What's wrong with Inflicted Insight?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
What's wrong with Inflicted Insight?
You can read what Inflicted Insight is here.
That said, why are experiments that do this are considered unethical and illegal? They sound rad to the max, we should do a lot more of them. I am literally a better person for knowing about the Milgram and Stanford prison experiments, who knows what other gold we have?
That said, why are experiments that do this are considered unethical and illegal? They sound rad to the max, we should do a lot more of them. I am literally a better person for knowing about the Milgram and Stanford prison experiments, who knows what other gold we have?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
- RadiantPhoenix
- Prince
- Posts: 2668
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:33 pm
- Location: Trudging up the Hill
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
They aren't considered unethical (and true legality rarely enters the issue). However, "mental health" is not at all the same thing as 'perfect self-knowledge'. There has to be a good reason if you're going to inflict mental anguish, even on willing and semi-informed participants.
There is a word for people who go around pointing out everyone's flaws.
There is a word for people who go around pointing out everyone's flaws.
Last edited by CatharzGodfoot on Sun Apr 17, 2011 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-
- King
- Posts: 5271
- Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:32 am
Catharz, well, that's sort of complicated. These experiments weren't about inflicting anguish, they were about discovering underlying flaws in human behavior. Understanding the consequences of the Milgram experiment forces us to completely rethink the way we handle authority - it is dangerous to put bad people in charge of good people. And it's important to understand, as someone who has ever taken orders, the Milgram experiment. To understand you can't trust yourself. These experiments did offer self-knowledge, and social knowledge.
It's called inflicted insight for a reason - it offers insight, the insight is just painful. It isn't 'inflicted mental anguish.'
But even more importantly, why is it bad to point out people's flaws? Sure, you can do it in a very rude, offensive way. But on the otherhand, you're offering this person knowledge that they can use to better themself.
Some people think very stupid things, and you could make them less stupid by telling them why the things they think are stupid. Though, you probably shouldn't use the word stupid to them. And people do tend to ignore evidence that contradicts their beliefs. (Deriving opinions from facts instead of choosing the facts that support my opinion? Blasphemy!) So yeah, that might be a lost cause. Maybe we need an 'Inflicted Insight' experiment where we convince participants to believe something obviously false, and then test their ability to ignore contradictory evidence and select supporting evidence.
It's called inflicted insight for a reason - it offers insight, the insight is just painful. It isn't 'inflicted mental anguish.'
But even more importantly, why is it bad to point out people's flaws? Sure, you can do it in a very rude, offensive way. But on the otherhand, you're offering this person knowledge that they can use to better themself.
Some people think very stupid things, and you could make them less stupid by telling them why the things they think are stupid. Though, you probably shouldn't use the word stupid to them. And people do tend to ignore evidence that contradicts their beliefs. (Deriving opinions from facts instead of choosing the facts that support my opinion? Blasphemy!) So yeah, that might be a lost cause. Maybe we need an 'Inflicted Insight' experiment where we convince participants to believe something obviously false, and then test their ability to ignore contradictory evidence and select supporting evidence.
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Lago, you obviously are not understanding the Milgram experiments:
Inflicted Insight is bad because the American Psychological Association says it is, and we should trust the experts.
Inflicted Insight is bad because the American Psychological Association says it is, and we should trust the experts.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
- RadiantPhoenix
- Prince
- Posts: 2668
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:33 pm
- Location: Trudging up the Hill
At risk of feeding the trolls, the reason that they are moving away from labeling transgender identification as a disorder is the same reason they started moving away from labeling people who are gay as having a disorder. Labelling people who are perfectly functional as crazy because they want to bang other boys or be a real boy or both doesn't serve much purpose.Psychic Robot wrote:Just like when they say that transgenderism isn't a mental disorder.we should trust the experts.
I don't see why transsexuals complain so much. After all, gender is just a social construct, so there's no reason they can't just re-educate themselves to be men with a good program. I mean saying that they should actually get surgery and that sort of thing is unconscionable unless you think there are aspects of gender innate to the brain/mind.
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
If you say that wearing non conforming clothes (for your station) is a mental disorder, where do you draw the line? What is next? Ascots?Psychic Robot wrote:Just like when they say that transgenderism isn't a mental disorder.
Hey, Tzor catches onto Mardi Gras well.
Nice vest. Or would that be a waistcoat?
Nice vest. Or would that be a waistcoat?
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
I do realize that, but after some personal experience with using it myself, I interpret the trollface as less "ha ha, just kidding" and more "I am a raging asshat." So I realize that I was basically taking the bait, but I felt it necessary to point out what I did, because raging asshats should not be the only voice on a subject.
Anyways, after that.... intriguing... detour, I would suspect that there is a feeling that when you conduct those kinds of experiments that result in inflicted insight, you take a low level of responsibility for the mental well-being of the people who participate. Essentially from the point of the experiment, for up to years afterwards, you can be blamed for them going off on a crazy episode, even if you managed to handle the entire experiment just fine. So even if you don't necessarily have any ethical opposition to it, you still have to be very careful. It can easily turn into a logistical nightmare. But that is almost purely speculation.
Anyways, after that.... intriguing... detour, I would suspect that there is a feeling that when you conduct those kinds of experiments that result in inflicted insight, you take a low level of responsibility for the mental well-being of the people who participate. Essentially from the point of the experiment, for up to years afterwards, you can be blamed for them going off on a crazy episode, even if you managed to handle the entire experiment just fine. So even if you don't necessarily have any ethical opposition to it, you still have to be very careful. It can easily turn into a logistical nightmare. But that is almost purely speculation.
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
I suppose one issue is that, if people start to get worried about whether or not an experiment might involve Inflicted Insight, the experiment might get tainted. People might start second guessing stuff all the time, which could throw off their normal reaction. For that matter, people might simply be less willing to participate.
On a related note, is there any way to gage how often people behave in a way that's not normal or natural because they're trying to predict what the experimenters are looking for? Is this currently a problem? I only took one psych class in college.
On a related note, is there any way to gage how often people behave in a way that's not normal or natural because they're trying to predict what the experimenters are looking for? Is this currently a problem? I only took one psych class in college.
Makes sense.Almaz wrote:I do realize that, but after some personal experience with using it myself, I interpret the trollface as less "ha ha, just kidding" and more "I am a raging asshat." So I realize that I was basically taking the bait, but I felt it necessary to point out what I did, because raging asshats should not be the only voice on a subject.
- RadiantPhoenix
- Prince
- Posts: 2668
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:33 pm
- Location: Trudging up the Hill
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
That was a trollface? I thought is was Gabe Newell. I though PR had breaking news on Valve.
edit - actually, now that I check the image location, it is gabe newell.
edit - actually, now that I check the image location, it is gabe newell.
Last edited by Blasted on Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
King Francis I's Mother said wrote:The love between the kings was not just of the beard, but of the heart
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
It's a trollface of Gabe Newell. Yes, it was being tongue-in-cheek because I was agreeing that the APA is mostly full of shit while saying something politically inflammatory.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
The Milgram experiment didn't just provide people with insight. It caused real mental anguish as peoples' respect for authority and empathy came into direct conflict. The insight (which may have also resulted in mental anguish) came afterwards.DSMatticus wrote:Catharz, well, that's sort of complicated. These experiments weren't about inflicting anguish, they were about discovering underlying flaws in human behavior. Understanding the consequences of the Milgram experiment forces us to completely rethink the way we handle authority - it is dangerous to put bad people in charge of good people. And it's important to understand, as someone who has ever taken orders, the Milgram experiment. To understand you can't trust yourself. These experiments did offer self-knowledge, and social knowledge.
It's called inflicted insight for a reason - it offers insight, the insight is just painful. It isn't 'inflicted mental anguish.'
But even more importantly, why is it bad to point out people's flaws? Sure, you can do it in a very rude, offensive way. But on the otherhand, you're offering this person knowledge that they can use to better themself.
Some people think very stupid things, and you could make them less stupid by telling them why the things they think are stupid. Though, you probably shouldn't use the word stupid to them. And people do tend to ignore evidence that contradicts their beliefs. (Deriving opinions from facts instead of choosing the facts that support my opinion? Blasphemy!) So yeah, that might be a lost cause. Maybe we need an 'Inflicted Insight' experiment where we convince participants to believe something obviously false, and then test their ability to ignore contradictory evidence and select supporting evidence.
The only reason that an experiment which only provides self-knowledge to participants would have trouble passing a review board is because that self-knowledge could result in mental anguish which is disproportionate to the value of the study.
If you go around inflicting insight by telling fat people that they're fat, ugly people that they're ugly, and stupid people that they're stupid, you're not performing a great service to humanity. You're being an ass.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack