Wednesday, April 22, 2015

“The science of blame: Why we respond to tragedies all wrong”

it seems like the blame ends at Lubitz. Then why do we keep looking for answers and trying to hold others responsible?
Our impulse to blame is strong, but it's also complicated and imperfect. Cognitive psychology tells us that following a negative event our impulse to blame has both an emotional "why" component driven by anger and sadness, and a more rational "who or what is going to make sure this doesn't happen again" set in motion by anxiety and fear. These processes are closely related and often at cross-purposes. Punishing someone for a past event doesn't always make it more likely we can prevent bad events in the future. Conversely, making things safer in the future doesn't always give us the vindication of punishment. Having a better understanding of why we blame and what we're seeking when we do can perhaps get to a more satisfactory — and productive — end…
The impulse to "fix" the problem so it doesn't happen again is a natural one. But it is unclear whether it is a wise one.
"The result is you wind up with laws that are hyper-reactive to situations," explains Solan. "The traditional notion of Madisonian republicanism is precisely because if you do things too quickly, in reaction to immediate situations, you'll respond to blame impulse and not more contemplative pragmatic ideas."”

No comments:

Post a Comment