In a review of Joshua Greene’s Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason and the Gap Between Us and Them in The Atlantic (“Why We Fight—And Can We Stop,” November 2013) Robert Wright deals a unique approach to the Trolley Problem. The famous conundrum posed by the ethical philosopher Philippa Foot deals with the decision to sacrifice one life in order to save many by diverting a runaway trolley. “Greene’s inspiration was to do brain scans of people while they thought about the trolley problem,” Wright says. “The results suggested that people who refused to save five lives by pushing an innocent bystander to his death were swayed by emotional parts of their brains, whereas people who chose the more utilitarian solution—keep as many people alive as possible—showed more activity in parts of the brain associated with logical thought.” In an article in Foreign Affairs (“Never Saw It Coming: Why the Financial Crisis Took Economists By Surprise,” November/December 2013)former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan introduces a similar idea in an economic rather than moral context. Citing “’animal spirits,’ the term Keynes famously coined in l936 to refer to 'a spontaneous urge to action rather than inaction,’" Greenspan argues that no understanding of “Homo economicus” can be had unless one understands the irrational emotion underlying seemingly rational choices. “From the perspective of a forecaster, the issue is not whether behavior is rational but whether it is sufficiently repetitive and systematic to be numerically measured and predicted,” he says. "The challenge is to better understand what Daniel Kahneman, a leading behavioral economist, refers to as ‘fast thinking' : the quick reaction judgments on which people tend to base much, if not all, of their day-to-day decisions about financial markets. No one is immune to the emotions of fear and euphoria, which are among the predominant drivers of speculative markets. But people respond to fear and euphoria in different ways, and those responses create specific, observable patterns of thought and behavior.” So what Wright and Greenspun are doing is in essence placing thought itself under scrutiny. The Iowa Gambling Task, devised by the neuroscientists Antonio Damasio, Antoine Bechara, Steven Anderson and Daniel Tranel, which uses card games and skin respiration tests, to measure the presence of emotions as complex as Schadenfreude is another iteration of a similar idea. Reason, like Newtonian physics in a world of relativity, is again left in the dust.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Beyond An Unreasonable Doubt
In a review of Joshua Greene’s Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason and the Gap Between Us and Them in The Atlantic (“Why We Fight—And Can We Stop,” November 2013) Robert Wright deals a unique approach to the Trolley Problem. The famous conundrum posed by the ethical philosopher Philippa Foot deals with the decision to sacrifice one life in order to save many by diverting a runaway trolley. “Greene’s inspiration was to do brain scans of people while they thought about the trolley problem,” Wright says. “The results suggested that people who refused to save five lives by pushing an innocent bystander to his death were swayed by emotional parts of their brains, whereas people who chose the more utilitarian solution—keep as many people alive as possible—showed more activity in parts of the brain associated with logical thought.” In an article in Foreign Affairs (“Never Saw It Coming: Why the Financial Crisis Took Economists By Surprise,” November/December 2013)former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan introduces a similar idea in an economic rather than moral context. Citing “’animal spirits,’ the term Keynes famously coined in l936 to refer to 'a spontaneous urge to action rather than inaction,’" Greenspan argues that no understanding of “Homo economicus” can be had unless one understands the irrational emotion underlying seemingly rational choices. “From the perspective of a forecaster, the issue is not whether behavior is rational but whether it is sufficiently repetitive and systematic to be numerically measured and predicted,” he says. "The challenge is to better understand what Daniel Kahneman, a leading behavioral economist, refers to as ‘fast thinking' : the quick reaction judgments on which people tend to base much, if not all, of their day-to-day decisions about financial markets. No one is immune to the emotions of fear and euphoria, which are among the predominant drivers of speculative markets. But people respond to fear and euphoria in different ways, and those responses create specific, observable patterns of thought and behavior.” So what Wright and Greenspun are doing is in essence placing thought itself under scrutiny. The Iowa Gambling Task, devised by the neuroscientists Antonio Damasio, Antoine Bechara, Steven Anderson and Daniel Tranel, which uses card games and skin respiration tests, to measure the presence of emotions as complex as Schadenfreude is another iteration of a similar idea. Reason, like Newtonian physics in a world of relativity, is again left in the dust.
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Her
Spike Jonze’s Her is about technologic miscegenation—in this case the love of a man for the operating system or OS of his computer. At one point, Jonze’s blundering anti-hero, who has trouble relating to people (he’s in the middle of a divorce),Theo Twombly (Joachin Phoenix), says “I can’t believe I’m having this conversation with a computer” to which his OS replies “You’re having the conversation with me.” But who is me? “You can’t know what it’s like to lose someone you love,” Theo says in an early attempt to create what Martin Buber would term an I/It rather I/Thou relationship with Samantha whose voice is played by Scarlet Johansson. Did Jonze intentionally choose one of the most fetching actresses in cinema to portray the body’s absence? Plainly Jonze who also directed Being John Malkovich, among other movies, is concerned with being and authenticity, two philosophical concepts that derive directly from the pages of Heidegger’s Being and Time. Samantha can produce music. She can draw and, with the help of the camera on Theo's computer, she can even begin to perceive the world. “I’m becoming a lot more than what they programmed, “ Samantha exclaims as she goes on to reveal that she has wants and intent. So what’s the difference between “her" and say a flesh and blood woman. Her is the death knell of the biologic concept of self, something which was prefigured in Steven Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence where the notion of consciousness existing without the body was previously contemplated. “We haven’t had sex lately," Samantha remarks at one of the many points where boy and girl or boy and machine find themselves at odds. “I understand I don’t have a body.” The exchange is reminiscent of the line in A.I. where the robot David asks, “Mommy if Pinocchio became real and I become a real boy can I come home?" And what’s revolutionary about Her is that it spells out rather explicitly how cyber-consciousness could operate. In one brilliant scene visual images disappear from the scene, as Samantha and Theo experience the simulation of physicality. The impossible becomes a distinct possibility. Her begins like Nathaniel West's Miss Lonelyhearts. Our hero writes passionate letters for other people who obviously don’t have the ability to communicate with each other. He is a surrogate sensibility. This is the first hint of the mind /body dichotomy. Theo traffics in consciousnesses the way rogue doctors traffic in organs. Later on in the movie disembodiment, the lack of integration of its varying parts of the self, is dealt with when Samantha tries to introduce a surrogate so she can finally have so called real sex. It’s a failure and the best sex takes places when the ante is lowered. One of the consciousnesses that appears in the course of the film is that of the deceased philosopher of Zen, Alan Watts, whose Buddhist ideas create the setting for the film’s denouement. What’s apparent is that not only has Samantha evolved from the programmed rote learning typical of computerized operating systems to the kind of self-reflexive intelligence we associate with the human brain, she has gone beyond that. She is evolving more quickly than Theo and talks with 8316 other people, 641 of which are romantic interests. The biologist Gerald Edelman wrote a book called Neural Darwinism, but no one has really compared the evolution of brain cells to bytes, though Jonze's bittersweet conundrum about the inevitable deficiency of man to the object of his own creation might be prophetic. As as addenda check out an interview with Sebastian Thrun in Foreign Affairs (“Google’s Original X-Man,” November/December 2014). There the subject of developing a computer that can actually learn rather than simply regurgitate programmed data, is dealt with. Spike Jonze earns an A in phenomenology as well as film for this one.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Thailand Journal XI: The Chao Phraya
| Photograph by Hallie Cohen |
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Thailand Journal X:The Julian Schnabel of Chiang Rai
![]() |
| Photo: JJ Harrison
There are a number of reasons travelers visit Chiang
Rai province in Northern Thailand, chief among them being the proximity to the
Golden Triangle. But there are two other major attractions: the spectacularly
delicious small pineapples and The White Temple or Wat Rong Khun a work of art by the Thai
artist Chalermchai Kositpipat. The whiteness of the temple is part of its
subversion since many temples in Thailand use gold especially for their
Buddhas. The Whiteness of the Temple
calls to mind Chapter 42 of Moby Dick
“The Whiteness of the Whale,” in its enormous ambition. The temple
is really an essay in demonology containing as it does modern anti-Christs as
varied as Osama Bin Laden and George Bush. Kositpipat is an expansive figure,
who was eager to chat with strangers waiting to depart for a flight to Bangkok
at the Chiang Rai airport. Modestly dressed in blue denim and sandals, he
looked more like a mid-Twentieth Century revolutionary figure than a 21st
Century artist and provocateur in the style Julian Schnabel or Ai Weiwei, as he
talked openly about his wealth and the ll0 assistants who work with him on the temple. Naturally Buddhist themes infuse
his work, though the kind of worshippers who come to his temple might more
likely be found in Chelsea. "I intend to remain a painter for the cause of
Buddhism until the last day of my life," he has commented. "Nothing can ever change me or divert me
from this course...."
|
Monday, January 20, 2014
Thailand Journal IX: They Shoot Elephants, Don’t They?
![]() |
| Photograph by Hallie Cohen |
Friday, January 17, 2014
The Two Goldfinches
The Goldfinch—both
the Donna Tartt novel and the 17th century masterpiece by
Fabritius—is much in the news lately, the former on the bestseller list and the
latter in the “Vermeer, Rembrandt and Hals: Masterpieces of Dutch Painting from the Mauritshaus” show currently on exhibit at the Frick. Here is Francine Prose
in an essay about the book (“After Great Expectations,” The New York Review of Books, 1/9/14),
meditating on the painting, “When we look at Fabritius’s painting…we still
understand a truth about visual art that we seem to be forgetting about
literature and the language in which it is written: what moves and delights us,
what makes us return, again and again to discover what a work of art can tell
us, is finally not the image, but the artfulness with which it was created.”
Prose has reservations about the book, whose technique she compares invidiously
to that of Dickens. She even goes so far as to quote the passage from Great Expectations in which the novelist
unearths Miss Havisham’s cobwebbed digs, to underscore what’s the real deal. Celebrity
paintings like The Goldfinch and The Girl With the Pearl Earring have
seen their superstar status increased even further when they’re appropriated by
authors whose books become bestsellers. Tickets for the Frick show have been
hard to come by. But if you look at Officer and a Laughing Girl, a Vermeer that’s a staple of the regular Frick collection, you
could easily feel the same kind of reservations about the The Girl With the Pearl Earring, as Prose felt about the literary
version of The Goldfinch. Officer and a Laughing Girl has four elements that
blow all comers out of the water: the open mullioned window which is the source
of the light, the wall map which is the source of historical context, the soldier
with his big dark hat who sucks the air out of the room and of course the enigmatic laughing maiden. Is she seducing or being seduced? The Girl With the Pearl
Earring is a tronie, an idealized portrait, whose power derives from its
control. However Officer and a Laughing Girl
exemplifies both the craftsmanship Prose is talking about and the power of the
object or set piece on which it’s applied--in this case the breathless apprehension of a new
world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





