vimarsana.com

This is about one hour and 15 minutes. Welcome to the brooklyn public library. This is usually where i start. Please welcome jennifer. [applause] youre here to discuss her first book is a shame necessary. What may give you a sample of the biography. Do you just want to start in on the discussion when i do the biography . Im happy to start i am happy to start right in. Shes an assistant professor and works at the intersection of conservation and cooperation focusing on the Human Dimensions of largescale social dilemmas. Once again shes crossing the river and lets just give her one warm brooklyn welcome. [applause] make sure you pull that up to your face so we can hear you. I just noticed the guilty planet blog. So you have a career that draws you to these negative emotions and creating work. Is that true . Hispanic there are things that will continue to draw negative emotions for the problems and particularly ones that involve the environment or Animal Welfare or labor abuses. When i first heard about it i was curious because when we think about shaming we think of these evil distasteful things you get into some of them and you think about the Scarlet Letter and you think about touring and feathering and think about religious people who are maybe using a model that is pre democratic so i expected to disagree with the book. Before you came to this topic and ended up writing a book about sort of reclaiming the value of shame. The activists reach for that rarely shaming tools. In that guilt with engaging guilty people through consumerism. So, you feel guilty for flying or guilty for. So you buy cruelty free Carbon Neutral and fair trade products. And my interest was in this dynamic and the way that we were engaging this minority of concerned people and engaging them as consumers rather than as activists and the tool of guilt that i would see because it can scale to the institutional government levels and as an example i gave in the book is cesar chavez who protested the famous boycott and wouldnt have been satisfied if a solution to that problem was industry saying look we are going to allow the consumers who want to buy them to purchase them. They continue the same old thing. He would not have been satisfied with Something Like that because his concern was to change the entire industry not just to change a small portion of it. So this focus shifted the burden to the demand side of the equation rather than the supplyside and its one of those tools that focus on supplies. We know a little bit more about how to label gets taken or used or gets into some cases bought but it still seems like im doing this thing and its a step in the right direction but you actually flip that around and say that its really not a great first step. I dont argue that its not better. There is no doubt that if you view it as your primary way of engaging with the issue. And the majority what sort of step out of the way. Its one of the Fastest Growing sectors people think that its highly visible and it only accounts for 4 of the food market. I want to get into the question of how you came to this. You were involved in looking at the fisheries. I was really interested in the microeconomics and i got interested in these tools like the wallet cards in the code labels for seafood. It was the organic foods and fair trade, the whole work and they all had Similar Properties in that there was a tendency to what they actually meant because that meant more things could be certified because theres more demand than supply can meet so in the case of the Fisheries Committee idea of what is sustainable or just glover and lowered over time and also as i was mentioning. As an undergrad i then decided to come to my senses and give it the page. And you saw the video first and the labeling . My First Experience with guilt that wasnt just about something i had done and affected those around me but actually affecting something that ive never met before much was the loyal dolphin, so i got a photograph in the mail because i put into this group called the Earth Island Institute when i was 9yearsold, and opened up the return letter it was all about how they were killing dolphins and there was this very very scarring image of a dolphin being wasted and killed on board of the vote. Thats something that i had cared about and never met. There were millions of schoolchildren who assisted with her parents recalled and that led to the safe logo and that was one of those i was suggesting is one of these red flags about how we engage with the issue but as soon as it was reintroduced or was introduced we began buying tuna again, and i thought that the trouble was over and thats so i realize now the fallacy in thinking that way. Some of this you came to unpack a little later this is the seed that was planted about what you end up describing in the book and the book is how the shift happened, it sort of puts the onus on the consumers rather than on the corporations or the government. The logo was actually the first label of its type prior to that. In the environmental history if you think of that as being a big moment. In distracting us from focusing on the supply to changing and focusing on the demand. And then you give other examples of how economic incentives and disincentives can actually do the shortterm good may be better than how longterm negative consequences, the one that stuck out was the day care center. There was a study where the parents were coming too late and too often and so they said you know we are tired of them coming so late and we are going to introduce the fine and when they did that. Because the parents thought what a relief all i have to do is pay a fine so where they have this sort of guilt or even shame prior, they replaced that with a marketbased punishment. There had been more Research Showing how the markets and the willingness to exchange the behavior from money can actually increase the standard. Its tethered to a subjective power that we all have inside. Thats where shame becomes preferable and it is not as individualistic as that. I described guilt as a tool and its its patrol to regulate your own behavior. The interesting thing is that for that reason, shame can scale up to institution to the governments to the marketplace in the way that guilt cant. You cant say that they have some sort of internal conscience, but you could worry very much of the public reputation. The guild hasnt worked in some of these cases and how putting it all to the consumer point to the consumers of guilt rather than keeping the onus on the collective principle. You talk about the norms. So talk now that weve been on the conversation. What are some of your favorites of the tool of shame working really well. If the government is failing you in certain ways enforcing rules or failing to pass legislation then you might turn to the harsh forms of punishment, so a few examples that i like are those in the sierra club and trying to work with local governments to get it stopped and they were not after going through the companies because they were not very familiar, so instead they traced the financing to the companies to the nine banks. Year after year how they were financing and apple to scale and that started in 2010 and wells fargo and j. P. Morgan announced that they were cutting ties with the company so this isnt obviously stopping mountaintop removal entirely but it is halting the progress and making the other banks agreed to the standards are. They went after a bunch of big box retailers for unsustainable seafood and they would rank the retailers and year after year after year they come after the bottom third of this ranking because the consumers of trader joes really cares who in 2009 they launched a campaign. They have demonstrations of the nation and they have a really cool internet platform where the volunteers could view the platform to call managers around the nation to stop selling unsustainable seafood. It is playful but it was also an intense exposure and as a result, trader joes moved up out of that campaign very much in its obvious result and gave up a lot of their did that solve the not solve the problem of selling unsustainable seafood, no. Are we eventually going to need serious legislation in place . Yes. But after the stop gap in the way that i dont see any evidence of guilt really working at that scale. I want to come back to that because where weve gone we started with the consumer looking at labels to more supply eventually we need to get to the government and we can but before we move on i want to throw out something you said. Guilt is the cheapest form of this tool. What does that mean . Is that economic lingo fax if you think about punishment from the evolutionary perspective and sometimes they line up in the cost come at punishment is costly. This is getting really technical but the punishments and three wards are different in the sense that it is transferring something great to you but punishment is like me taking a hit of some form some small cost or you could imagine if it was like a physical confrontation particularly a large cost to then deprive you of something so we wind up paying a cost and then we can see this. Punishments and society at the government level are all costly. Prison is a very costly system. And yes, economic terms but just in terms of resources and efforts, whatever. So imagine the best form of punishment is where you punish yourself, you bear the cost. Is changing the behavior. So its like when a kid asks why do i feel pain why does pain exist in the universe thats to keep your body intact and present you from doing harm so its a similar thing is that its maybe a mean more at the individual again, just to beat a dead horse, the selfregulating stomach theres a lot of debate whether guilt is a universal emotion. And a universal tool. Shakespeare used the the word built 33 times. Its very likely that guilt is a much more recent, western, more individualistic concept and emotion than shame. If we are in the territory of guilt, we are very subjective where i could drink away my guilt and go and hide and might not lead to better behavior if i am a ceo or a politician. The same is true even if these were perfect we wouldnt have these harsh forms of punishment as well. Lets look at summit samples of shame because thats always fun. As i said before, its something that i have negative connotations the word and you have plenty of examples in the book about the potentials for the use of shame and the in the media that at its worst it can lead to things not going well in the behavior of the norm so people writing from shame i think that here in your book to be as be a cicada talk about current kinds of results that you can get to with shame. Its not just at the individual level. Corporations and governments all display the similar behaviors in these similar behaviors and the various ways that you can ease cape. So i open up that chapter and its very charming. The owner of the titanic that happened to be onboard the on board for night of the titanic went down and she did manage to escape and survive and he felt a tremendous amount of wealth, whether or not he felt if we cant see because i dont know what he looked like. I didnt measure has four modes and that is one of the only ways to know the internal state but he exhibited a lot of signs because one of the first things he did for instance he inserted his name so he assigned his name and referred. He wouldnt come out and face anyone. These are two signs that the shaming is powerful and that you may or may not be getting the ideal outcome afterward. I think sometimes the kind of shame we are talking about is the creative with your social persona dying and it was intense, so he was removing himself from the people that he loved. He said he wasnt going out in public and he was changing his identity because it latches onto reputation so we also see Philip Morris or bp considering its name change after the deep water rising. You can see these similar tendencies even among the groups were the governments its much harder to change that it does happen. Or change the name of a technique. So, online examples appear i dont know if youve read the book there are a lot of examples of the shaming going awry with the new media and what people have learned. And you sort of draw the line between a kind of shaming the changes that behavior on the one hand without ruining a life on the other and that seems to be part of what you describe it in the described in the chapter called the sweet spot of shaming. Very much like antibiotics it depends on the right to does at the right time and you can overdo it and you can under debate. One of the issues generally this sort of comes back to individuals and individual behavior but it is right now as we see disproportionate punishment of individuals are being punished in a much more longlasting form than people who commit actual physical crimes. And this is a strange moment that i dont think its going to last that much longer. Part of the disproportionate aspect is because there is so much anonymity online and also because it has so far been a sort of wild west and we are seeing all of that at the moment. I would be even less give you could remixed if i didnt mention you were examples of rosa parks. How did she fit into the story of using shame, and Martin Luther king of course. It is a great line of Martin Luther king in the book about how, which i concluded in the book about how its the purpose of the bus boycott was to shame and open up a feeling of moral shame and so the boycott was so strategic which is fascinating and it was designed to attract attention and to the reputation that it was attacking was more about the system as a whole than anything to do with montgomery specifically. And this is so what i think is the essence of the strategic shaming that goes after a deeper system and thats why i contrast to some of these examples who has this public shaming site where im not comparing him to Martin Luther king necessarily that rather than going out after individuals, he goes after the groups thats a sort of similar things and its not searchable trying to sort of get america in general to sort of self reflect. But often along the same lines. So i think this is a more interesting form of shaming. It was listed as the most popular news anchor. They they had to be getting the news on a comedy channel. If you think about ridicule and satire these are cheap forms of punishment we talk about expense. If they allow you to say see what you think and allow people to laugh and to easily change their behavior without a big apology. Its not as confrontational because of the element of laughter is that the idea . I dont know if its the element of laughter but its not as confrontational sleazy this is the first sort of punishment and ridicule because that is just the least harsh form of punishment there is and he is just so clever for pitting our attention and refocusing it on those bigger systems taking the Brian Williams case and pivoting towards mass distraction and the veracity of that argument. The government or if the media is so interested in the truth, where were they then. You also talk about gossip. This is related to the jon stewart and stephen colbert. You can have a cynical view of humanity and get the data and say two thirds of what we do is gossip about other people and about 90 of that is negative in certain studies. It would be interesting to look at the subculture but when you think deeply about that it makes sense you dont think about your relationship and you dont talk about the great things you talk about the bad things in hopes of improving them and also if you think about the society at large, people that are doing a great job are not the people that concern us most and that is a fundamental aspect and why in the delinquent taxpayers for instance there is about 20 states now that chamberlain for taxpayers and you could say why not reach for something more positive why do we have to expose the people that dont do it, should we expose the people that pay their taxes . This is an absurd idea we expect people to pay, 90 of people do so that would be strange to have a system of positive reinforcement. One of the first things you learn in psychology class is that as a parent may be positive maybe, positive reinforcement is supposed to be preferable but maybe in Group Situations that doesnt bear out i think its true that positive reinforcement is a better tool but in the threshold where we need a certain amount of people to cooperate with the whole system. Fullstop art its probably not going to be the first thing we reach to what we are not going to say who are the people that matter to us most we are interested in people ruining it for everyone else. Lets talk about how this book is unique because most of us were to try to write about a bit of shame and look at it through literature. Page getting the new data. One of the interesting thing things when we talk about the market as well is that a lot of experiments on punishment in the labs use monetary forms of punishment so i introduced the concept of lets have it be reputational that would play these games which students can earn real money into the end of the game we told them this would be the case, we told them that it would expose the two least cooperative out of the six and in another treatment we did the two most cooperative. What i love about this is that its something that predates capitalism and money and a barter and trade. This is just about reputation. This is getting to something that is very fundamentally human. And that threat and the promise of honor letter to the led to the increase in cooperation. On the basis of again no cost other than what youre getting in terms of reputation. Said take us through this. Do you do most of these at nyu . Uf students . They come to the lab and then they have the choice to give or not to get over the course of the ten rounds of the public goods. They get 10 at the start of the game and they can give a dollar or not and whatever is given to the public good is doubled and redistributed among all of the players even if they didnt cooperate and this is like a School Project in the sense that theres an incentive to the Group Project at school where there is in incentives but if everyone free rides everyone fails so you need some people doing some work and some people get into some people dont. There are low levels of overall cooperation and this is what we saw in the threat of exposing the least or most increased their willingness to give. Said, that was the main one you did. Did you look at other experiments . I did. And i looked at asking people others come if they could know the identity who would they want to know and overwhelmingly people want to know the least cooperative. Another thing you wouldnt find in the book about shame is animal experiments experiments that i myself do not run but are fascinating in terms of their animals that have a lot of social lives and of showing the same behaviors and manipulation that we do so i was interested in finding some of those analogs. The ones that come to mind are the sparrows. That was a key study one of the first to show the power of deception that but what is interesting is what it really got at is even the little birds used ostracism. They dont have shame and its hard for them to expose an individual to the group, but they would use it against individuals they thought were trying to deceive the flock. It would be nice if we could come up with the shaming. Do you know of anything like that . I do know Something Like that. That was one of the chapters in the book is a highly effective shaming but again not it could be used for anything. Rightclicks this is the whole soft power thing that we were talking about, but they really could. In other words, its kind of it has a Bad Reputation but it could be a neutral tool for the good or ill. So, what are the best what are some of those most important habits . One of the ways i wanted to focus on our attention its the bedrock of shaming because the audience isnt so much a part of the tool and we are being asked to be part of the audience for the shaming technique every part of the day. So where should you focus your shaming or focus your attention and where should you worry about the individual for potentially being shamed, these were sort of my main drivers outlining these habits. The first one but i think is the most important is the audience should be fundamentally concerned in the transgression and there are just certain things that we are really not interested in exposure so i cite an act that is a very popular where you can expose companies or restaurants for doing the wrong thing. There is a case where this guy exposes a restaurant for delivering his thai food 30 minutes late. I dont care. Im sorry that your food was late. They do respond to these sites, but i think that its a misuse of the audiences attention for things like this. It only affected this one first. Is between them and the thai company we all get Better Service in this regard but what i would say is yes but we wind up losing the power of shame for another harmful activity that affected us. Another is this application that tells all of your friends if you push this button. And again i just really dont care if my transit for sleep, so but the idea is i will get up the first time to see how many times they hit the snooze. But im just not convinced that is defective because we its effective because we are not the victim of the transgression. Maybe if it went straight to your boss it would be a better tool that i think that gets exactly to my point which is whoever is asking to be part of the audience, they should be a victim or really fundamentally concerned in that transgression. So, that is my social coming of shaming is a social tool that does rely on the audience is and so the more that it gets to the fundamentally social question i think the more effect if it would be. I was thinking about how you set up a person being shamed has to care about the audience that is participating in the shaming. And i thought of something that somebody once said to me about the sanctions against burma which was that it worked better, the sanctions worked better in south africa than south africa against apartheid because that regime considers itself to be part of the europeanamerican kind of community whereas the burmese generals, some of the hardliners didnt and some of the soft minded. So it was slowly working its way towards possibly working that part of the reason it didnt is because the hardliners didnt care what europe or america thought about them. They cared about the money part. So thats what i thought about in terms of the audience during the shaming. I think thats also back to my traitor joes example because, for instance, other retailers are obviously low on that list and a retailer like winndixie was much lower than trader joes. But they would have had a much harder time going after them because if the consumers and the managers are less aligned with the greenpeace agenda and so it had that mismatch between the people trying to do the shaming of the people that were asked to be a part of the audience. We are in a moment now where if you like you are an expert on this moment that we are in a way that you are we could benefit from. It seems like enough and this is now even under obama is how afraid we should be of terrorism which affects the wiki people whereas it seems like the big and as this Climate Change which could conceivably escalate and do so very rapidly to affecting and killing more people than terrorism has. It seems like the agenda behind this book commanded another negative word perhaps in the impetus at the heart of the book is Climate Change is that true . Its one of the many. Its a sort of my big Research Agendas but those are also all a part. So what you say that it could be a tool for all Different Things . You wanted this book to be out there for potentially fill of activists is that right . Stack i could have written the same began to take in all of the examples from things like stopping abortion or stopping any control on gun sales. Itunes examples that fit my agenda if you will. On the other hand, i would argue my concerns are a bit social in nature. It depends on your constituency. If your constituency is a bunch of them certainly abortion is your key issue. Who do we consider part of the group, who are we acting on behalf of when we say social, who is our society, who is the audience and so im interested in how it proportionately affects. These are sort of this is the group i would consider myself closely aligned with. You also mentioned in passing example about how the american system of slavery showed how the law often needs to do a lot of work to catch up with more of the social norms, so it seems to me that there is not a lot of accountability whether it is in the environment. We didnt find the kyoto particle. There is a lot happening by omission and it seems like the impetus is dealing with the kind of corruption and by omission and you need to change the norms and you need to get the law to happen. It seems like when you come to shame, you are so put off by the word and you get to the end of the book and we need this because there isnt so much that isnt happening. If you think about the democratic Justice System, which i happen to be a fan of it is something that we all think of but if you think about the deprivation again the perspective you have life again only in the hands of the state. Only the states can deprive someone state can deprive someone of life in a law that states cant even do that. Liberty, that is a new thing. They are relatively new on the whole scene of punishment compared to the others. Physical physical safeties and you could actually break somebodys arm, again not available to the means for the reasons im very thankful for and then there are two others. You are actually denying somebody. Because there is no democratic system there is no binding treaty so what do we have so that we can be aikido or institutions or of the government if they dont behave how we in the Civil Society wants them to and in a way shaming is as you point out, the that sort of indicator that the rise the need other systems are failing us but it also seems the way that we reach for it should be strategic. Because you can lose the attention and it could be like it has to match the offense. There was a decision Amnesty International would go after the campaign being one of seven countries in the world that is still executed in the juvenile offenders. There were other things as well. The question was what other tool could have been used again we couldnt tell america and maybe this would happen. But this reputation is one of those things we can use against the entire countrys system. We could open up for questions here but before we do lets hear one more time for the visitor. [applause] is a microphone right here and im going to ask you to be brave enough to get in line and come over there because we are here with our friends from cspan. We had our friends who are going to be selling the book and if we are still lucky than at even jennifer will stay and sign the book. Any questions if you are shy you can shout them out and i will repeat in a microphone. Any question . We have someone going to the microphone right now. Can you hear me . I have a question. You get right up to the microphone if you can. You can turn it down a little. The example that you are giving seems compelling in the power of shame to make social changes and in particular the affected affected house on reputation and how people take it personally and how they try to adjust their behavior to match what they intend to have, that is remarkable. But i was thinking like havent we been exposed to exactly these kind of tools for the opposite because i feel that for instance it is a very powerful shaming so they expose you in the u. S. In particular its very clear that brand you should buy and what are the products and if we are extremely clear. If they would come into your backyard you take them wherever they reputation would be exposed so it is a technique that we have seen used in lots of ways and we see the advertisements for the companies into and the problem isnt so much the tool but its more how do you bring it to the causes that interest you so how would you do with . I understand you are talking to the organizations that have the nonprofits but how could one do it more individually and i think that some of these would require a lot of individual taking small actions next to other individuals and hopefully have a way to promote behavioral changes. Is the shame possible to do use i know that wasnt the whole question but that was really compelling. I think that was the end of the question whether what individuals can you shame i think the point of the book is that you kind of need an audience dont all of you have mothers . I see a lot of individual uses but sure it can work and backfire and lead to worse behavior it has all those options into the same characteristics. The way that i would say that advertising is a bit different is that i would find it very specifically in the book as there is behavior that is not uniformed because thats important. If it was uniform across everyone like imagine trying to shame people for, i dont know Something Like im trying to even think of a good example. Something that when we all do similar things is unnecessary if the behavior is uniform, you need a variance of the behavior. And then i will think of a good example, but it is the way that i do find it then is exposing a minority who are exhibiting the worst behavior and so thats i have to take a specific way of defining it so i didnt wind up going down every single track because its like all these other tools competing for our attention so that was my definition. Its different than the ad that is encouraging certain forms but it doesnt shaming. Its secondary or much further down the road in the social system that is very class or consumerbased. It might be anxiety. I thought of how the book really goes in and out of shame into other motions and when you get into the Martin Luther king example, theres also an element of your opponent who has to potentially have the choice to have compassion towards your campaign but in the book it. Against many other emotions and tools. One of those i think advertising like inadequacy making you feel less about your self they are tapping into these things so i guess i wouldnt define it specifically as a shaming and i would say right now we are at a crossroads for creating some important standards of behavior with the terms of climate and welfare at and i dont think we are going to get there without Something Like shaming involved. I see we have another question. Thank you so much for the conversation. I have one comment and then one question. The comment that i would have is they talk about three areas and when i heard your comments about the shame, it fits more into the social realm and they suggest its the more effective one. The question regarding the shame is through is qualified as an individual entity to bring about the shaming in the other party. Whos authorized. You can gather the easiest way is that you are not part of the society. And then an example would be the recent things you share about hackers and then going after the customer privacy and the whole irony of that is both of the consumer becoming aware of something about themselves and the institutions losing their reputation and then feeling either fuzzy about this notion and what they can do to infiltrate the privacy but have to expose it to show the shame and then if take one problem to a second problem. So if you can comment about the regime going after the other regime is that the example of shame lacks the most visible groups that went to a great talk about them. So, a few things. It can be used either strong against the weak and when we tend to be more sympathetic about it its the weak against the strong. We are less cool with the government or google van and anonymous for some reason unless it is a major breach of security that makes us all feel uncomfortable. So thats already an interesting aspect i mentioned at the end of that makes it more acceptable rather than effective, which is the kind of version 2. 0. I think hacking worries us because of the lack of due process and the democratic Justice System that we have sort of all gotten used to and it makes us feel like we are back in the bible blast where we are experiencing some vigilante is some and your neighbors could come into your house and enforce their own rules on you. A lot of us are hesitant to return to a system like that. On the other hand, theres the counter argument is that the other side has got into strong so there are reasons to expose them for that. I would say that yes i am a fan of the democratic Justice System and its one of those things that doesnt seem to matter as much on till it happens to you and then you are left wondering. So in other words they share those two properties very much and make us all a little nervous. My particular one is the people that support the palestinians are using shame effectively as they could against the israelis. A lot of them go into that subject which is probably fraud with controversy. I think south africa and whether shame was used effectively and you had suggested nobody is shameless but i wondered for example if he could be ashamed for ukraine. So its permeated with how is it used against the governments that government that you do not agree with . Those are Big Questions on the political spectrum. The only thing i will say is that most of the time if you have somebody with power theres an audience there is an audience they care about somewhere and so there is an example i cited in the book about how they dont respond to the negative newspapers that they do respond to the negative press especially in the wall street journal and theyve been noted to redesign the nazis of scrutiny which is interesting that the audience that matters to them is not fair in group per se so there are these strange anomalies the countries that appear to not want to be part of the group at all. That makes us feel on edge what can we do to bring these countries in and should they get powerful weapons or whatever and you know north korea i also mentioned this in the book because they tend to be one of those countries and then they join the world cup and they decided not to be part of the world cup again so this is the question how do we balance and to me they are such fascinating questions because it isnt about the individual psychology, its about these scaled features and do we treat north korea likely would be ostracized kid on the playground it isnt clear to me these are the perfect metaphors. So i think it will be an interesting challenge but one thing is for certain that we are moving towards a globalized structure in which we are all interconnected and feel as a global group this is inevitably going to mean the norms and standards butting up against one another in figuring out who wins and how. You responded to the question by pointing out they have a political background but you say that she admits one of his greatest tools is a shaming these regimes that fail on the human rights records. But they did have better luck in the United States than with yemen. So they have have to do what we are part of a community that is shaming them. There is a call scholar because one has the power of wealth and the other has nothing to lose and so this is all so i think true even at the global scale you have to have something to lose for it to matter. Do you want to shout your question from your seat backs the whistleblowers chambers. They are exposing a transgression especially with some of the technique is like the video. I guess it immediately goes to the Animal Rights works because of the counter legislation thats been proposed recently that maybe you have other cases in mind. I define it as anybody exposing the disapproval and anybody that is is in a position in the whistleblowing and one of the ways to make it powerful is to show irrefutable evidence that makes the information hard to because one of the counter strategies is to save the source has no credibility and to try to undermine it but if the facts are still so prevailing in the face of that attack, it may not matter that the reputation has been destroyed and that has happened over and over again on the global scene. You mentioned wiki leaks and counter strategies and one of the ones you focus on is just writing one is hiding. The other is destroying the reputation of the messenger and that was the case. They are the result of earlier generations realizing the trial and error that we sometimes have a situation with a powerful can cant be comforted in their own transgressions own transgression so we protect with whistleblowers and it becomes very protectionist to unravel that. Unless there are other questions i see one now but we dont have to get up everyone is going to just get up and shout their questions. Lets make sure we have time for the signing. Lets do a i saw three hands can we do three questions . Hispanic i saw that and first in the back. In the discussions you wanted to do all of the questions at once . The i was just wondering you defined a this and that made me think about the different and how im interested in the complexity. Im curious about so why is a shame instead of skilled . I think i saw that hand [inaudible] [inaudible] because question [inaudible] realigning on the democracy [inaudible] okay great. I will start with the last one first so they can remember it easily. Ive will start with that one ive will start with that one then. Weve written about this and others in the society more generally rather than the market economy and that dealt is a closer friend of the market and shame because it can be as waged by the decisions to buy certain things over others. That is my main argument anyway and there may be others including the sort of meta norm that we have about the individual over the group and killed guilt being more individualistic than shame. That fits into my freedom to choose and it is a perfect storm i think that about guilt to take off. [inaudible] when you tend to look at the focusing from supply to demand, the last environmental legislation being in the 70s i am a Ronald Reagan baby and i consider that to be the moment, but there are other scholars that would argue it was happening sooner. As for the kind of work that i do, i do theoretical work and so its not the premise is just cooperation and it has to do with money. But the decisions are about the behavioral economics and how they make decisions in the lab. So i dont i havent at least yet taken any teams or targets and i work on individuals which is kind of frustrating because im interested in the group level but its hard to do that experimentally. So, most of the experiment in fact are on individuals and that is a problem but i would say. For the groups i like i tend to like the groups that are less in bed with corporations because i tend to see them as acting more on behalf of the Civil Society van on the interest of the market. So, in doing this research was interesting the names that kept popping up because these are groups that have strong policies against corporate money into that gives them the financial distance to them still a Human Rights Watch they are not beholden to the ceo of bp that might be on the board of directors sort of thing so that might be the group i was looking up to, but im sure in every domain, people would have a different answer to that question so thats my own. As for how the u. S. Whether or not the democracy is failing, you know, whether or not they can serve us when i say the powerful and corporations have so much interest, when you look in terms of Climate Change now the recent work is chilling that this isnt being represented by the decisions are not democratic decisions. The minority isnt making the decision against the democratic well. But i still see the reputation as one of the most important tools in the battle and i dont know how to get around it. What else do we plan to attack in the organized fraction just last week they sent this whole email about how you could send an email to the number i think there were like 15 deniers in congress that singled them out and they were using that social pressure. So i still see it as being fundamental to the democratic process even though as ive mentioned some of the issues like the due process that we have all grown accustomed to. The titanic owner, i should be clear i dont know whether or not he felt what i can say but i can say into this as im interested in experimentally do people change their behavior in the face of public exposure or the threat of public exposure and what it seems is that his behavior fundamentally changed after the titanic went down not only those few days but life in general he lived his days alone in ireland, and so i see that he was ashamed and how he reconciled with that in his own mind we will never know because he didnt write about it but i would say that again whether or not you want to call that the guilt or shame in turn only, i am not sure that it matters especially because things like survivor guilt in general sometimes manifests in the same ways that we say shame us. And finally im not very familiar in the cases you mentioned us a line sure that he would have more to say than i would. Theres more than there is more than you could ever pursue. The last part was very fun to watch. What and i want to thank you for coming to the brca1 library and once again lets hear it for our guests. Thanks for having me. [applause] thanks for your attention. I would suggest going up around that way and then coming down the aisle. Thanks again. [inaudible conversations] dr. Paul offet who talks about

© 2024 Vimarsana

vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.