Recently the oxytocin levels in Toad Hall have been rather
high. This mainly has to do with the Angora rabbit, Honeysuckle, that lives on
our back porch and the litter of 10 kits she produced after a weekend fling
with a handsome young buck named Heathcliff. She is new to mothering, so she
was helped begin nursing by an inoculation of oxytocin… well, this is probably
more than you need to hear, at least on this blog. For more such news you can
go here.
Anyway, oxytocin was suddenly a topic of conversation around
here the weekend the baby bunnies were born. That weekend also happened to be
the time John and Leslie Eddy, from Cos Cob, CT were here for a visit. So they
too were swept up in talk about oxytocin, which really is not something I am
prone to normally give much thought to. But there it is. After they returned
home John alerted us to a fascinating TED talk on “Trust, Morality—and
Oxytocin.”
I recommend this talk, and encourage you to watch the video
and think through what Paul Zak is saying. I’d like to begin a conversation
here—in the comments on this blog—about this video and Zak’s ideas, and so have
appended a few questions that might be worth considering. My questions don’t
cover all that needs to be discussed, but the ones I list here will get us
started and prepare the way for the rest of what should be addressed.
Questions for reflection:
1. How do
you respond to Zak’s presentation as a talk? Consider what he communicates in
such a brief presentation—how effective, interesting, persuasive, and
informative is his TED talk?
2. As
objectively as possible, state Zak’s basic premise(s), and the reasons he gives
for accepting it.
3. What
ideas did Zak make attractive in his talk? How did he accomplish this?
4. With
what in Zak’s presentation do you agree? Why?
5. How do
you respond to the notion that might be a molecular basis for empathy or other
aspects of behavior we classify as “moral”?
6. Assuming
that all the findings in Zak’s research are valid and confirmed by more
testing, to what extent and in what way does your understanding of morality
need to change?
7. Some
Christians might express the fear that if some biological or molecular basis for
moral behavior is identified, any claim for a divine basis for morality or law
would be rendered implausible. How would you respond? What Scriptures would you
appeal to? What Scriptures might they appeal to as the reason for their
concern? How would you respond to these texts?
8. Reflect
on Zak’s prescription of 8 hugs per day. On the one hand, it can sound a bit
sentimental and certainly is incapable of solving the intractable problems of
our badly broken world. Even 108 hugs per day will not fulfill the deepest
yearnings of the human heart. On the other hand, the corners of the world we
inhabit are filled with lonely people who feel unnoticed and underappreciated,
for whom simple human touch can bring a moment of respite and a glimmer of
hope. How does Zak’s prescription resonate with the Christian mandate to love
our neighbor?
Paul Zak’s bio (from TED): A
professor at Claremont Graduate University in Southern California, Zak believes
most humans are biologically wired to cooperate, but that business and
economics ignore the biological foundations of human reciprocity, risking loss:
when oxytocin levels are high in subjects, people’s generosity to strangers
increases up to 80 percent; and countries with higher levels of trust—lower
crime, better education—fare better economically.
I look forward to reading your comments.
This entry was posted
at Monday, November 07, 2011
and is filed under
Morality,
Science,
Truth
. You can follow any responses to this entry through the
comments feed
.