Meaning of Numb Legal

Britannica English: Translation of numb for Arabic speakers Underlying affect in the experience system is the meaning of images to which positive or negative feelings attach. Images in this system include not only visual images, as important as they are, but also words, sounds, smells, memories, and products of our imagination. Kahneman (2003) notes that one of the functions of System 2 is to monitor the quality of intuitive prints formed by System 1. Kahneman and Frederick (2002) suggest that this surveillance is generally rather lax and allows for the expression of many intuitive judgments in behaviour, including some that are erroneous. This has important implications, which will be discussed later. In addition to positive and negative affects, more nuanced emotions such as empathy, sympathy, compassion and sadness have been shown to be crucial in motivating people to help others (Coke, Batson, & McDavis, 1978; Eisenberg and Miller, 1987). As Batson (1990) put it: «. Extensive research suggests that we are more likely to help someone in need if we «feel» for that person. A final important psychological element in this story is attention. Just as feelings are necessary to help, attention to feelings is necessary. Research shows that attention amplifies emotional responses to stimuli that are already emotionally charged.

The research I will describe here shows that images and feelings are lacking when large losses of life are simply presented in the form of numbers or statistics. Other research shows that attention to individuals is greater and less acute and intense when targeted at groups of people (Hamilton & Sherman, 1996; Susskind, Maurer, Thakkar, Hamilton & Sherman, 1999). Weaknesses in images and attention influence feelings in ways that can help explain apathy toward genocide. Another important link with feelings comes from Haidt (2001), who argues that moral intuitions (similar to System 1) precede moral judgments. In particular, it asserts that «. Moral intuition can be defined as the sudden appearance of moral judgment in the consciousness, including emotional value (good-bad, like-aversion), without being aware of having gone through research stages, weighing evidence, or inferring a conclusion. Moral intuition is, therefore. like aesthetic judgment. You see or hear about a social event and immediately feel approval or disapproval. (page 818) Affect, analysis and value of human lives How should we evaluate saving lives? If we believe that every human life has the same value (a view probably supported by System 2 thinking), the value of saving N life N is multiplied by the value of saving one life. It can also be argued that significant loss of life is disproportionately more severe because it threatens the social fabric and viability of a group or society, as in the case of genocide.

How do we really value people`s lives? The research provides evidence for two descriptive models associated with affect and systems thinking-1, which reflect saving values that are fundamentally different from the normative models just described. Both descriptive models are instructive in terms of genocide apathy. The first of these, the psychophysical model, is based on evidence that an affective response, and the value we attach to saving human lives, can follow the same type of «psychophysical function» that characterizes our diminished sensitivity to a variety of perceptual and cognitive entities as their underlying magnitudes increase. The constant increase in the size of a stimulus usually produces smaller and smaller changes in response. The application of this principle to the assessment of human life suggests that some form of psychophysical anesthesia may result from our inability to estimate loss of life as it increases. The importance of saving a life is great when it is the first or only life saved, but decreases slightly as the total number of lives saved increases. Thus, the importance of saving a life in the context of a greater threat is psychologically diminished – we are unlikely to «feel» much differently or estimate the difference between saving 87 lives and saving 88 people if these perspectives are presented to us separately. Fetherstonhaugh, Slovic, Johnson, and Friedrich (1997) documented this potential for reduced sensitivity to the value of life – i.e., «psychophysical anesthesia» – in the context of assessing people`s willingness to fund various life-saving interventions. Although a psychophysical model may explain disregard for the progressive loss of life in the context of a great tragedy, it does not fully explain apathy towards genocide, as it implies that the response to the initial loss of life will be strong and sustained, albeit with too little change, albeit with too little change, although with too little change.

when losses increase. This is followed by evidence of a second descriptive model that is better suited to explain apathy toward genocide. Numbers and Numbness: Images and Feelings Psychological theories and data confirm what careful observers of human behavior have known for a long time. Digital representations of human lives do not necessarily convey the meaning of those lives. Too often, numbers represent dry statistics, «people with dried tears» who lack feeling and do not motivate action (Slovic & Slovic, 2004). How can we convey the feelings necessary for rational action? Attempts to do this usually involve highlighting images that are below the numbers. For example, organizers of a rally designed to get Congress to kill about 38,000 people a year from handguns stacked 38,000 pairs of shoes on a hill outside the Capitol (Associated Press, 1994). Students at a Tennessee middle school who struggled to understand the magnitude of the Holocaust collected 6 million paper clips as the centerpiece of a memorial (Schroeder & Schroeder-Hildebrand, 2004). English Language Learners Definition of numb (entry 2 of 2) Testimonials Associated Press. (September 21, 1994). 38,000 shoes represent the loss of this deadly year.

Le Registre-Garde, p. 6A. Batson, C. D. (1990). How social is an animal? Human capacity for care. American Psychologist, 45, 336-346. Batson, C. D., O`Quin, K., Fultz, J., Vanderplas, M., & Isen, A. (1983).

Self-reported need and empathy and selfish versus altruistic motivation to help. Zeitschrift für Persönlichkeits- und Sozialpsychologie, 45, 706-718. Coke, J. S., Batson, C. D., & McDavis, K. (1978). Empathetic aid mediation: a two-step model. Zeitschrift für Persönlichkeits- und Sozialpsychologie, 36, 752-766. Dillard, A. (1999). For now. Alfred A.

Knopf, New York. Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. (1987). Empathy and prosocial behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91-119. Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49(8), 709-724. Fetherstonhaugh, D., Slovic, P., Johnson, S.

M., & Friedrich, J. (1997). Insensitivity to the value of human life: a study of psychophysical anesthesia. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14(3), 283-300. Gilbert, D. T. (2002). Inference correction. In T. Gilovich, D.

Griffin, & D. Kahneman (eds.), Heuristics and biases (pp. 167-184). New York: Cambridge University Press. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionistic approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814-834. Hamilton, D. L.

and Sherman, S. J. (1996). Perceiving individuals and groups. Psychological Review (103), 336-355. Jenni, K., & Loewenstein, G. (1997). Explanation of the «identifiable victim effect». Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 235-257. Kahneman, D. (2003).

A perspective on judgment and choice: describing limited rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: the substitution of attributes in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (eds.), Heuristics of intuitive judgement: Extensions and applications (pp. 49-81). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kogut, T.

and Ritov, I. (2005a). The «identified victim» effect: an identified group or a single individual? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 157-167. Kogut, T. and Ritov, I. (2005b). The singularity of victims identified in separate and shared assessments. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 97, 106-116. Kristof, ND (2007). Save the Darfur puppy. New York Times. Retrieved May 10, 2007, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2007/05/14/opinion/l14kristof.html Lifton, R.

J. (1967). Death in Life: Survivors of Hiroshima. New York: Random House. Power, S. (2003). A Hell Problem: America and the Age of Genocide. New York: Harper Perennial.

Schelling, T. C. (1968). The life you save can be yours. In S. B. Chase, Jr. (ed.) (pp.

127-176). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute. Schroeder, P. and Schroeder-Hildebrand, D. (2004). Six million paper clips: the creation of a Holocaust museum for children. Minneapolis: Kar-Ben Publishing. Slovic, S., & Slovic, P. (2004). Numbers and nerves: on the way to an emotional perception of environmental risks. Ganze Gelände, 13, 14-18. Small, D.

A. and Loewenstein, G. (2003). Helping a victim or helping the victim: altruism and identifiability.