Free to punish: A motivated account of free will belief.

Clark, Cory J.; Luguri, Jamie B.; Ditto, Peter H.; Knobe, Joshua; Shariff, Azim; Baumeister, Roy F.

doi:10.1037/a0035880

Cited by 147 publications

(173 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

147

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This research has uncovered many exciting results and has shown that people's intuitions about whether free will is possible in a deterministic universe are mixed and vary depending on various contextual and motivational factors (e.g., Clark, Luguri, Ditto, & Knobe, 2014;Deery, Davis, & Carey, 2015;Nadelhoffer, Shepard, Nahmias, Sripada, & Ross, 2014;Nichols, 2011;Nichols & Knobe, 2007;Paulhus & Carey, 2011;Pizarro & Helzer, 2010; see also Cushman & Young, 2009). This research has uncovered many exciting results and has shown that people's intuitions about whether free will is possible in a deterministic universe are mixed and vary depending on various contextual and motivational factors (e.g., Clark, Luguri, Ditto, & Knobe, 2014;Deery, Davis, & Carey, 2015;Nadelhoffer, Shepard, Nahmias, Sripada, & Ross, 2014;Nichols, 2011;Nichols & Knobe, 2007;Paulhus & Carey, 2011;Pizarro & Helzer, 2010; see also Cushman & Young, 2009).…”

Section: Free Will and Determinismmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do People Find Incompatible With Causal Determinism?

Bear

Knobe

2015

Cognitive Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four studies explored people's judgments about whether particular types of behavior are compatible with determinism. Participants read a passage describing a deterministic universe, in which everything that happens is fully caused by whatever happened before it. They then assessed the degree to which different behaviors were possible in such a universe. Other participants evaluated the extent to which each of these behaviors had various features (e.g., requiring reasoning). We assessed the extent to which these features predicted judgments about whether the behaviors were possible in a deterministic universe. Experiments 1 and 2 found that people's judgments about whether a behavior was compatible with determinism were not predicted by their judgments about whether that behavior relies on physical processes in the brain and body, is uniquely human, is unpredictable, or involves reasoning. Experiment 3, however, found that a distinction between what we call "active" and "passive" behaviors can explain people's judgments. Experiment 4 extended these findings, showing that we can measure this distinction in several ways and that it is robustly predicted by two different cues. Taken together, these results suggest that people carve up mentally guided behavior into two distinct types-understanding one type to be compatible with determinism, but another type to be fundamentally incompatible with determinism.

show abstract

Section: Free Will and Determinismmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do People Find Incompatible With Causal Determinism?

Bear

Knobe

2015

Cognitive Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They think about the processes that lead them to a particular choice in terms of deliberation and intentionality, see their own actions as internally driven and motivated [69], and come up with internally consistent reasons when the true drivers of choice are not immediately available to them [45]. Even when other people's actions are described as driven by external circumstances, people are still motivated to ascribe intent and responsibility [20].…”

Section: The Need For Autonomy In Consumer Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer Choice and Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data

André

Carmon

Wertenbroch

et al. 2017

Cust. Need. and Solut.

197

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent developments in the field of artificial intelligence and data analytics are facilitating the automation of some consumer chores (e.g., in smart homes and in self-driving cars) and allow the emergence of big-data-driven, micro-targeting marketing practices (e.g., personalized content recommendation algorithms). We contend that those developments can generate a tension for marketers, consumers, and policy makers: They can, on the one hand, contribute to consumer well-being by making consumer choices easier, more practical, and more efficient. On the other hand, they can also undermine consumers' sense of autonomy, the absence of which can be detrimental to consumer well-being. Drawing on diverse perspectives from marketing, economics, philosophy, neuroscience, and psychology, we explore how consumers' sense of autonomy in making choices affects their wellbeing. We discuss how new technologies may enhance or diminish consumers' perceptions of being in control of their choices and how either of those can, in turn, enhance of detract from consumer well-being. Building on this, we identify open research questions in the domain of choice, well-being, and consumer welfare, and suggest avenues for future research.

show abstract

“…For instance, belief in free will increases with the desire to hold others morally responsible for their wrongful behaviour and to justify punishment [106]. Similarly, the tendency to condemn others and to see them as morally unreliable is associated with the belief in a moralizing God [107,108].…”

Section: Strategic Moralizing and The Belief In Cosmic Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

The nature and dynamics of world religions: a life-history approach

Baumard

Chevallier

2015

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contrast with tribal and archaic religions, world religions are characterized by a unique emphasis on extended prosociality, restricted sociosexuality, delayed gratification and the belief that these specific behaviours are sanctioned by some kind of supernatural justice. Here, we draw on recent advances in life history theory to explain this pattern of seemingly unrelated features. Life history theory examines how organisms adaptively allocate resources in the face of trade-offs between different life-goals (e.g. growth versus reproduction, exploitation versus exploration). In particular, recent studies have shown that individuals, including humans, adjust their life strategy to the environment through phenotypic plasticity: in a harsh environment, organisms tend to adopt a 'fast' strategy, pursuing smaller but more certain benefits, while in more affluent environments, organisms tend to develop a 'slow' strategy, aiming for larger but less certain benefits. Reviewing a range of recent research, we show that world religions are associated with a form of 'slow' strategy. This framework explains both the promotion of 'slow' behaviours such as altruism, self-regulation and monogamy in modern world religions, and the condemnation of 'fast' behaviours such as selfishness, conspicuous sexuality and materialism. This ecological approach also explains the diffusion pattern of world religions: why they emerged late in human history (500-300 BCE), why they are currently in decline in the most affluent societies and why they persist in some places despite this overall decline.

show abstract

Free to punish: A motivated account of free will belief.

Cited by 147 publications

References 87 publications

What Do People Find Incompatible With Causal Determinism?

What Do People Find Incompatible With Causal Determinism?

Consumer Choice and Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data

The nature and dynamics of world religions: a life-history approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About