4 ms·

> Judges that decide over parole won't attribute their decision on the last time they ate, even if it is the single most important factor to their decision. Th

> Judges that decide over parole won't attribute their decision on the last time they ate, even if it is the single most important factor to their decision. This finding doesn't replicate[0]. In the original study, there was a more mundane explanation: "Defendants without representation have their hearings scheduled at the end of sessions, before breaks." You have much more confidence in the current research than I think is warranted. Genes are indeed a small portion of our DNA, but your statement that "the interesting stuff happens in the other 95%" is unbounded and poorly defined. Personally, I think we have some control over things, and probably less control than most people perceive themselves as happening. But this research is in its infancy and having trouble with basic replication, so holding a strong opinion is a recipe for making poor decisions off it. [0] https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges-dont-give-harsher-sentences-hungry-annies-newsletter-october-5-2018/ https://www.annieduke.com/no-judges-dont-give-harsher-senten...

xorfish 5y ago
Thanks for correcting the judge study. It seems that cases with a higher chance of success are also scheduled earlier as the time it takes is less certain. My understanding is that a portion of the remaining 95% are responsible for turning genes and whole chains of them on and off or something in between. There is no place in the physical world where this control could come from. The factors that influence are hugely complex and very hard to separate. Just because we do not understand how certain factors interact and influence our behavior doesn't mean we have control.
- edmundsauto 5y ago
  Agreed! The really fascinating part to me is how we define control over ourselves. In the end, however, I suspect it doesn't matter - it's kind of like a reverse Pascal's Wager: it's better to think we have control, because otherwise why even try? Put a little differently, regardless of what the absolute truth resolves to - it's in my best interest to take the illusion of control.
  - xorfish 5y ago
    I think the world would be a better place if we accepted that we do not really have controll. Poverty and Crime are not moral failings. Presumably we would make the lives of such people far better if we attribute their missfortune to just bad luck. Redistributing wealth from people that got lucky is also simpler than if we'd attribute their success to their goodness.
    - edmundsauto 5y ago
      That's an interesting perspective. Are you saying that humanity as a whole would be better, if we built societal structures that acknowledge how much less control we have than we perceive? My comment was mostly about my own orientation towards the world. Maybe I do have control, maybe I don't - but I feel better (and hopefully have better outcomes) with the illusion of control/actual control, instead of letting go. OTOH, I also get a lot of stress relief from letting go and not trying to control things during meditation. Living is hard.

xorfish 5y ago

Thanks for correcting the judge study. It seems that cases with a higher chance of success are also scheduled earlier as the time it takes is less certain. My understanding is that a portion of the remaining 95% are responsible for turning genes and whole chains of them on and off or something in between. There is no place in the physical world where this control could come from. The factors that influence are hugely complex and very hard to separate. Just because we do not understand how certain factors interact and influence our behavior doesn't mean we have control.

edmundsauto 5y ago
Agreed! The really fascinating part to me is how we define control over ourselves. In the end, however, I suspect it doesn't matter - it's kind of like a reverse Pascal's Wager: it's better to think we have control, because otherwise why even try? Put a little differently, regardless of what the absolute truth resolves to - it's in my best interest to take the illusion of control.
- xorfish 5y ago
  I think the world would be a better place if we accepted that we do not really have controll. Poverty and Crime are not moral failings. Presumably we would make the lives of such people far better if we attribute their missfortune to just bad luck. Redistributing wealth from people that got lucky is also simpler than if we'd attribute their success to their goodness.
  - edmundsauto 5y ago
    That's an interesting perspective. Are you saying that humanity as a whole would be better, if we built societal structures that acknowledge how much less control we have than we perceive? My comment was mostly about my own orientation towards the world. Maybe I do have control, maybe I don't - but I feel better (and hopefully have better outcomes) with the illusion of control/actual control, instead of letting go. OTOH, I also get a lot of stress relief from letting go and not trying to control things during meditation. Living is hard.