Parábolas, altruismo espontáneo y coherencia cognitiva. Analizando la eficaz construcción de algunas parábolas

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46543/ISID.2029.1053

Palabras clave:

parábolas, altruismo espontáneo, castigo altruístico, coherencia cognitiva, decisión moral

Visualizaciones:

340

Resumen

Varios recursos empleados en la construcción de un grupo de parábolas coinciden con puntos que la ciencia actual enfoca. 1) El hecho de que la situación ajena es percibida de un modo más objetivo, con menos sesgos, que la situación propia. 2) El “altruismo espontáneo”, que empuja a conductas automáticas de ayuda. 3) La enorme influencia que el lenguaje puede ejercer para modular la atención, tanto la ajena como la propia. 4) La coherencia cognitiva, que interviene en el autocontrol, tanto el autocontrol moral como el que está al servicio de los propios intereses del sujeto. Al analizar el efecto de esos puntos en las parábolas en cuestión, intento mostrar que las capacidades comunicativas humanas están allí funcionando al máximo para facilitar la decisión del oyente, y que esa facilitación o ayuda es diferente por completo a las manipulaciones de cualquier tipo.

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Citas

APPERLY, Ian – Stephen BUTTERFILL, “Do Humans Have Two Systems to Track Beliefs and Belief-Like States?”, Psychological Review 116 (2009) 953-970.

BAARS, Bernard, “Is Feeling Pain Just Mindreading? Our Mind-brain Constructs Realistic Knowledge of Ourselves”, Behavioral and brain sciences 32 (2009) 19-20.

BAJTÍN, Mijaíl, Problemas de la poética de Dostoievski, México: FCE, 1986.

BATSON, C. Daniel et al., “Anger at Unfairness: Is it moral outrage?”, European Journal of Social Psychology, 37 (2007) 1272-1285.

BAUMARD, Nicolas – Jean-Baptiste ANDRÉ – Dan SPERBER, “A Mutualistic Approach to Morality: The Evolution of Fairness by Partner Choice”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (2012) 59-122.

BEJARANO, Teresa, “The Most Demanding Moral Capacity: Could its Base Evolutionarily Arise?” (submitted).

BEJARANO, Teresa, Inner Speech, Self-control and True Moral Freedom (trabajo en proceso).

CARRUTHERS, Peter, “How We Know Our Own Minds: The Relationship Between Mindreading and Metacognition”, Behavioral and brain sciences 32 (2009) 1-62.

CHRISTIE, Stella – Dedre GENTNER, “Where Hypotheses Come From: Learning New Relations by Structural Alignment”, Journal of Cognition and Development 11 (2010) 356-373.

DESSALLES, Jean-Louis, “Spontaneous narrative behaviour in homo sapiens: how does it benefit to speakers?” Proceedings of the 7th Evolution of Language Conference – Barcelona (2018) 91-98.

FAUCONNIER, Gilles – Mark TURNER, “Rethinking Metaphor”, in Ray W. GIBBS (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Cambrigge, Cambridge University Press, 2008, 53-66.

FENICI, Marco – Tadeusz Wieslaw ZAWIDZKI, “The Origins of Mindreading: How Interpretive Socio-cognitive Practices Get Off the Ground”, Synthese (2020): https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02577-4.

FESSLER, Daniel M. T. – Colin HOLBROOK, “Baumard et al.’s Moral Markets Lack Market Dynamics” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (2012) 89-90.

FREGE, Gottlob, “Über Sinn und Bedeutung”, Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 100 (1892) 25-50; IDEM, Ensayos de semántica y filosofía de la lógica, Madrid, Tecnos, 1998.

FUMIHIRO, Kano – Christopher KRUPENYE – Satoshi HIRATA – Masaki TOMONAGA – Josep CALL, “Great Apes Use Self-experience to Anticipate an Agent’s Action in a False-belief Test”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116 (2019).

GALLESE, Vittorio – Alvin GOLDMAN, “Mirror Neurons and the Simulation Theory of Mind-reading”, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2 (1998) 493-501.

GICK, Mary L. – Keith J. HOLYOAK, “Schema induction and analogical transfer”, Cognitive Psychology 15 (1983) 1-38.

GOLDMAN, Alvin, “The Psychology of Folk Psychology”, Behavioral and Brain Science 16 (1993) 15-28.

GOPNIK, Alison, “How We Know Our Minds: The Illusion of First-Person Knowledge of Intentionality”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (1993) 1-15.90-101.

HEAL, Jane, “Simulation and cognitive penetrability”, Mind and language 11 (1996), 44-67.

HUTTO, Daniel, “Folk Psychology as Narrative Practice”, Journal of Consciousness Studies 16 (2009) 9-39.

KRUPENYE, Christopher – Kano FUMIHIRO – Satoshi HIRATA – Josep CALL – Michael TOMASELLO, “Great Apes Anticipate that Other Individuals Will Act according to False Beliefs”, Science 354 (2016) 110-114.

NANAY, Bence, “Vicarious Representation: A New Theory of Social Cognition”, Cognition 205 (2020) 104-451.

ONISHI, Kristine – Renée BAILLARGEON, “Do 15-Month-Old Infants Understand False Beliefs?”, Science 308 (2005) 255-258.

PEDERSEN, Eric J. – William H. B. MCAULIFFE – Michael E. MCCULLOUGH, “The Unresponsive Avenger: More evidence that disinterested third parties do not punish altruistically”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 147 (2018) 514-544.

PEREIRA-DELGADO, Álvaro, “Verdad, carne y salvación. Consideraciones a propósito del enigma teológico de la verdad bíblica”, Isidorianum 51-52 (2017) 27-36.

PREMARCK, David – Guy WOODDRUFF, “Does the Chimpanzee Have a Theory of Mind?”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (1978) 515-526.

RATZINGER, Joseph, Jesús de Nazaret. II: Desde la entrada en Jerusalén hasta su resurrección, Madrid, Encuentro, 2011.

SAXE, Rebecca, “Against simulation: the argument from error”, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 (2005) 174-179.

SCHMIDT, Marco F. G. – Michael TOMASELLO, “How Chimpanzees Cooperate: If Dominance is Artificially Constrained”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 113 (2016) E6728-E6729.

SCHNALL, Simone – Jean ROPER – Daniel M.T. FESSLER, “Elevation Leads to Altruistic Behavior”, Psychological Science 21 (2010) 315-320.

SCHWARTZ, Stephen, “Soritic thinking, vagueness, and weakness of will”, New Ideas in Psychology 27 (2008) 18-31.

SELLARS, Wilfrid, “Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind”, in Herbert FEIGL – Michael SCRIVEN (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Volume I: The Foundations of Science and the Concepts of Psychology and Psychoanalysis Minnesota, University of Minnesota Press, 1956.

SHORT, Timothy – Kevin RIGGS, “Defending Simulation Theory against the argument from error”, Mind and language 31 (2016) 248-262.

SOUTHGATE, Victoria, “Are Infants Altercentric? The Other and the Self in Early Social Cognition”, Psychological Review 127 (2020) 505-523.

SPIKINS, Penny, et al., “Living to Fight Another Day: The Ecological and Evolutionary Significance of Neanderthal Healthcare”, Quaternary Science Reviews 217 (2019) 98-118.

SUCHAK, Malini, et al. “How Chimpanzees Cooperate in a Competitive World”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 113 (2016) 10215-10220.

TOMASELLO, Michael – Josep CALL – Brian HARE, “Chimpanzees Understand Psychological States – the Question is Which Ones and to What Extent”, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (2003) 153-156.

TOMASELLO, Michael, “How Children Come to Understand False Beliefs: A Shared Intentionality Account”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (2018) 8491-8498.

TOMASELLO, Michael, “Why Be Nice? Better Not Think About It”, Trends in Cognitive Science 16 (2012) 580-581.

WAAL, Frans de, The Age of Empathy: Nature’s lessons for a kinder society, New York, Three Rivers Press, 2009.

WENIN, André, “David et l’histoire de Natan (2 Samuel 12,1-7), ou: le lecteur et la fiction prophétique du récit biblique”, en Daniel MARGUERAT (ed.), La Bible en récits. L’exégèse biblique à l’heure du lecteur, Genève, Labor et fides, 2003, 160.

WIMMER, Heinz – Josef PERNER, “Beliefs about Beliefs: Representation and Constraining Function of Wrong Beliefs in Young Children’s Understanding of Deception”, Cognition 13 (1993) 103-128.

Publicado

2020-11-20

Cómo citar

Bejarano Fernández, T. (2020). Parábolas, altruismo espontáneo y coherencia cognitiva. Analizando la eficaz construcción de algunas parábolas. Isidorianum, 29(2), 13-36. https://doi.org/10.46543/ISID.2029.1053

Número

Sección

Artículos