Washington DC: A new study has helped explain the paradox of why we are quick to blame people for their actions, but slower to give them credit, says ANI. We constantly read others’ intentions in what they do, from seeing someone help an elderly person cross the street or cutting in line or committing a heinous crime. Judgments about intentionality are threaded deeply within our legal system and pervasive in our support of political candidates, and have been the focus of discussion for the past decade in the philosophical literature.
The Duke University study is the first to use neuroscience research tools to try to explain why people are biased toward treating negative actions as intentional but positive actions as unintentional, said lead author Lawrence Ngo. “There’s no logical reason why we would call something intentional, just because it causes a bad outcome as opposed to a good outcome,” said corresponding author Scott Huettel.
