes and presumibly underlies our intuiitions

Question 7

how do we go about reaching RE ?

Answer 7

1. start with a judgement (intuition) about uncontroversial moral cases
2. develop a principle that explains those judgements
3. test the principle by trying to come up with counterexamples (an action that is intuitively wrong but does not violate the principle)
4. if we find a counterexample, our principle is not in harmony with our intuitions (no RE) and we need to revise / replace that principle

Question 8

What is the “claim” of the neuroscientific challenge to ethics

Answer 8

• our intuitions are prompted by features of our mind / brain that, whatever else can be said for them, cannot be taken to be reliable guides to moral reality (intuitions are unreliable to moral reality)
• our moral intuitions are a product of cognitive mechanisms that evolved under nonmoral selection pressures, so they cannot be used to accurately track moral reality

Question 9

Explain the study by Greene et al. that is taken to provide evidence for this claim.

Be sure to address the distinction between personal/impersonal moral dilemmas, how each corresponds with a variation of the Trolley Problem, and the different brain regions that activated in each.

Answer 9

Study: tested the judgements of subjects when confronted with different versions of the trolley problem

personal dilemma: directly causing harm or death to someone (fat man)
- lots of activity in the brain regions associated with emotion (less than baseline of working memory)

impersonal dilemma: harm or death results from less direct processes (traditional)
- more activation of working memory, little activation of emotional regions

explanations: the discrepancy between personal and impersonal dilemmas is because intuitions are a product of evolutionary history. more disgusted by direct harm because it was the only harm we were able to inflict in the past

Question 10

How does Singer respond to the other study

Answer 10

we should not rely on intuititons in moral reaonsing, because the differential rsponses to both trolley problens is a result of affective states; they are not rationsla, and thus ought to be rejected as guides to action

(all intuiitions should be rejected as guides to actions if some intuititons are irrational)

Question 11

How does Levy respond to Singer, with what evidence

Answer 11

A judgement’s evidential value should not be discounted just because it is “affectively coded”

evidence:
- damasio and somatic marker hypothesis: emotions are generally reliable guides to reality (advantage from intuition in gambling)
- VM patients with damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex have generally unimpaired reasoning, but poor practical reasoning prudentially and ethically (consequentialist reasoning in trolley)
- similarities and differences between VM and psychopaths (psychopaths cannot distinguish moral from conventional transgressions, and they dont realize that moral transgressions can cause distress to patients

Question 12

Descriptive vs Normative

Answer 12

decriptive: how things are
normative: how things ought to be

Question 13

2 questions of Heinz that are more salient in the real world than either descriptive or normative questions

Answer 13

• why do people fail to behave in a way that they should ?
• what can we / should we do about it ?

practical questions can be both normative and descriptive

Question 14

Effect of (1) cognitive biases and (2) emotional influences on individual moral behavior

why are these morally problematic

Answer 14

1. cognitive biases: unconscious tendency to judge a certain element based on one’s preferences, expectations, and experiences
   - bystander effect: failure in duty to help
   - victim effect: failure to exhibit clarity and justice
2. emotional influences: condemnation of an event can be strongly influenced by the emotional state of the person evaluating it
   - induced disgust: harsher condemnation of disgust related moral transgressions

Question 15

2 potential explanations for why people dont behave in the morally correct way

+ critiques that there is more

Answer 15

1. mistaken beliefs about what they ought to do
   - lack cognitive capacities
   - ignorance of important info
   - lack of reflection
2. they know whats right, they just dont do it
   - lack of self-control
   - evolved character traits

• does not take into account external forces that lead to a morally wrong choice (peer pressure, societal conditions)
• differences in personal experience (perceived moral weight of the wrong does not outweight the benefits from the wrong decision)

Question 16

5 possible means of improving human moral decision making

do they believe this is possible ?

Answer 16

1. nudging: choice architecture that alters people’s behaviors in a predictable way without forbidding any options; makes use of inclinations and biases to lead people to a specific choice
2. training: train cognitive and emotional functions involved in moral decision-making
3. moral education: moral reasoning (deontological) and character (virtue ethics) education. long history of this
4. pharmacological enhancement: improve conditions through drugs (ex: Oxytocin enhances trust)
5. tDCS / TMS: possible to influence mechanisms related to moral behavior

Pies Make These Ds Nut

atleast some improvement is likely possible– education, for example, has worked for ages; some improved cognitive abilities, thus making moral possible

Question 17

potential barriers to / concerns about moral improvement

Answer 17

• how do we identify the standard for moral improvement ?
  (there is a risk for abuse by persons in power)
• altering moral behavior may not produce desired results
  (counterproductive– exploitation from increased trust; irreversible mistakes)

Question 18

ultimate position on whether or not we should try to morally improve humans

Answer 18

is not to take a normative position, but to provide leads for further debate of this topic and the controversial questions it raises

Question 19

healthcare providers should limit multitasking for the sake of safety and ethics

how does this connect to neuroscience

Answer 19

brain structures are vulnerable to multitasking and can impair those involved in moral reasoning. So, this can impair a physicians ability to provide effective patient care. Distractions in a clinical environment can lead to cognitive overload, exhaustion, moral depletion, and impaired clinical and ethical deciion making, thus harming patient safety and ethics

1. shared neural circuit between sensory error detection and moral reasoning -> multitasking can impair abstract problem solving and ethical reasoning
2. multitasking increases number of interruptions -> physicians interrupted every 9-15 minutes and failed to return some 18.5% of tasks

Question 20

Levy on self-control

why is it valuable

Answer 20

self control is valuable because it is instrumentally valuable to pursuing the kind of life we want. When we lack it, we find ourselves at the mercy of “passing fancies”. If i cannot control myself, i cannot trust myself

Question 21

addiction hypothesis

why does levy reject it

Answer 21

• addiciton hypothesis: the addictive desires are irresistible. So, addiction destroys agency itself. Addiccts do not choose to consume, they are impelled by their addiction
• Rejection: addictibe behaviors are not literally compulsive, cause addicts still exercise some degree of control. They do and can resists those desires (either short or long term). And, if it was actually compulsive, then addicts would never recover / give up drugs voluntartily. but, they do in reality

Question 22

what hypothesis explains the failures of self control

how is this superior ?

Answer 22

Ordinary failures of self-control: depletion of resources needed for self-control

when they consume the drug, they do what they want, but in terms of autonomy, they act against their own values

Question 23

how is the extended mind thesis relevant to addiction and how can it be uselful

Answer 23

enables us to better control ourselves and others

Question 24

Why do S and A think “are addicts are responsible” is the wrong question ?

Instead, what should we ask

Answer 24

it is difficult to make such a blanket statement or generalization due to the variety in addiction

alternate: how responsible are addicts ?

Question 25

why / how is the vareity of addiction relevant to determinants of responsibility

Answer 25

• need to break down characteristics of addicts to find a generalizable characteristics that all addicts may share
• variations in responsibility are contingent on the variability of addiction
• adds nuanace to the question (heavy user vs. addict distinction)

Question 26

reasons-responsiveness account of control

how is this relevant and useful to determine control in addiction

Answer 26

RRA: Requires that an agent’s reason for performing a certain action, agent’s belief about that reason, and that action itself all correspond with each other

• agent’s reason for performing a certain action
• agent’s belief about a reason
• action itself
  ex:
• action: person stays in to study
• reason: they have an exam, tmrw
• belief: they believe they should stay in to study

all in correspondence when one is in control, so, control varies by scenario and can be determined by correspondence. So, the account of control can tell us when they are vs are not addicted

Question 27

Do addicts have control over whether or not they use drugs?
What evidence exists in support of an affirmative answer to this question?

In support of a negative answer?

Is the evidence conclusive one way or the other?

What answer does the author himself give to this question?

Answer 27

YES, affirmative evidence:
- Success of recovery programs and clinics
- AA recovery model → submitting control to higher power
- use anti-addiction drugs, despite side effects
- War vets who were heavy users quit after returning to normal life
- success of reward-based recovery

Negative evidence:
- trying to recover but fail
- relapse

Data is inconclusive: control comes in degrees and is context-specific -> addicts have some control, but not full control, and less control than non-addicts

Author: the data does not clearly support a categorical yes or no answer to the question

Question 28

Explain the relationship between addiction, control, and responsibility that the author defends.

Explain the author’s contention that all three vary by degree, and yet certain practical “lines” must still be drawn in particular contexts to signal the presence or absence of each.

Answer 28

relationship: drug users are more addicted when they have less control and then they also have implied less responsibility. addiction is when someone lacks control over an action because of a strong desire / appetite

we cannot ask if theyre responsible because addiction is too varied and comes in degrees. as does responsibility

where the line is drawn between addicts and non-addicts is made depending on the purpose and goals in that particular context
ex: different level of lenses to needed to drive with different levels of vision impairment

Question 29

transference

S and A response

Answer 29

prior to becoming addicted, addicts had control of their actions when they first began to use drugs. Responsibility for initial drug use transfers to present drug use

response: The fact that addicts once had control does not change the fact that they no longer have control over their current drug use due to addiction → since control partly determines both addiction and responsibility, addicts’ lack of control over their present drug use diminishes their responsibility over their current drug use