3 ms·

Isn’t introspection a necessary ingredient to form morals?

• kelseyfrog 7mo ago
  Nesbit and Wilson(1977)[1] suggest that we have little or no direct intro-spective access to higher order cognitive processes. Most of our behaviors are a result of System I thinking and most of our moral rationalizations exist as System II thinking. It's extremely difficult to do what we feel is wrong so it's easier to intellectually synthesize a frame where we're morally correct than force ourselves to act against our possibly wrong intuitions. 1. https://home.csulb.edu/~cwallis/382/readings/482/nisbett%20saying%20more.pdf https://home.csulb.edu/~cwallis/382/readings/482/nisbett%20s...
  • curio_Pol_curio 7mo ago
    Your Sys-I vs II connection reminds me of Dijkstra's take on the moral dimension of the Buxton index https://thewavingcat.com/2024/03/on-the-buxton-index/ https://thewavingcat.com/2024/03/on-the-buxton-index/ In the sense that the very fact that different parts of one's mind work at different pace leads to internal moral conflicts Separately, your trend of thought might risk rationalising (For non-rugged-individualist): the need for a therapist. (For rugged individualist): the need for a therapist at _the same intellectual level_ (or, at a lower level, a therapist who can sympathize with their planning horizon)