Unlocked, by Jerry Zaltman

[asakiyume]

I don't usually edit whole books, but every now and then it happens, and this was one such case: Unlocked: Keys to Improve Your Thinking. I really enjoyed working on this book and have used some of the exercises in it with students I volunteer with, always with wonderful, thought-provoking results.



The intention of the book is to get people thinking about how they think, to understand how things like priming and cues work, to learn about the faultiness of memory and the selectivity of attention and so on, in the hopes that understanding how we think can help us think better. In the preface the author says,

People can react negatively to complexity and to rapid social and scientific change—for example, by retreating into rigid, deeply entrenched thinking, which leads to diminished curiosity and intolerance of those who think and act differently. Still more worrisome is an unconscious, invisible reluctance to challenge our own thoughts and feelings. Thinking, it seems, is far too often employed to justify an existing position rather than to explore, improve, and perhaps change it.

This book wants to change that.

I'm imagining that people reading here probably will, like me, be familiar with some of the thought experiments and information about thinking that the author presents, but probably/maybe (like me) not all of them. And they're entertainingly presented (though my nemesis, the trolley problem, makes an obligatory appearance).

One perk of doing the editing is that I have some books to give away! Both actual, physical books, which are better for some things (like writing down stuff when you're asked to write down stuff), and ebooks, which are better for other things (like hyperlinks and seeing stuff in color--the physical book is in black and white, but the ebook is in color).

Below the cut is an excerpt from the first "Think Key," which features an ethical dilemma that's a little less high-stakes than the one in the trolley problem. It'll give you a sense for what the book is like. To enter the giveaway, just express interest in a comment. In two weeks' time, I'll put names in a hat and pull three and post the results in a new entry. I'll also try to contact winners privately. You'll get both the physical book and the ebook.



I'm going to skip the introduction and take you right to the exercise:

Brooke and Jared are sister and brother. Brooke has just turned twelve and Jared is almost fourteen. It is Brooke’s birthday, and Jared is taking her to lunch as a treat. Brooke is very excited. Their family seldom can eat out even at fast-food restaurants. Jared has worked very hard to save enough money to take Brooke to lunch, which also requires round-trip bus fares for each of them. It will be a long time before he can save up enough money to do this again.

Brooke absolutely loves burgers. However, she is not an adventuresome eater. In fact, some people say she is a very fussy eater. A new burger joint has opened. It is very popular with her friends, and she hasn’t been there yet. The restaurant has quickly become known for its Zomburgers. A Zomburger is made from ground-up caterpillars. It is considered very, very healthy. The burger joint even has its own caterpillar farm to assure freshness and quality. Interestingly, a cooked Zomburger looks and tastes just like a regular burger and is served the same way. After it is cooked no one can tell the difference. The only thing that sets the Zomburger apart is that it is so very healthy and, of course, what goes into it.

Jared really wants Brooke to join him in having a Zomburger. But after a long discussion at
the restaurant in which Brooke often uses the words “disgusting” and “absolutely not!” Jared fails to convince her to try one. She says she’d rather starve. He goes to the counter and orders a regular burger for Brooke and a Zomburger for himself. And French fries for them both.

After picking up the order he heads back to their table. However, while bringing the burgers to their table, Jared realizes he has forgotten which one is the Zomburger. He knows the restaurant people can’t help now because the burgers look alike. And he doesn’t have any money left to order another regular burger for Brooke.

As Jared arrives at their table, Brooke is looking very pleased and very, very hungry. She can’t wait to dig in.

What should Jared do?

1. Give her a burger, pretending it is the regular burger. In other words, keep his confusion about the burgers to himself. He is certain she won’t know the difference. How would you justify this decision if you were Jared? How certain are you that this is the best decision?


2. Admit his confusion and let Brooke choose what to do. He knows she feels the Zomburger is disgusting. He will likely end up eating both burgers himself while Brooke goes hungry on her birthday. How would you justify this decision? How certain are you that admitting his confusion right away is the best decision?


3. Should he tell her only while she is eating that he doesn’t know which one she has? What emotions do you think Brooke will feel if he does this?


4. What emotions will she feel if he tells her afterwards, say on the way home on the bus?


5. Will her emotional reaction change if he tells her a few years later?


6. How might Jared’s feelings be different depending on whether he tells her before she starts eating, halfway through the burger, or right after she finishes?


7. On Brooke’s part, should she give a logical reason to Jared for not wanting a Zomburger? Is it enough to say that she finds it disgusting without having to say why? Does she owe him more explanation?


8. If Jared tells Brooke the problem he has before giving her a burger, how do you think Brooke will feel or should feel about Jared?


9. How might the situation differ if Jared and Brooke bought the burgers to eat at home, and Jared only realized his confusion then?

And now I'm going to skip the Basic Idea section and take you to the So What? section

Thinking about Jared’s situation and how to handle it is one thing, but more broadly, this exercise should prompt you to question how you’ll prepare yourself for being in a similar situation. What can you do? When such an occasion does arise, a good question to ask is: What is the foundational principle for me here? That is, what core value do I want to express or use to guide my decision? For Jared it might be, “Never trick anyone to ingest food they don’t like.” Of course, it could also be, “Don’t ruin a very special birthday outing for your sister.”

If you want to take a further look at the book, you can visit Amazon or the author's website.

Comments

[rachelmanija]

My thoughts on ethical dilemmas in general is that the ones we encounter in philosophy, like the Zomburger or the trolley, hardly ever have relevance to the ones we encounter in real life. They're either so outlandish (trolley) or so carefully weighted (the gross food definitely cannot harm Brooke, AND buying her another burger is impossible) that they're very hard to match to reality.

I actually think we'd be better equipped to handle RL dilemmas if we started with the sort we actually encounter, and then really thought through the implications and how we'd handle them, and whether we'd be willing too. Because in RL, the reason ethical dilemmas are dilemmas is not usually that they're confusing and it's unclear what the right thing to do is, it's that one choice comes at a price that you're not sure you're willing to pay.

IMO, the more RL version of the Zomburger dilemma would be that Jared could buy his sister another burger, but he'd then have to sacrifice something he really wanted to use that money for. Are you willing to do that, when the Zomburger is harmless and there's a 50-50 chance she won't get it anyway?

[asakiyume]

Yes, I was thinking just now how the problem with the Trolley Problem is that, like a trolley, it's stuck on very rigid tracks and can go in very limited directions--whereas, for instance, if you're writing a novel, you can invent all kinds of alternatives.

And your last-paragraph scenario reminds me of one person's answer to this question, which was to point out that Jared, too, is losing something--the chance to be sure he's trying a Zomburger.

[amaebi]

Yeah. I generally say, "What I want to know is what Torquemada is sticking people in these problems? I won't play this game." Which makes people mad. A lot like my responses to the so-called problem of evil do.

[asakiyume]

This is something he acknowledges, not about the Trolley Problem, but in a chapter that has a scenario involving a video clip of a person walking on a tightrope over water. In one video, the person is in complete control and nearly across; in another the person seems on the verge of falling in the water; in a third, the person is wobbling but could recover or could fall. People are asked which video they'd like to see the conclusion of. He says that most people choose the third video and hypothesizes it's because it's the one whose outcome is most uncertain--but he says that some people find the whole exercise too troubling and don't want to watch any videos. Which is to say, he recognizes that people have different degrees of sensitivity to this stuff.

[sartorias]

If there is an alternative where Jared takes the plates back and asks the cooks to put a piece of parsley on the Zomburger so he won't get confused again, then I'd be okay with it as offering practical solutions or discussion of different ways of thinking, but for the most part, these highly weighted scenarios I find very frustrating, as my questions always fall between the cracks.

(And at least this one isn't cruel, like the "would you save the drowning dog or the drowning thief, you can only save one," which I hated with incandescent hatred, back in the day).

[asakiyume]

I think the staff at the Zomburger joint would appreciate that idea with the parsley to prevent any further mix-ups like this one!

[sonia]

I was thinking it would be very likely that they would do this already, like the different flavored chocolate truffles that each have their own little tweak - different shape, sprinkles on top, whatever. Because the restaurant can't afford people to be upset with them about getting the wrong thing, or even having a doubt that they didn't get what they ordered.

How cool that you got to edit this. I'm expressing my interest!

[asakiyume]

Thank you! So noted!

The author of this book is a professor emeritus of marketing, so I am absolutely sure if the Zomburger joint were to ask him for advice, that would be one of the first things he'd recommend.

[boxofdelights]

I would love to read this book.

[asakiyume]

Excellent! I'm noting you down.

[khiemtran]

Jared gets both burger patties. Brooke gets the fries. (For bonus marks, put the extra fries in place of the burger patty...)

More seriously, this is me, quite often when I'm getting coffee for friends. "And this is the skim... or was it this one? Umm..." Solving the problem together is always the best way...

[asakiyume]

See, this is what I mean! I hadn't thought of that as a potential solution, and I love it.

[amaebi]

I'm interested.

The title made me think Ugh, but your description made it clear that I'd enjoy this a lot.

[asakiyume]

There are other books like this out there, and no doubt they cover similar ground, but what I really like about this is the guy himself. He's *interested* in people, he cares about getting people to recognize when generally helpful mental shortcuts can cause problems, he's warm and friendly, and he practices what he preaches. There's one chapter that has quotes from famous people on imagination. When I suggested adding some more women and people of color, he was one hundred percent in favor of the idea. And he has a chapter in which he talks about letting people who are the subject of study speak for themselves.

[st_martin_a]

Looks interesting.
I'd let Brook have one of the burgers and wouldn't mention the fact that I didn't know which was which.
If she knew years later, she'd be mature enough to react better.
That's me.
: /

[asakiyume]

I vacillate like a vacillating thing about what I'd do, but there's a high probability I'd do that, too.

[petrichor_pirate]

I’m interested in the book also.

But my first answer to the problem was for Jared to tell Brooke he’s gotten confused and then try both of the burgers and give her the one that tastes most like a normal burger. But I also like sartorias’s suggestion of just taking the burgers back to the counter and asking them to mark the new ones.

[asakiyume]

I'll put your name in the hat!

According to the story, Zomburgers taste exactly like regular hamburgers (although, of course, not all hamburgers taste identical, so there's that). I think a more real-life example would be something like a pie crust that could either be made with lard or butter, and the person's a vegetarian. The pie crust might not taste discernibly different, but the vegetarian wouldn't want to eat it if it was made with lard.

I definitely think marking the Zomburgers in the future is the way to go! It doesn't solve Jared's problem, but it means no future people would suffer the same fate.

[petrichor_pirate]

A pie crust is a good analogy -- it makes more sense than a burger.

[e_d_young]

I'm doubtful there is one best decision for this kind of ethical dilemma. And I suspect the Golden Rule is at play in a lot of people's thinking, whether they're conscious of it or not. But even that doesn't necessarily provide the best decision because the way Jared would like to be treated might be different from the way Brooke would like to be treated.

Staying within the options given in the exercise, I say No Way! to #1 and #3. That's because I wouldn't want someone to do that to me, and yet I'm aware some people would rather be lied to or managed.

[asakiyume]

What you say about the Golden Rule not necessarily being a reliable guide is definitely true. I think another problem is that we can think, when we're dealing with hypotheticals, that we'd feel one way, but in the moment we might feel differently. Factors that we downplay when we're imagining the situation may be more salient when it's actually upon us. (Example: people can think they'd rather die than be incapacitated in some way, but when they find themselves in the situation, they prefer to keep on living. Obviously not true for everyone, but true for some.) In Brooke's case, she could protest a hypothetical zomburger a whole lot and declare she'd rather starve--and the thought experiment has to insist on this to make it a dilemma for Jared--but in real life, if Jared elects to tell her, it could be that suddenly her hunger and the delicious look of both burgers would overcome her objections. But there's no way of knowing in advance.

[light_of_summer]

I am definitely interested in the giveaway!

Thanks for all your recent posts--I've been enjoying them, despite my comment-silence until now!

[asakiyume]

I will definitely include you in the drawing! And thank you ^_^

[sovay]

(though my nemesis, the trolley problem, makes an obligatory appearance)

I am afraid I now think of the trolley problem as lurking inexorably in your path in the same way as the trolley in the problem. [edit] Do you have to push another thought experiment in its way?

[asakiyume]

I think that's the whole problem of declaring something your nemesis, right?

And to your edit, I guess I just did. "I don't know about switching tracks...but HERE have a caterpillar burger! That'll stop you!"

Seriously, though. Pushing the fat person/large person onto the tracks is such a fat-phobic element. Like, if five people are at risk from this trolley, there is no way that one person can possibly be large enough to stop it. I know that's the kind of hair-splitting, nit-picking carping that ignores the spirit of the thought problem, BUT STILL. If we're just going to say "But for the sake of argument," then why not make this hypothetical person an alien whose body is extra dense? Of course then you're not going to be able probably to push them. But for that matter, how are you going to put the fat person?

TROLLEY PROBLEM!!! YOU GOT ME STARTED YET AGAIN! **shakes fist**

[sovay]

"I don't know about switching tracks...but HERE have a caterpillar burger! That'll stop you!"

I would definitely try a caterpillar burger, for the record. I've eaten cricket chips. I would just want to know that's what I was eating, since in the real world the chances of me reacting idiosyncratically to something I have never eaten before are non-zero.

Seriously, though. Pushing the fat person/large person onto the tracks is such a fat-phobic element. Like, if five people are at risk from this trolley, there is no way that one person can possibly be large enough to stop it.

That must be a variant: I thought the original problem was simply the ethics of a five-for-one tradeoff. Is it supposed to make you think differently about the quality of the one life you're sacrificing to save five? (Ergh, if so.)

TROLLEY PROBLEM!!! YOU GOT ME STARTED YET AGAIN! **shakes fist**

We don't have to do the trolley problem! We can do the utility monster instead!

We can not do thought experiments!

[asakiyume]

Yeah, it's one variant--one that's in this book (not the only variant in the book; others are also given), but one I've seen elsewhere too.

Utility monster? **googles**

For instance, eating a cookie might bring only one unit of pleasure to an ordinary person but could bring 100 units of pleasure to a utility monster.

D'awwww! And I'm going to stop right there, before I find out things like that a utility monster gets 100 units of pain for every one I get or something like that. Have a cookie, utility monster.