Eight Hugs a Day: Trust, morality - and oxytocin

[zonsb]

This relates primarily with emotions compared to the Language is All Thumbs article that primarily deals with intellect. I find it beneficial to have understanding/comprehension of both in my "tool box;" how stuff works -- understanding the world around me and in me. From the smallest to the largest. From atom to our Universe. Speculating beneath subatomic particles and beyond our Universe to the meta-universe/mufti-universe. From origins to full embodiments.

Uploader comment:

Quote: http://www.ted.com Where does morality come from -- physically, in the brain? In this talk neuroeconomist Paul Zak shows why he believes oxytocin (he calls it "the moral molecule") is responsible for trust, empathy, and other feelings that help build a stable society.

---

--

[eye2i2hear]

Some comments that caught my eye to prompt further thought on the matter, per YouTube replies (it's all information):

YouTube users Wrote:Interesting research, but calling oxytocin the moral molecule is a bit disingenuous... Actions A, B and C may release oxytocin, but our decision about wether it is right or noble to perform those actions or inhibit them can not be related to the product oxytocin. It may explain how we become slightly more generous, but not why we hold generosity in high regard.
--aadrian13

So praying releases oxytocin, wich makes you trust strangers and give them your money. It makes sense.
--salahhe

Great talk !...
But does excess oxytocin induce gullibility too ? Will I irrationally give money to someone untrustworthy if I just had sex?
--test123ok

So praying raises oxytocin and that causes me to give money? Not sure if that’s moral but it’s what happens every Sunday.
--gusphraba

I wanna buy oxytocin. so i can trick people to give me money. a fucking breakthrough XD
--doublebasel

Every politician should be forced to take regular doses of oxytocin. = world peace.
--UnhonorableMentions

fantastic!!! what would be interesting though is to see if people release oxytocin to different stimulus, like masochistic maybe get it when they feel pain. If they dont and the releasing of the molecule is consistent amongst all humans then it would be a great step forward to creating a Universal Human Values which is determined by science
--zerr0ww

another issue is while oxytocin may enhance empathy, empathy does not necessarily entail morality--just like motive doesn't necessarily entail action. just because I can share the well-being of another doesn't compel me to care--though it may increase the likelihood--which makes it seem as if morality is still yet an abstract organic process.
how does oxytocin account for moral plurality? the propensities for social cultures to eventually converge and adhere to moral principles may be the same, but "what is deemed moral" still differs per culture aside from some universal moral principles.
it seems oxytocin at best is either a bio-social enabler or social-evolutionary residue from conscious interaction.
--xjustamem0ryx

I loved this talk! It's a little hard to swallow though; I always regarded morality as a social convention that varies in each culture. Maybe oxytocin would be more related to empathy, from which morality stems?
--Iker888

we have found the chemical responsible but where is the gene that control the production of this chemical? if we could isolate the gene(s) that effects this process, could we not then alter it to make it produce a little more? If we could and if we increased it enough (too much oxytocin) would we not have a situation where that person will really be compliant and docile ? That is, this type of person would be very accepting to their situation? A perfect worker colony ?
--ghostandgoblins

Research into neural regeneration and remapping after amputation and stroke indicates that the brain is continually rewiring itself to meet new requirements. Our brain structure and hormonal content is also directly effected by other more subtle factors like our decisions and behaviour. This means that immoral people do not have the 'excuse' of poor oxytocin production. The brains of people who decide to behave morally will gradually remap, producing more oxytocin, making it easier for them.
--TahaNasserTV

what would happen if we started releasing huge amount of oxytocin
instead of all the toxins in the atmosphere?
car with morality as bi-product... ??
--pay4cayray

Did he just do drugs in front of the whole crowd? Or did he just dose the front row with the cloud he sprayed? Could an OWS protester sprayist into the air near a crowd like that? Can the police spray the protesters with it? Who produces oxytocin spray/liquid and whats their stock market symbol?
Weaponize the spray, spray china, then tell them to send us cash!
--mattmoore111

Oxytocin has some other nasty side effects, including making people likely to believe what someone says without critically thinking about it.

Oxytocin is what advertisers dream of, and what politicians would die to have solid control over. If these groups ever used oxytocin against us, it would be the closest thing to mind control. Decent averted in favor of blind obedience.
1984 has nothing on this shit.
--TheReasonWhyGuy

@TheReasonWhyGuy You want to know something truly horrifying? They've already harnessed the power of this substance. But they've just used various techniques to make us produce it rather than injecting it into other people. I mean political rallies, advertisement, etc. are all stuff which should jack your oxy-levels into the red. The entire public relations sector lives on this stuff.
--Slug99

Humans are self-aware compassionate electrochemical reactions. Discovering some of the important chemicals is not corporate manipulation or science fiction, it's inevitability.
--Decimaster321

Hopefully this sort of science will help us evolve properly without the current rule by psychopaths leading us to ever increasing disaster – of course they will use it on us to manipulate us even more. 
--ehpl

Small nitpick. You found 'a' molecule correlated with morality, trust, and empathy, not 'the moral molecule'.
I'd be interested to see if the 5% who don't produce oxytocin with the stimulus referred to are or are correlated with actual clinical psychopaths.
Now we just need to find a stable oxytocin molecule that we can put in the drinking water in order for firefly to be just one step closer to reality.
--dookiecheez

In regards to Paul Zak's credentials: "Serious methodological questions have arisen in regards to the intellectual integrity of Zak's work, however."
I wholeheartedly concur.
...serious methodological questions have arisen in regards to the intellectual integrity of Zak's work. It is purported the authors in this study analyzed experimental data in doubtful ways, thus exaggerating results. You're arguing in favor of some guy blowing SUNSHINE up your ass, and while it may feel good, that doesn't qualify it as a legitimate study. It's not even widely accepted in his own circles.
--metamorphicmuse

~YMMV

[NonEntity]

Excellent post of comments, i2!

This reminds me to note a book I've recently read which I don't know if I've mentioned here: Born for Love, by Perry and Szalavitz

This book posits that psychopathy is not necessarily a genetic thing but rather appears to be the result of a lack of certain very specific needs in the very formative stages of an infant. If a certain kind of loving and consistent care is not given by ONE person during the very formative years then the empathic functions in the child do not develop properly.

So maybe the Beatles were right, "all you need is Love."

- NonE

P.S. I just watched the video (which I hadn't upon writing the above) and was immediately reminded of how my psychopathic friend really did not like, did not understand, being hugged.

[zonsb]

(11-20-2011 11:26 AM)eye2i2hear Wrote:  Some comments that caught my eye to prompt further thought on the matter, per YouTube replies (it's all information):

I know what you mean, I think. Watching the video was enough for me to do further search on the subject. I'm mostly interested in what conditions cause the chemical to be produced or released and what hinders are inhibits those.

--

[Dionysus]

Once again, effects are conflated as causes. I'm sick of it.

[zonsb]

(11-20-2011 01:41 PM)Dionysus Wrote:  Once again, effects are conflated as causes. I'm sick of it.

Among many choices available is do your own research or don't get out of bed.

--

[Jonathanr]

Yep. The classic correlation not equal to causation trap.

[zonsb]

(11-20-2011 02:00 PM)Jonathanr Wrote:  Yep. The classic correlation not equal to causation trap.

Perhaps that flag and a dozen others should be raised just in case on most posts. It's not a trap once a person understands that correlation doesn't equate to causation. Me?... I'm more conservative with anticipation others will expend their energies raising flags. Special thanks to eye2i.

It will be a huge breath of fresh air if this can be implemented and developed as intended: The Internet, peer-reviewed

--

[NonEntity]

(11-20-2011 01:06 PM)NonEntity Wrote:  Excellent post of comments, i2!

This reminds me to note a book I've recently read which I don't know if I've mentioned here: Born for Love, by Perry and Szalavitz

This book posits that psychopathy is not necessarily a genetic thing but rather appears to be the result of a lack of certain very specific needs in the very formative stages of an infant. If a certain kind of loving and consistent care is not given by ONE person during the very formative years then the empathic functions in the child do not develop properly.

So maybe the Beatles were right, "all you need is Love."

- NonE

And here I read this interesting post (recommended) which contains the following quote. I quote it here because I think, and HOPE, the author is wrong in his supposition that the quantity of psychopaths is an unchanging constant percentage of the general population.

Doug Casey Wrote:All the institutions that made America exceptional – including a belief in capitalism, individualism, self-reliance and the restraints of the Constitution – are now only historical artifacts.

On the other hand, the distribution of sociopaths is completely uniform across both space and time. Per capita, there were no more evil people in Stalin's Russia, Hitler's Germany, Mao's China, Amin's Uganda, Ceausescu's Romania or Pol Pot's Cambodia than there are today in the US. All you need is favorable conditions for them to bloom, much as mushrooms do after a rainstorm.

(emphasis mine)

- NonE

[eye2i2hear]

I can't help but wonder --seeing as how the specialists seem divided on the nature vs nurture-- if this is less an either/or and more a both/and? In other words, is it possible that there are both psychopaths (nature) and sociopaths (nurture)?

As far as Mr Casey, some factual research on his claim here quoted certainly seems in order. (surely before he'd make such a bold statement, he'd have some research backing it up?!? particularly noting his website's name: CaseyResearch.com)

Meanwhile, another couple of snippets from the article that seem apropos here:

Quote:
There are two ways people can relate to each other: voluntarily or coercively. The government is pure coercion, and sociopaths are drawn to its power and force.
...
With sociopaths in charge, we could very well see the Milgram experiment reenacted on a national scale. In the experiment, you may recall, researchers asked members of the public to torture subjects (who, unbeknownst to the people being recruited, were paid actors) with electric shocks, all the way up to what they believed were lethal doses. Most of them did as asked, after being assured that it was "alright" and "necessary" by men in authority. The men in authority today are mostly sociopaths.

---

[sidebar, regarding "research"]: from CaseyResearch.com:

Quote:The Casey Research Philosophy

For over a quarter of a century, legendary investor and best-selling author Doug Casey and his team at Casey Research have been helping self-directed investors to earn superior returns through innovative investment research designed to take advantage of market dislocations.

[bold text mine --eye2i]

---

additional wabbit twailing info (recommended read):
[excerpt]:

Kelly McAleer, Psy.D Wrote:Sociopathy vs. Psychopathy | Forensic Focus

I try to use research as my guide in defining and applying these terms to my discussions, rather than the popular usage that is sometimes tossed about in the media.

Walsh & Wu, 2008 Wrote:Research suggests that, “psychopaths are a stable proportion of any population, can be from any segment of society, may constitute a distinct taxonomical class forged by frequency-dependent natural selection, and that the muting of the social emotions is the proximate mechanism that enables psychopaths to pursue their self-centered goals without felling the pangs of guilt. Sociopaths are more the products of adverse environmental experiences that affect autonomic nervous system and neurological development that may lead to physiological responses similar to those of psychopaths. Antisocial personality disorder is a legal/clinical label that may be applied to both psychopaths and sociopaths” (Walsh, A., & Wu, H.H. (2008). Differentiating antisocial personality disorder, psychopathy, and sociopathy: Evolutionary, genetic, neurological, and sociological considerations. Criminal Justice Studies, 2, 135-152.).

In other words, in the mental health field there is some consensus that psychopathy is more of an innate phenomenon whereas sociopathy, which has a similar clinical presentation to psychopathy, is more the result of environmental factors (poverty, exposure to violence, permissive or neglectful parenting, etc.). This is of course difficult to prove, as the nature versus nurture debate never seems to have a winner, and for good reason–it is very likely that both our biological components and environmental exposures influence and shape us fairly equally.
...
[O]ther differences between psychopathy and sociopathy, aside from origin, have been cited. The capacity to feel attachment and empathy towards another and to feel guilt and shame after doing something wrong is not associated with psychopathy; however it is suggested that sociopaths can emotionally attach to others, and feel badly when they hurt those individuals that they are attached to. The sociopath will still lack empathy and attachment toward the greater society and will not feel guilt in harming a stranger, or rebelling against laws, but does not lack empathy entirely, as is typical with the psychopath.

Therefore, both psychopaths and sociopaths are capable of committing heinous crimes; however, the psychopath would commit crimes against family members or “friends” (as well as strangers) and feel little to no remorse.

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/forensic-focus/2010/07/sociopathy-vs-psychopathy/ [this site may have some additional good linked info on the topic?]

[eye2i2hear]

Rick Nauert PhD, in A better definition of ‘Psychopath’, on Psych Central News Wrote:Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on July 3, 2006

Are some corporate CEO’s, doctors, lawyers, politicians and scientists psychopaths? The answer could be “yes” if you use a definition which labels individuals who are often intelligent and highly charismatic, but display a chronic inability to feel guilt, remorse or anxiety about any of their actions. Tack on the use of violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs and the label expands.

Typically the term “psychopath” evokes thoughts of violence and bloodshed – and evil of the darkest kind. But during 25 years, Joseph Newman, a psychologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, has built a body of work that may help temper such deeply ingrained perceptions.
Sure, people do commit horrific, unimaginable crimes. But does that automatically mean they are psychopathic? And what is “psychopathy” anyway? With unique research access to prison inmate populations in Wisconsin, Newman has devoted his career to answering such questions.

The proper understanding of psychopathy has implications for the treatment of inmates everywhere – particularly for those who are wrongfully labeled. Newman’s work could also serve as the backbone of new behavioral interventions that target psychopathic behaviors.
“My main concern is that the label (of psychopath) is applied too liberally and without sufficient understanding of the key elements,” says Newman, who is chair of the UW-Madison psychology department. “As a result, the term is often applied to ordinary criminals and sex offenders whose behavior may reflect primarily social factors or other emotional problems that are more amenable to treatment than psychopathy.”

But trying to alter stereotypes about a reviled segment of society has been a long and uphill road. For one thing, prison studies are notoriously difficult to do .... The field of psychopathy is also a contentious one, and Newman – who has put forward a provocative theory about the condition – has consistently faced opposition from his scientific peers.

The scientist has persevered, however, demonstrating in study after study the potential merit of his claims. And during the years, Newman’s patient, steady approach has earned the respect of top researchers in the field.

“In looking back, I see (Newman) as one of the preeminent research scientists in the field – his work is ingenious, meticulous, methodologically sophisticated and driven by theory,” says Robert Hare, a leading psychopathy expert at the University of British Columbia. “I really think he’s the top man in the area.”

So who are psychopaths? Broadly speaking, they are people who use manipulation, violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs. They can be intelligent and highly charismatic, but display a chronic inability to feel guilt, remorse or anxiety about any of their actions.

Scientists estimate that 15-25 percent of men and 7-15 percent of women in U.S. prisons display psychopathic behaviors. The condition, however, is hardly restricted to the prison system. Newman estimates that up to 1 percent of the general population could be described as psychopathic. Surprisingly, many who fall into that bracket might lead perfectly conventional lives as doctors, scientists and company CEOs.

“Psychopathy appears to exist throughout the world and has probably existed throughout history,” Newman says.
Behavioral specialists now use the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised – a diagnostic questionnaire created by Hare – to detect psychopathy. But although there is finally consensus on the best way to identify the condition, there is still a lot of disagreement on why it occurs in the first place.

The dominant scientific model asserts that psychopathic individuals are incapable of fear or other emotions, which in turn makes them indifferent to other people’s feelings.
But Newman has a different idea entirely. He believes that psychopathy is essentially a type of learning disability or “informational processing deficit” that makes individuals oblivious to the implications of their actions when focused on tasks that promise instant reward. Being focused on a short-term goal, Newman suggests, makes psychopathic individuals incapable of detecting surrounding cues such as another person’s discomfort or fear.

... “People think (psychopaths) are just callous and without fear, but there is definitely something more going on,” Newman says. “When emotions are their primary focus, we’ve seen that psychopathic individuals show a normal (emotional) response. But when focused on something else, they become insensitive to emotions entirely.”

..."Everything that we can learn (about psychopathy) can impact our attempts to change people’s patterns of behavior. Newman’s work is likely to impact the entire field and not just Wisconsin.”

But in order for psychopathy research to give rise to new behavioral treatment approaches, Newman says scientists need to get together, discuss ideas and continually challenge the status quo. “There has been a tendency to recycle the same intuitively appealing ideas rather than pursue critical tests of new ideas,” he says.

To help generate fresh discussion and debate, Newman and others recently founded the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy.

[color/bold emphasis, mine --eye2i]
http://psychcentral.com/news/2006/07/03/...99/64.html

---

additional reference (if nothing else because it indicates focus on research; and Hare is listed as a member)

Quote:Welcome to the Psychopathy Society
The Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy (SSSP) is a non-profit, professional organization which was developed to promote the conduct and communication of scientific research in the field of psychopathy and to encourage education and training in those fields of science that contribute to research in psychopathy.

http://www.psychopathysociety.org/index.php?lang=en-US

[Dionysus]

Quote:So who are psychopaths? Broadly speaking, they are people who use manipulation, violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs.

So, basically, every politician that ever lived.

Quote:Welcome to the Psychopathy Society

As opposed to the "psychopathic society?"

[eye2i2hear]

(03-25-2012 02:28 PM)Dionysus Wrote:  

Quote:So who are psychopaths? Broadly speaking, they are people who use manipulation, violence and intimidation to control others and satisfy selfish needs.

So, basically, every politician that ever lived.

So long as they meet the other crucial criteria, including:

Quote:...but display a chronic inability to feel guilt, remorse or anxiety about any of their actions.

(where if not, they might be better labeled as b.) sociopaths, or c.) ASPDs, or d.) narcissists or e.) dumbaddicts ... ok, I made that last one up, a bit)

Quote:

Quote:Welcome to the Psychopathy Society

As opposed to the "psychopathic society?"

Yeah, letting that one roll off the tongue too quickly could raise an eyebrow or2.