Values in the News: Of Jabs and Djokovic

Note: I had promised readers three articles on misinformation. They’re still coming, just in two weeks. I wanted to talk about this issue while it was still in the news.

Tennis has been an inexplicably major forum to debate social issues in modern times. The Battle of the Sexes, where Billy Jean King beat Bobby Riggs, was a landmark moment in the feminist movement. Serena Williams’ 2018 blowup at an umpire prompted serious introspection about the double-standards of decorum that people hold for male versus female athletes. In 2021, Naomi Osaka withdrew from the French Open to protect her mental health, an event that led to a more open discussion of mental illness among athletes. However, as far as I can tell, there has never been a controversy in tennis over public health guidance and immigration law.

Until now, that is. On January 5, 2022, top-ranked tennis player Novak Djokovic found himself in detention after his Australian visa was denied. In the days leading up to his arrival, there was an explosion of public anger about his intention to compete in the Australian Open. See, Djokovic is unvaccinated against COVID-19, and Australia is experiencing its first major wave of COVID-19. The country had previously avoided the worst of the pandemic through strict border controls and tight lockdowns, which proved to be extremely disruptive to the lives of average Australians. Melbourne was under lockdown for 262 days in two years!

Read more

Toolbox: How We Use Reason to Morally Justify Anything

“Toolbox” articles delve into a new way of looking at values, with a view to using these techniques in future articles.

Last week, I introduced the two systems of thinking: System 1, which is based on emotions, intuitions, and heuristics (i.e. rules of thumb), and System 2, which is rational and methodological. Using the Monty Hall problem, a famous brain teaser, I demonstrated how System 1 thinking can lead to mistakes, but also how System 2 can override these errors with time and effort (spoiler alert: it’s extremely uncomfortable, and you would have to be an masochist to want to do that every day).

In this article, I’ll bring the conversation back to values. There is considerable evidence to suggest that value-based judgements are derived from System 1, not System 2. An important piece of proof is “moral dumbfounding”, instances when people have a strong negative moral reaction to a situation (e.g. a moral vignette), but they struggle to explain why they feel that way. If pressed for a justification for their reactions, individuals are left speechless and confused. Sometimes, they conclude that certain acts are just wrong, and no explanation is necessary.

Read more

Values in the News: The Government of Alberta’s $100 Giveaway

I’m now going to demonstrate why values analysis (using the moral foundations “tool”) is useful for policymaking by looking at a news event: the Government of Alberta’s decision in late 2021 to provide a $100 incentive to newly vaccinated Albertans. Values analysis can help explain the controversy surrounding this decision in a systematic way.

Background

In early September 2021, COVID-19 cases in Alberta surged beyond 1000 per day, overwhelming hospitals and emergency rooms across the province. No doubt, this was related to Alberta’s relatively low vaccination rate. As of September 4, only about 60.2% of Albertans were fully vaccinated, ahead of only Saskatchewan (59%) and far behind Ontario (68.1%), Quebec (71%), and the Canadian leader Yukon Territory (73%). You go Yukon!

Read more