What Is True/Slant?
275+ knowledgeable contributors.
Reporting and insight on news of the moment.
Follow them and join the news conversation.
 

Apr. 23 2009 - 1:02 pm | 8 views | 0 recommendations | 0 comments

More on the Al Gore Effect

{{w|Eliot Spitzer}}, "New York State Atto...

Image via Wikipedia

Marginal Revolution links yesterday’s item about the Al Gore’s Giant Fraggin’ Mansion Effect, and the commenters over there have some interesting applications of the whole idea of “moral self-regulation,” or a “moral thermostat,” or the “portfolio effect,” as Tyler Cowen calls it.

A few samples:

* “Makes sense from a social signaling POV. If you’re perceived as good, it means you’ve done enough to reap the social benefits.”

* “Does this explain the phenomenon of moral scolds caught cheating? ‘I, Eliot Spitzer, am a hero for my fight against the financial industry. So I can afford to cheat on my wife.’”

* “Whoa! So I guess that means all that Catholic guilt people have heaped scorn upon for decades had a purpose. Who knew?”

I think all of that is essentially dead on.

Religious guilt is all about making people feel guilty so that they’ll comply with the church and give it money, enforcing what the church perceives to be a beneficial social code.

While I suspect it’s a bit more complicated, I think moral self-regulation probably does play a pretty big role for moral crusaders who get caught with their pants down. They’ve committed their lives to doing good at a sweeping, social level; they can surely be allowed to pluck a little from the public till or bop a secretary. In some cases, though, it certainly seems the moral crusading stems from the desire to sin. Ted Haggard hates himself for wanting to sleep with men and do crystal meth, so he becomes a pastor at a megachurch (of course, one could just consider this moral self-regulation working in the opposite direction, from sin to the desire to do good). In Spitzer’s case, of course, maybe he just loves hookers.

As for social signaling, that certainly makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. Though, the effect here seems to be about one’s own self-image as “moral.” Of course, that internal self-image could simply exist to create the right signaling to your fellow hairless monkeys.

Anyone here have any of their own experiences with moral self-regulation? Post them in the comments.


Comments

No Comments Yet
Post your comment »
 
Log in for notification options
Comments RSS
 

Post Your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment

Log in with your True/Slant account.

Previously logged in with Facebook?

Create an account to join True/Slant now.

Facebook users:
Create T/S account with Facebook
 

My T/S Activity Feed

 
     

    About Me

    I'm a freelance writer and blogger based in Brooklyn, NY. My background is mostly in politics. I've worked on the editorial boards of the New York Sun and New York Post. In 2006, I wrote a book, "The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians, and the Battle to Control the Republican Party" (Wiley). I've also done my share of freelancing, for places like the Atlantic Monthly, The New York Times, Reason, and RealClearPolitics.

    These days, I'm interested in humanity's ever-expanding understanding of its own irrationality. Hence, this blog.

    Comments, questions, news tips, creative verbal abuse, etc. can be sent to: editor-at-ryansager.com.

    See my profile »
    Followers: 299
    Contributor Since: January 2009
    Location:Brooklyn, NY

    What I'm Up To

    • Follow Neuroworld on…

      stumble

      reddit-256x256

       
    • The Elephant in the Room

      My book about the collapse of the Republican Party.

      To buy, click here.

       
    • This is a picture of a lemur

       
    .<
    • +O
    • +O
    • +O
    >.