The psychology of moral grandstanding | Brandon Warmke | Big Think
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- The psychology of moral grandstanding
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moral grandstanding is the use of moral talk for self-promotion. Moral grandstanders have egotistical motives: they may want to signal that they have superhuman insight into a topic, paint themselves as a victim, or show that they care more than others.
Moral philosophers view moral grandstanding as a net negative. They argue that it contributes to political polarization, increases levels of cynicism about moral talk and its value in public life, and it causes outrage exhaustion.
Grandstanders are also a kind of social free rider, says Brandon Warmke. They get the benefits of being heard without contributing to any valuable discourse. It's selfish behavior at best, and divisive behavior at worst.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRANDON WARMKE
Brandon Warmke, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Bowling Green State University. He is currently writing two books, Grandstanding: The Use and Abuse of Moral Talk and Why It’s OK to Mind Your Own Business, both with philosopher Justin Tosi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
BRANDON WARMKE: If you had a bumper sticker and you wanted a quick, dirty definition of moral grandstanding, it's the use of moral talk for self-promotion. Grandstanders are moral showboaters. They use public discourse as a vanity project. They're less concerned about saying what's true. They might be less concerned about helping other people. They're less concerned about contributing to a conversation that might be productive.
More specifically, someone might want to be seen as having spectacular, superhuman insight into what is just. Some people might want to be seen as caring the most about the poor or about the troops. Some people might want to be seen as the most affected by some injustice. So grandstanding doesn't always look like the same sort of animal. Grandstanding sometimes looks like piling on. You often see cases of piling on when a lot of people join in on a shame fest for someone who's misspoken or engaged in a small minor infraction. In order to signal to their in-group or to their enemies that they have a heightened sense of justice, they pile on in cases of public blaming and shaming.
Another form that grandstanding takes is what we can call ramping up. Ramping up involves trying to out-do each other in moral discourse. You can think of it as a kind of moral arms race. So I might say something like, 'The senator's behavior was highly unacceptable. She should clearly be censured for it.' Now you, not wanting to be outdone, might say something like, 'Yes, I agree that her behavior was wrong, but it's clearly way out of bounds. She should no longer hold her office. She should be impeached.' And then someone else, again, not wanting to be outdone, might say, 'As someone who has long stood on the side of injustice, we should look into the criminal law. This cannot go unpunished. We must remember the world is watching.' And you can think of ramping up in terms of what psychologists call social comparison. Social comparison theory says, roughly, we think of ourselves in comparison to others. So if I think of myself as caring deeply about the poor or about the troops, that's going to be important to me, I'm going to think of myself as a more just person or a more caring person than my peers. What happens in conversation is that once people reveal their positions about how much they care about or how affected they are by some problem, you can now look like you don't care as much as others about some problem. And so in order to beat someone else in the moral race, you have to outdo them. And so this often results in people taking more extreme stands than they might otherwise do on reflection, because when the world is watching, you must show that you care more.
Moral philosophers tend to think there's three main ways for something to be morally good or bad: One, it could have morally good or bad consequences. Two, it could be morally good or bad insofar as it mistreats other people, or shows them respect or disrespect. And that's irrespective of the bad or good consequences it might have. And third, philosophers will often say something like: Something is good or bad if a virtuous person would do it or not do it. So we think about the virtues, like honesty, courage. We think that grandstanding is bad according to all three ways of thinking that something could be morally good or bad. Grandstanding has bad consequences. We argue that it contribut...
For the full transcript, check out bigthink.com/s...
Want to get Smarter, Faster?
Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter
Literally everyone in 2020 social media.
Don't most extreme overtly christian clergy and, apologist claim of their virtue they're justly proud. Largely because of the God of classical monotheism.
Sad but true
the key thing though is that, yes you can genuinely hold the more extreme position, but its moral grandstanding if you are doing it because of what others think
This is a very important concept, as it is among the primary roadblocks/tools devised by rhetoricians. Our ability to identify moral grandstanding will move us toward real discussion in such forums as the political theater.
There's a difficulty in that some people are naturally more vociferous in advocating for some causes (like puppies and children), and even if the same principle affects another, less desirable class, they go silent.
The compliment to moral grandstanding is indifference, where each is a selective application of virtue. More than trying to infer the motives of an individual, it is probably better to see just how deep those convictions lie.
sure, a rare number of us will learn about this concept, but so what, what about the millions of other people who do this kind of thing regularly and feed into it, a few of us recognizing it solves absolutely nothing, we are at the whims of these people whether we want to accept it or not, it's basically impossible to navigate around this fundamental human flaw
This is all very interesting but it begs two questions:
1. How do you distinguish genuine concern for moral issues, from grandstanding?
2. From a consequentialist point of view, what's the use of questioning motives, when you can opt to focus on the consequences/results of specific ideas?
My $.50:
Someone with concerns
- Seek to understand the situation before making their mind.
- wont try juge the moral character and/or shame the people responsible of that situation, nor the people currently talking about it.
- Could come with a solution to solve the issue (but won't necessary express it, as they may think this is not their place to do so). Not necessarily a solution that would satisfy them, but one non-the-less.
For example, and from my experience, if you ask someone "Okay, so what do you propose (to solve the problem)?", people speaking in good faith would reply something like "I'm not sure this would be the best solution, but we could do X, or at least Y".
Then they could rationally explain why they came with these solutions.
And if at some point these solutions appear flawed, they won't mind admitting it, they wouldn't be emotionally-attached to them, because they were only devices leading to a better understanding.
Whereas virtue-signalers would either reply by some sort of shaming: "Are you seriously asking what should we do?! Ain't that obvious?!" and/or come with a (mostly likely radical) solution they won't be able to back up rationally (because they didn't seek to understand the situation first).
Then, if you prove that their solution isn't rational and/or very unlikely to work, they would probably be upset, because they would find that questioning their conclusion is a direct attack against their moral values.
_____
For the second question, the point is to be able to debate kindly, and in good faith, without fearing to be punished if we misspoke or even commit a reasoning error.
I use the word "punished" because virtue-signaling is a form of shaming (ie: "look how virtuous I am, I'm so much better than you!") and shaming is a form of punishment (eg: pillory, public sentences, etc.).
This idea about shame as punishment in further developed within Jon Ronson's book "So You've Been Publicly Shamed" which I couldn't recommend enough.
Good faith and benevolence are especially important for the public debate, due to the importance of free speech in republics.
@@europeansovietunion7372 Ultimately, what my question implies is that it is impossible to decouple self-interest or self-benefit from a public manifestation of concern, regardless of how well informed, nuanced, and effective one's approach is to addressing the issue at hand. Claiming that an opinion is grandstanding, is indulging precisely in the judgement of someone's moral character. This paradox is solved by simply ignoring personal motives, and focusing on the message's quality, pertinence, and grasp of facts.
@@FilipeBrasAlmeida It's usually best to just lisyen to the argument, and respond to it on its merits. They may be grandstanding, but since it's sometimes impossible to tell if its good faith, just weigh facts instead of worrying about intent. Nobody does anything without intent - everyone benefits, or intends to benefit, from all their actions. (Even if its just the warm and fuzzies from feeling good about doing good)
@@ifartmagic I'm inclined to agree. This was Bertrand Russell's and John Stuart Mill's formulation as well.
Intent only becomes relevant once actual harm has occurred.
@@FilipeBrasAlmeida Very true. If someone is saying nice things that you agree with, just make sure it's factually accurate, but intent doesnt really need to be a factor unless it's a lie (ie harm).
So yeah I totally agree with those people's assessments. Guess I should look them up.
Here come the wave of people attacking moral grandstanders while doing the same thing themselves.
the fuck do you know about anything? and for the record you're doing it right now.
Sigh....pay attention
@@Doriesep6622 hahaha predictable little shit
@@baticadavinci3984
Nope... Im predicting an ironic occurrence and I think it's funny.
Chill buddy.
Yup, bunch of haters
Well said. Real life example: the abortion debate in the U.S. Most of the people rabidly demonstrating haven’t taken the time to really think through the issue and define their own position. They just want to be more rabid than the person next to them.
Analogy Accepted You may be right. During the big protests though, I see a lot of kids out there just wanting to be part of something bigger than themselves - just wanting to be part of something “cool”. So, they pick a side, print up a placard, and voila, they are no longer alone.
Analogy Accepted I’m definitely older (like you) and, in fact, I lived on a farm, went to a one-room school with eight grades, and shared fun and adventure with kids of all ages. I look back now and see how really valuable my early days were and I feel so sorry for kids who lead such boring and lonely lives in front of their computers and iPads.
Biddy Dib Dab: kinda like people joining a church. Voila, no longer alone. Part of a group bigger than they are.
Well done Sir... pride in the arrogant sense as a virtue is having disastrous results on society.
@ForrestSCS Indeed, I was going for broader strokes with the term pride as a larger logical category with grandstanding in it. In behavioral economics, there is conspicuous consumption where goods are bought for extrinsic signaling (the basis of consumerism that drives so many to debt and fictitious social groups). There are herding behavior and group identity that is leading to the polarization as individuals seek comfort in others to save mental energy by letting others think for them (as well as the amygdala) with the added benefit of pooling egos by creating ideological armies. Once again, pride as arrogance is perhaps better stated as egoism or base individualism that lead to conformity to a mob and one's individual neurological programs that resemble the characteristics of a beast which makes them predictable in a pack. So yes I agree that violence and appeal to authority abject of morality is a major negative outcome but it's rooted in a primate substructure in the mammalian and lizard reaches of the brain... there is little use of what one would consider humanity. If you want to delve into the neuroscience or behavioral economics of the matter I'd love to have a chat, I'm just surprised to see a moral philosopher using "free rider" in such a clever way. Cheers.
*Moral grandstanding is what people do when they lack any purpose or meaning to life.*
People have to do something in order to feel good about themselves... or do they?
Psychopath
Some do good because doing bad feels bad. This is one of those times one must define good for the sake of argument. So then root cause of good actions are more clear.
This guy should get an award for pure objectivity. At a time when virtually everyone quickly reveals their position in the current political divide, this guy kept it strait down the middle. Excellent.
I got canceled at my job for asking out a girl who said no... like it seemed like nothing, and I was smeared for 3 years and I eventually cracked and got fired... grandstanding ruined my life.
THE HIERARCHY OF GOOD:
1) DO GOOD CAUSE ITS GOOD 👍
2) DO GOOD CAUSE IT LOOKS GOOD 👎
3) DO BAD ❌
You forgot one . . .
Do good because an imaginary friend (I.E. god) tells me to.
And . . .
Do incredibly horrible, evil, fucked up shit but believe I am doing good things because an imaginary friend (I.E. god) says that they are good.
@ForrestSCS Because of grandstanding. - Your intentions are good (=you picture a good result of your actions). For the reciever of your actions, the picture might be quite different. If you want to help anybody,
take your time and get to know in what direction they want to move.
It IS possible to do something morally objectionable and obtain a good outcome.
@@is-be6725 There were some good outcome from WW2 : FN, innovations etc. It does not mean starting a world war is the right ting to do. Sometimes doing a good thing turns out to give a negativ output years later. That does not mean you should stop
being good, - but you should ask forgivness.
Ellen Gran
Moral philosophy is messy business; I’m afraid we’ll never get it right.
Soooo ... Grand standing = virtue signaling?
Basically yes
It looks like the exact same thing.
The speaker probably just wanted to use a less loaded term.
@@europeansovietunion7372 Ding, ding, ding.... That's what I was thinking.
Anything can potentially be called virtue signaling. Even accusing others of virtue signaling is a form of virtue signaling. And thats why virtue signaling is such a useless term.
European Union the EU should be federalized
*100% APPLIES TO "RUclipsRS"/"CONTENT CREATORS"!*
spot on!
Facts
well said
Moral grandstanders compete for praise & glory in *Outrage Olympics.*
As do opportunistic 'victims' participating in the Oppression Olympics.
While I do think some people who passionately condemn things as immoral are selfishly motivated, we *can’t tell* which ones are and which ones aren’t. Best to focus on the content of what they’re saying. People have too often been accused of “moral grandstanding” when they were in fact ahead of their times. The person whom we find “annoying” or “odd” for criticizing a cherished practice may well be correct that what we confidently consider benign isn’t so benign. Their motives are beside the point. Whether their claims are incorrect is what should determine whether those claims are dismissed, not our suspicion that the person making those claims is insincere or defective in some way. *We* may just be stricken by a shared intentionality that makes it nearly impossible for us to recognize that the out-group has it worse and that their angst is valid.
Imagine a world where we all cried like Jordan Peterson and lectured people about morality.
hahhahahahahahah
Some people might want to be seen as having deep truths, when they actually have nothing of interest to say. They might want to be seen as having a “big think” when it is actually a “minuscule think.”
This video deserves way more likes 😊👍 especially in 2021
Basically any religious leader on the planet!
Including political correctness.
Peter P. Lol, truth!
This
@Peter when you said any religious leader my mind instantly went to Claude Frolo from the hunchback
"Beata Maria
You know I am a righteous man
Of my virtue I am justly proud...
Beata Maria
You know I'm so much purer than
The common, vulgar, weak, licentious crowd..."
"Hellfire"
Spot on!
Brilliant analysis
My grandfather died in a concentration camp :( he got drunk and fell off the guard tower.
His standing wasn't so grand, then; Brandon approves
Love this guy on Modern Family.
Virtue signaling?
Great! Now when I encounter a person with moral opinions I don't agree with, I have a new label to use against them.
So it seems to me that this moral grandstanding is rooted in selfishness. Thinking of ones self over others. In any way, shape, or fashion.
I see this in many religions. Mines included. This "selfishness" rears its ugly head in many ways. Moral grandstanding in some. In my particular church, there is a dominant group. They mirror the dominant group of society at large. And they have a... privilege. A place where those outside there group may not enter. They are... better. It's never said. It's never inferred. It's almost ignored by the privileged. But deeply felt by the others outside the group.
I don't think it's a fault of the church. But rather, a fault of society at large that has infiltrated the church.
I really love my church. It has become apart of my identity even. But I am deeply troubled by this inherent flaw in humanity that has found its way into the church. Which is the one place I hoped it wouldn't exist. 😞
Flossie Tube: churches ARE part of mainstream culture if you life in the US. Of course they are rife with privilege, the ins and the outs. It was a brilliant way to put it that they seem to hardly notice it...but everyone does anyway. It's like chickens in a barnyard...a pecking order. It's too bad. If you can't escape it in church, where can you escape it? The answer is, you cannot. As soon as you mix with others, there it is. Try to be brave if you're below, try to be kind of you're above, and praise others for what they do well or right. Nobody gets enough praise any more. Did they ever?
This pretty much sums up all the reasons I stay away form most WhatsApp group chats.
Same
Hey,
just wanted to share the hope of the Gospel that all men need, the Bible says all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23) this means we all deserve death and separation from a perfect and holy God. But God did not leave us for dead, He sent His only begotten Son to die in yours and my place, so that anyone who believes in Him and repents of sin will be saved from separation from God, and have eternal life! I urge you please put your faith in Jesus Christ and follow Him, He promises to save all who cry out to Him and have a humble heart. We arent guaranteed another day so we must repent of sin and seek Him today while He may be found!
Ben affleck
Is a douchey actor
Please keep talking about this
The Chinese have an incredibly accurate term for the people who love this: Baizuo.
What would be the literal translation?
Marek Janouš White left.
I want to share this because there a lot of people that would be better off if they heard it but i don't want to risk being a grandstander in the process. Is it too late? Am i already doing it?
Did...did he just try to sum up the deontological position as "don't be disrespectful"? He hit utilitarianism. He hit virtue ethics. But what is this "don't be disrespectful" thing? Last time I checked, the other major positions in moral philosophy are deontology and ethics of care. And neither have anything to do with "being respectful". Is he possibly hinting at some sort of Confucian ethic? I'm so lost.
Robert Hunter Yeah I thought the same thing. I think deontology is fucking stupid, but he definitely didn’t do it right.
Imagine thinking that all expressions of justice are simply about gaining social status.
0:50-6:25
.."...unbalanced negative consequences..".. I see... We definately need to reduce number of public discussions like 'what is moral and what is not moral'... - our world is perfectly beautiful as it is.. and 'the better' is a sertain enemy of simply good... - it is great!..
Social justice began from policy and only social security is when social justice is established
The story of my life.
Same but I have to learn that I have to be less judgemental and less condescending in general
Do one on religious grandstanding.
This is particularly relevant to the radicalization of the right wing and to a lesser extent the left wing. This clearly shows a process whereby the rhetoric becomes more and more extreme and divisive. People who behave this way do not possess ideas as much as ideas posses them. They have to differentiate themselves and their identities from the herd and constantly need to one up the competition to climb up the dominance hierarchy in their tribe. If this video bothers you, you are probably a grandstander and you have just been exposed. This is another dimension in which the ego is a master of deception.
Agreed, though "to a lesser extent the radical left"? Wokeness is the incarnation of grandstanding
The only acceptable way to be antisocial and morally good. Is to avoid being compelled to grand stand by staying home and defending your solitude by requiring intruders not bombard you with they're screwed rhetoric
It is not about any one or any group but it is more about there should no be unecessary suffering and there is no need of evil act or plan against any group black white brown yellow ect...
I'm quite the man. I give this a Like.
One can greatly reduce harmful "moral grandstanding emissions" into one's life by getting rid of all HD LED objects in one's home! I'm not saying that they would end completely.
Once grandstanding is stated you can just assume that there will be a problem.
If I had such a bumper sticker it would say "Don't annoy your horse".
One of the most obvious examples is Pence going to a football game for the sole purpose of ostentatiously walking out of it.
How much tax money did that waste?
Or, the hilarious photo of serial adulterer and twice-divorced Trump getting pawed by those Evangelical poseurs.
This video should be sent to everyone in Hollywood
It's true , the senator's behaviour was criminal. No one should be above the law.
Is this a thinly veiled criticism of SJWs?
Do SJWs grandstand about their love of the troops? Nope.
@@S2Tubes That's why I said "thinly veiled," and not "so obvious even a Democrat couldn't miss it."
thats some heavy grandstanding my friend hahahahha
It's for the sake of appearances.
You know who else are free-riders? Non-union workers. They get all the benefits of improved workers rights regulations/legislation, better pay etc, but don't pay a penny towards the unions that fought for them!
You just want to take their money and use it to bribe politicians into forcing them to give you more.
Everyone does it though, so we can’t grandstand the grandstanders
But great video, I definitely enjoyed it!
Everyone ? Nice generalization. Fail.
So basically Meghan McCain...
Omg!!!! That is exactly who I thought of.
everyone's job is to listen to the princess of Arizona
And every single self-identified progressive
And AOC
@@alexill imperialist moron
So any side who calls the other side names and refuses to talk to them.
Wow, can you talk ony slower, please more pauses, oh and look more than 90% into the bottom right corner! Thanks!
And in *private* discourse, when you experience someone as a vaccilating, time-wasting idiot, but you politely tell them the *action* they've taken is arrogant, I suppose this is also "grandstanding"? 🐯
Alright, I agree that this is a real thing, a real problem that comes from the complexity of human social behaviour.
But please, big think, and the speakers that make an appearance here. Give us some solid ground when laying down an argument. At least a flashcard at the beggining or the speaker being more clear. For example, who are "we". "We think"
And a strong attitude of us and them is created if the speaker keeps adressing it as an outsider problem.
People often don't take responsibility if they don't see themselves as a part of the problem. It makes the problem external and formless.
We're here talking about moral highstanders, while talking from a moral high-stand to talk down on the problem.
Either make the argument more neutral or take more precautions while adressing the issues.
I don't want to dehumanize big think, big ideas, ideologies which are tightly tethered to humans and their behaviour. And it is healthy to view an issue through the eyes of many individuals who feel differently about it.
But think about your channel, it's called big think. You're presenting yourself as a channel to share ideas, and you upload videos that reach a variety of topics.
The ways you present them are crucial.
Moral Grandstanding = American Politics
2021 in a nutshell
Bill deblasio in a nutshell
Right is right...wrong is wrong...Truth is truth
This guy looks lit.
This long word salad... Not clear. Better to use CONCRETE EXAMPLES, FOR INSTANCES... WHICH IS ALSO WHAT THE STUPID MEDIA DOES AND THE ACTUAL VIRTUE SIGNALLERS THEMSELVES... NO SUBSTANCE TO AN ARGUMENT, talking around the idea, without really presenting it... But around the end of vid he gives a few examples... But this vid could be reworked.
John Stewart
I find it very odd that THIS is the take of the recordings the BigThink chose to publish...
Very interesting...
This describes Facebook.
Good, but he should have finished his meal before he started recording
Virtue signaling. The currency of Millennials.
A Big Think video morally grandstanding against moral grandstanding because the Koch Brothers have lost the high ground and so should you
One minute in and already can't stand the lip smacking. Sorry.
Social liberals, or collectivist types in general, really, are NOTORIOUS for this. And of course it's chic these days to refer to someone's public opining as virtue signalling. But of course the fact that taking a position publicly is often chastised for being self-serving means remaining silent is seen as superior. And it's clear that those who think silence is better see themselves as superior, otherwise they wouldn't criticize speaking publicly lol. You can see by the way this guy is talking that he recognizes the inherent contradiction of taking publicly the moral position that taking a moral position publicly is wrong lol. He's wearing like a sweater the cognitive dissonance that is wracking his brain as he's speaking. It's making him visibly uneasy...
disagree completely. we need courageous people to raise and vocalize issues.
Looks like he's talking about the SJWs :-D
Hey Brandon, tell Victoria Brown, "I'm coming up only to hold you under, I'm coming up only to show you wrong" ask her if she knows that song? It's called The Funeral!
Another mediocre big think. And he keeps saying we believe this and that. But who is "we"?
*cough* Ben Shapiro *cough*
Virtue signaling
VIRTUUUUUUEEE!
Casey Lee nice shoulders, Casey 😃👌🏻
I know it’s a lot of hard work!
@@kylorenthehusky2584 Thank you love. 😘
stick figure family, my dog are my kids, support troops, my son is in navy
Just people peopling or something specific?
They're pure evil.
Hasan Piker^
So basically all media personalities and their affiliates
This seems like a very empty term.
Could we use less filler words? Ums and Ahs ruins it :(
Abandon religions.
Ted f***ing Cruz!
Can someone tweet this to Elizabeth Warren?
Virtue Signalers are social cancer. GG
Funny thing is that there will be left wingers watching this thinking how does any of this apply to them xD
Did you just try to delegitimize Martin Luther King?
Great in-depth description of the Left Wing (SJW)
...or the right-wing... especially these forced-birth extremists!
Let's see who can out-virtue-signal the other! YEEEE
SJW'S
SJWs Cough cough cough*