An internal switch

These people are involved in a dialectic dialogue.

They have different opinions but both wish to establish the truth by discussing it.

These people are having a debate.

They have different opinions and each wishes to convince the other of their view.

Somewhere inside the brain there is a switch. It operates whilst people are discussing something.

On one side the person is motivated to ‘find the truth’, on the other side the person is motivated to ‘convince the other of their opinion’.

When does that switch flick over?

(and how can I express that in a spatial audio composition? 🙂

Advertisements
This entry was posted in artificial stupidity. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to An internal switch

  1. Bogus Name says:

    It depends on the person. For some people the switch is permanently wired to “Debate”. For other people, hopefully most people, it depends on the topic. For example, most people switch to “Debate” when discussing religion.

    How can that be expressed in a spatial audio composition? Sorry, but I don’t see how that can be done using space.

    Regards,
    Martin

  2. Pingback: Can a computer program model the internal switch? | Etienne Deleflie

  3. Bogus Name says:

    You asked, “then what is it about religion that has the capacity to flick that switch?”

    Simply that people have strong views about religion. (Typically because people are force-fed their particular religion when they are very young, and it goes straight into the brain.) The strength of a person’s view depends on the person and on the topic. The setting of the switch depends on the strength of the view. Also, the probability of the switch being set to “Debate” is inversely proportional to the amount of knowledge a person has about that topic. Here is a quote you may find relevant:

    “The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder’s lack of rational conviction.”
    [From “Let the People Think” by Bertrand Russell, 1941]

    Regards,
    Martin

  4. Pingback: Artificial Stupidity (AS) | Etienne Deleflie

  5. Pingback: The stupidity in Artificial Stupidity is becoming | Etienne Deleflie

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s