> "Using multiple methods (longitudinal, correlational, and experimental),
eight studies (N > 2200) establish that broad foreign experiences can lead to immoral behavior
by increasing moral relativism, or the belief that morality is relative rather than absolute."
Well, morality IS relative. It's not a "dark side" of going abroad. I feel pity for those who did this research because they're the ones who are "in the dark" and believe in their little world enough to do a research and write a paper on this. It's similar to bunch of christians doing a research about why God exists. I'm all for philosophy and theorizing things but just don't claim it to be "scientific" just because you used all these multiple longitudinal, correlational, and experimental whatever bullshit methods.
Well, I'm taking a stats class now and longitudinal etc aren't scientific bullshit. The real question is: were the methods properly used? Was the study well done? They frequently aren't, for a multitude of reasons.
I only skimmed the paper and so may be entirely wrong, but the sample sizes seemed awfully small. What drove me crazy is their simplistic notion is that the CPI and CI indexes of the countries they visited was a factor of sorts. The CPI is a ranking of countries "by their perceived levels of corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys.". The key word is 'perceived' - some cultures, 'back-scratching' is a fundamental component of how the society works and so by idealistic Western standards, it is wrong, but that society isn't hypocritical about it.
On the other hand, the UK is #10 in the CPI list, but after living here for a number of years now, I understand the culture enough to say that the English are utterly hypocritical about the amount of corruption that is actually present, despite the PERCEPTION the UK is a country that belongs in the top 10. And most English people I know are well aware of the inherent corruption (at least my friends, all left leaning ex-communists...) If the study was correct, then foreign students from other countries who study here, travel here would be become less immoral?? I think not. Morality is primarily a function of the individual, their personality, and how it was shaped by their own culture growing up. I doubt very much it is affected so easily, except for weak willed people.
Living here has not made me any more corrupt, but the opposite. Although I no longer have any problem stabbing someone who has shown themselves to be corrupt/unethical in the back... as a counter-action. I have gotten tired of being screwed with, but I certainly am not going to plan to be unethical right off the bat with someone. i.e. I play Tit for Tat now in the Prisoner's Dilemma game of life, not the ideal strategy taught to children to socialize them properly.
So if you want to measure how 'personality morality' changes over time, superficial things like a brief exposure to other cultures isn't going to be useful, it is hard core life experiences that shape a person more, and how their understanding of humanity evolves. And that is much harder to assess and doesn't get you published etc etc.
And I bet this bad study could/would be used by populist nationalists etc to justify why exposure to other cultures must be prevented... oh lord.
To clarify, I said bullshit because "bullshit" is a term used to refer to smug intellectuals who have an impure agenda and package them with "scientific" methods so the "common people" will just believe them. it's like how those cigarette companies fund researches to prove that cigarettes are good for your health. It's bullshit, and they should be ashamed of themselves for hiding behind bullshit science and doing their propaganda and mislead the public.
So yeah, I think no matter how great the tools are, if you use it wrong, it is bullshit. Just like knife can be used for cooking but also killing people.
3 comments
[ 7.8 ms ] story [ 827 ms ] threadWell, morality IS relative. It's not a "dark side" of going abroad. I feel pity for those who did this research because they're the ones who are "in the dark" and believe in their little world enough to do a research and write a paper on this. It's similar to bunch of christians doing a research about why God exists. I'm all for philosophy and theorizing things but just don't claim it to be "scientific" just because you used all these multiple longitudinal, correlational, and experimental whatever bullshit methods.
I only skimmed the paper and so may be entirely wrong, but the sample sizes seemed awfully small. What drove me crazy is their simplistic notion is that the CPI and CI indexes of the countries they visited was a factor of sorts. The CPI is a ranking of countries "by their perceived levels of corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys.". The key word is 'perceived' - some cultures, 'back-scratching' is a fundamental component of how the society works and so by idealistic Western standards, it is wrong, but that society isn't hypocritical about it.
On the other hand, the UK is #10 in the CPI list, but after living here for a number of years now, I understand the culture enough to say that the English are utterly hypocritical about the amount of corruption that is actually present, despite the PERCEPTION the UK is a country that belongs in the top 10. And most English people I know are well aware of the inherent corruption (at least my friends, all left leaning ex-communists...) If the study was correct, then foreign students from other countries who study here, travel here would be become less immoral?? I think not. Morality is primarily a function of the individual, their personality, and how it was shaped by their own culture growing up. I doubt very much it is affected so easily, except for weak willed people.
Living here has not made me any more corrupt, but the opposite. Although I no longer have any problem stabbing someone who has shown themselves to be corrupt/unethical in the back... as a counter-action. I have gotten tired of being screwed with, but I certainly am not going to plan to be unethical right off the bat with someone. i.e. I play Tit for Tat now in the Prisoner's Dilemma game of life, not the ideal strategy taught to children to socialize them properly.
So if you want to measure how 'personality morality' changes over time, superficial things like a brief exposure to other cultures isn't going to be useful, it is hard core life experiences that shape a person more, and how their understanding of humanity evolves. And that is much harder to assess and doesn't get you published etc etc.
And I bet this bad study could/would be used by populist nationalists etc to justify why exposure to other cultures must be prevented... oh lord.
To clarify, I said bullshit because "bullshit" is a term used to refer to smug intellectuals who have an impure agenda and package them with "scientific" methods so the "common people" will just believe them. it's like how those cigarette companies fund researches to prove that cigarettes are good for your health. It's bullshit, and they should be ashamed of themselves for hiding behind bullshit science and doing their propaganda and mislead the public.
So yeah, I think no matter how great the tools are, if you use it wrong, it is bullshit. Just like knife can be used for cooking but also killing people.