Immanuel Kant took a very strong stance against lying, for which he was
immediately, and has ever since been, criticized as being ‘unrealistic’.
Arguments against Kant’s deontologically-based position on lying have largely
been utilitarian.. A recent neurological study sweeps the feet out from under
such consequentialist positions, giving empirical evidence that the practice of
uttering even ‘little white lies’ can have deleterious consequences.
From NATURE NEUROSCIENCE (published online 24 October 2016):
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nn.4426.pdf
The brain adapts to dishonesty
Neil Garrett1, Stephanie C Lazzaro, Dan Ariely & Tali Sharot
“ABSTRACT: Dishonesty is an integral part of our social world, influencing
domains ranging from finance and politics to personal relationships.
Anecdotally, digressions from a moral code are often described as a series of
small breaches that grow over time. Here we provide empirical evidence for a
gradual escalation of self-serving dishonesty and reveal a neural mechanism
supporting it. Behaviorally, we show that the extent to which participants
engage in self-serving dishonesty increases with repetition.
"Using functional MRI, we show that signal reduction in the amygdala is
sensitive to the history of dishonest behavior, consistent with adaptation.
Critically, the extent of reduced amygdala sensitivity to dishonesty on a
present decision relative to the previous one predicts the magnitude of
escalation of self-serving dishonesty on the next decision.
"The findings uncover a biological mechanism that supports a ‘slippery slope’:
what begins as small acts of dishonesty can escalate into larger
transgressions.”
Chris Bruce,
in Kiel, Germany
- -
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
