I happened to read a few articles, shared by and through “Samooga Koornokkaalar” Mani Anna and his friends, one of those articles speaks about a performance artist planned for a social experiment. The experiment goes like this, the artist would stand in a public place and people can do whatever they want to do with the artist, she has also kept a table full of various things [1].
Now you can bring a mental picture of, how a predator approaches its prey, shown in any documentaries of natgeo or animal planet. Almost, similar things happened in that social experiment, initially, the photographers went nearby. Slowly public gathered around her, started moving her, made her to sit on a stool, some poured a glass of water over her, a little harmless, yet they would not dare to experiment the same with their own friends.
Then, there was an awakening, Pandora’s jar started pouring down, a guy undressed and groped her, some guy made a few slits on her skin with a blade, another guy made her to hold a gun against herself. The story went on like that. When the 6-hours experiment was over, it is like none of them could confront the presence of Marina Abramovic.
a neuroscience experiment
Another neuroscience experiment with the choices [2]. This experiment goes like someone is given some money, say $20 as in the experiment. They are given two choices, one is that you can have half of that money, and another choice is that he can bet with that money with a coin toss, if he gets a head he would be given $20, if it is a tail, he loses the money, $20. Most of the people chose the Choice 1!
In another experiment, he is given the same amount of $20, again two choices. Choice one is to lose half the money, and another choice is that same betting situation, a coin toss, if he gets head, he gets the $20; loses $20, otherwise. Most of the people chose the 2nd Choice.
As you might have noticed (otherwise, you are also a subject in that experiment, so am I! 😛 ), in both the experiments choice 1 expresses the same outcome, he can always carry his $10 without gambling in both the experiments! But you play the role of Shakuni and trick someone to gamble, and this Shakuni effect is known as framing effect by economists and psychologists! It looks like the framing effect is suggested as an emotional response by one of its theory. When the subject hears “you get $10”, he feels good, at the sametime, “you have to lose $10”, a sad outcome, it sounds! Thus it is suggested due to the emotions.
The neuroscientists compared the fMRI (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) images taken in various activities, like sitting, working, walking, sleeping, etc. Weirdly, this Shakuni effect does NOT resemble to the fMRI-emotion-image, but fMRI-Lack of mental effort-image! Wow!
Baha’i
There were and are clandestine institutions, BUT, which provide/d the real motivation to learn and educate. During the British rule, we had such Kalaripayattu traditions, running secretively. However, striving for education is such a wonderful thing. I love to listen to my father and his achievements, despite their poverty and undernourished environment. It is so motivating that I somehow started romanticized about the poverty, anyway. this is a stray statement!
Another case was that Baha’i are not even considered human, according to this story. So they can not even talk about human rights. Then it is quite ‘sensible’ to conclude that educating them is not quite a thing, we can think of! So the Baha’i run the clandestine institution, which is often hacked by the governmental agencies and this is the way story flows. Therefore, teachers from those institutions are often arrested; amidst the thorny environment, they are managing to run the institution and Baha’i get their education [3].
Several popular scientific magazines, such as Nature, Science, etc often write for the research-without-borders, and they have been publicizing about a young Iranian physicist from Texas, Austin who was detained by the Iranian Government [3a]. Sadly, a simple search as “Iranian physicist” in the privacy-concerned-search engine “DuckDuckGo”, it gives a suggestion list “iranian physicist assassinated”, “… killed”, “… jailed”. One of the most infamous case is that Iranian physicist got arrested and sentenced to prison for 10 years, during his visit to home in 2011. The reason was that national security [3a].
The intensity of the problem could be very prominently visible, depending on the state’s take on its minorities and its action in the name of national security.
Behavioral similarities
For me, these independent caustic stories sound very similar in its causal structure. Now, we try to perceive a thing or two by connecting these three different stories. Comparing the magnitudes of security- life threatening situation, environment, interaction among the people. Marina’s experiment on giving the freedom to human beings, she broke the rules of interaction, shattered the barriers, “by assuming you can do whatever you like”. That results in lurked animal nature with the slow pace of stomps of photographing, poking, bugging; finally, galloping into the regime of human violence groping, slitting, making her to point a gun herself. She said that after that experiment she felt she was a big piece of a white hair, I really do not know what she means by that. Just by keeping myself in this suicidal gambling. I would versify cantos in terror, if I were AbhiramaBhattar.
Lack of mental effort was projected in the neuroscience lab experiment, now compare the mental disengagement outgrew within the mob in Abramovic’s experiment and interestingly you compare the situation of no interferential emotions or sympathy, even if you consider this as a performance, I think we need to grow avatar’s tentacled braids to connect with the souls around.
The same type of gedanken experiment can be proposed like, in the place of Marina Abramovic, think of an organized system/a bank without any kind of security and say, same conditions apply- you can do whatever you want. But, you will be watched all the time. People might be worrying about the eyes of the public systems, and their future would be betrayed by their present actions, even though, the rules are turned-off. Therefore, their own moral stance would be policing your activities. You have to take up the choice of not jeopardizing your own future.
After the 6-hours of Abramovic’s experiment, the people, who were goofing off, could not even confront her and fled. How the high-entropic-hell, the group was abundant with righteousness, compassion or whatever-the-right-word, suddenly culminated in the mob, after the experiment. Eventually, groomed gentlemen tucked their 6 hours long cruelty into them, evaded the place. The state of lack of mental effort seems to be a psychopath, and there is no much of emotions play in this, I guess that through their actions.
I always wonder how any kind of mob stoop so low and stormtrooping the unwanted ones, be it in the case of large-scale fascistic movements or the less-in-number nirbhaya-like cases, I believed that they clutter themselves, due to the emotional drive within. But, we can safely question that a priori assumption! 😛 How a human-being can deny the humanness of another human being, as in the Iranian authorities question the Baha’i. So, we always have the same set of choices, but we opt for something which is interestingly evil and horrific, at least in the eyes of majority of the future generation, just like we feel about the world wars.
Trolley-problem
By the way, the word future generation and the ensemble size (small and large) conditions fired through my axons, to share an interesting gedanken experiment, in the field of moral psychology, known as trolley problem. It seems that that problem is given to the psychology students to initiate them into psychology!
The problem is described like a train cart/bogie runs fast on its rails and the track branches into two tracks. In one track, 5 people are tied to the rails, and in the other branching track there is only one person tied to the tracks. Now, you are standing at the bifurcating tracks and the track control is in your hand. You can not stop the train, but, you can choose which-way the train can be diverted. And you have to play the number game, whether to kill 5 people or 1 guy!
Suppose, you are ready to kill 1 guy for 5 people, what if that 1 guy is your close friend or someone significant? Thence, a dilemma.
Interestingly, some psychopaths were asked and the questions are made complicated to understand the nature of psychopathy. The question were reframed as what if you have someone standing nearby, whom you hate. The answer was pretty simple push that guy down on the track, save all!
Now the experiment is given to a toddler, A psychology professor wanted his kid to solve it for him. The result was terrific! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N_RZJUAQY4
References
- https://www.elitereaders.com/performance-artist-marina-abramovic-social-experiment/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTBkbseXfOQ
- https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-03-mental-shortcuts-emotion-irrational-decisions.html
- https://qz.com/934700/a-clandestine-university-has-been-educating-bahais-in-iran-for-30-years/?utm_source=qzfb
- http://www.nature.com/news/iranian-physicist-sentenced-to-prison-1.10642
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
ParamAnu 