Intuition First, Reasoning Second

Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs

Подписаться 39 тыс.

Просмотров 12 тыс.

50% 1

NYU professor Jonathan Haidt says that passions and sentiments drives strategic reasoning forward and he illustrates this using ice cream, his three-year-old son and the words "can" and "must."
September 20, 2012. For video, audio, and transcript, go to: www.carnegiecouncil.org/studio...

Опубликовано:

10 окт 2012

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 10

@lowereastsideastrologist7769 5 лет назад

Give that man a noble prize!!!

@GeorgWilde 2 года назад

Now we should examine every psychologist for his innitial motivations and intuitions why he innitiated studies that he innitiated.

@williamschlass6371 10 месяцев назад

Lol

@GeorgWilde 6 месяцев назад

@@williamschlass6371It went over your head.

@muskduh Год назад

Thanks for the video.

@patrickmcmanus1360 Год назад

What did the first part about “ reason being the servant of passion” have to do with the “can/ must” part? Not sure I get it.

@brianscalabrine2225 11 дней назад

Your line of reasoning is inherently biased to what you want to believe, or in other terms, reason is a servant to passion. He illustrates this by stating that a person who wants to believe something would follow a line of reasoning that begins with a "can I?", but if you want to deny it, you'd begin with a "must I?"

@GeorgWilde 2 года назад

Intelligent people verify their beliefs by attempting to falsify them not by cherry picking positive evidence. The fact that most people are unable to do that doesn't mean that everyone is like that.

@williamschlass6371 10 месяцев назад

The fact that you speak in the third person when youre clearly referring to yourself and calling yourself unique is telling but not surprising...

@GeorgWilde 6 месяцев назад

@@williamschlass6371 What actionable information does your "observation" actually give to you lol? I'm not trying to change mind of someone who ad hominems because they didn't like objective statement. Objective = subject to testing by external observation. And yes, i met and listened to other people who are dedicated to systematically designing tests for picking holes in their own assumptions.