It is truly amazing! Under the influence of a placebo prescribed by a physician people feel less pain, experience less fever, and get well. The placebo effect points to the importance of perception and the brain's role in physical health. If placebo medicine can induce people to release hidden healing resources then maybe there are other beneficial things that can come from believing in something that is not real or true. Take religion for example. There are so many religions in the world that it is impossible for all of them to be true. Yet believers receive benefits such as the comfort of having their sins forgiven and the promise of "knowing" that there is life after death. Even when science and reason proves that they are mythical, people continue to believe in their religions because of the benefits.
The placebo effect is a particular kind of priming effect. Perhaps a subconscious prime could be used as a placebo for the mind. Maybe subconscious primes could change character and attitudes. Once we have a theoretical understanding of how it works, we could exploit it in practical ways to change people's lives for the better! Just as we have discovered how to use placebo medicine to persuade people to heal themselves physically, we can discover placebo treatments for the mind. Pretenses about the environment could persuade people to be more moral, happier, nicer, more creative than they would be otherwise. I think it ought to be possible to devise placebo treatments for the self which induce people to emerge as better people. However, there are some ethical problems that have to be dealt with. My theory needs some fine tuning before it becomes practical. I will keep working on it.
Dear FLT,
ReplyDeleteI think you raise precisely one of those dilemmas which distinguishes the religious appreciation of truth from the narrowly scientific. It comes when you note the likelihood of ethical problems. I wonder, will you consider these with any of the cultural preconceptions ('pretenses') derived from, say, the Bible?
Or, to put it another way, is your abiding concern for 'ethics' actually a concern for others that admits there is somewhere, outside of science, a model for such concern? Maybe it's precisely that 'pretense' which allows you to enjoy a somewhat moral, happy, nice and creative life.
Maybe, in fact, 'pretense' is merely a diminutive and incomplete name for what others call 'Spirit'--something which gives order, personality and purpose to the universe, and something which you display far more of than you will admit. :)
You need to clean up your language whilst wrestling with ethics. Terms like “better,” “moral,” are relative, amorphous and multi-dimensional. Words like “character and attitudes” can be defined in many different even antithetical ways. “Happier,” “nicer” than what? If your action makes you happier but me sadder, then do we have a net plus or a minus? “More creative?” Not only do have to be concerned with more than what, but we have to define creativity and decide whether we’re looking at creativity or a copy-cat.
ReplyDeleteWhat is a “better person?” Better than you? Than me? Can it even be defined? Does it need to be defined? If so, then what system of measurement are we going to use? Religious? Philosophical? Which religion? Which philosophy?
Or do we start from scratch . . . and who will do the scratching?
I volunteer. But you have to assure me that when done, you will force everyone else to follow my diktat.
TsarPat
Dear Tsar,
DeleteYou need to clean up your own language before criticizing mine. The words I used are simple and the general meaning is easily understood by people of our culture. your terms of relative, amorphous, multi-dimensional, antithetical, are the words of a pompous ass who is trying to confuse the issue by making simple things complicated. You normally are a sensible fellow so I will assume you have been drinking. Thanks for participating and best regards to your lovely wife who has to put up with you.
Your Friend
Dear Malki-Shua,
ReplyDeleteI welcome and appreciate your comments to my blog post. I respect the religious appreciation of truth as well as the scientific but personally, I would say that religious truth is more narrow than scientific truth. I agree that almost all of our rules of conduct and morality are mentioned in the Bible but they actually evolved long before the Bible was written. My "model" for ethics is derived from both religion and science and is a part of our culture. I feel there are different points of view concerning what is truth. I have mine and you have yours. I respect yours! Thanks for visiting my blog. Please come again.
Thanks for the discussion. Pleasure is mine.
ReplyDelete