RobP

Excellent point; it is asymmetry which leads to diversity which keeps life from being a bland experience.

I think Bronwyn noted earlier on this thread that she misses a couple of posters who were often dogmatic, pigheaded, patronising and very often nasty. While I would often just skim their posts, if enough meaning caught my attention, I would prepare a response, which at the very least has benefited my writing and argument skills.

However, I find exploring how we achieve the perceptions and beliefs that we have of great interest and certainly pertinent in debating a topic. By keeping an awareness of how simply our opinions may be formed we can remain flexible, empathic and adaptable towards others.

Fractelle,

"I find exploring how we achieve the perceptions and beliefs that we have of great interest and certainly pertinent in debating a topic. By keeping an awareness of how simply our opinions may be formed we can remain flexible, empathic and adaptable towards others."

My take on this is that there are all sorts of reasons why people are different - some are just bad people who don't want to fit in, those that mean well but are caught in the currents of their past history and can't break their existing pattern without creating other waves and, of course, those that were ever in calm waters and never needed to cause problems for others.

If you could trace it right back to their origins, you'd probably find as many reasons for people's behaviour and beliefs as there are people.

Now, your earlier comment is obviously primarily referring to the rather abrasive Col. While I didn't at all like his, at times, nastiness and abrasiveness, there's no doubt he believes in the freedom of the individual to make his own decisions, right or wrong. You'd probably find that his starting point in life was always one of independence and objectivity that became fiercer as he ran into what he considered to be more and more blockages. Sometimes people like Col take this course because they can't change and sometimes because they won't. On the positive side, I always sensed that if you took a dispassionate view of things with no strings attached, Col would think about it and possibly even appreciate it.

Fractelle,
I think you might be confusing a number of different issues here.

The dictator game was In my opinion (IMo) flawed and at best can only be said applies to that group, that cultural back ground.

One assumes the experiment was done within a culture of financial accumulation. I can think of cultures that wouldn't be able to play this game as the concepts involved would offend their conditioning. However if the two groups were from different tribal nations then the result maybe very different again.

Also in the case of OLO I think the problems are more to do with issue
self image, social. Paulene Hanson syndrome.
fear of the unknown i.e. rejection of anything that might upset their view their of the world. i.e. no point in life with out order or God(s) racial differences.
Their intellectual abilities and feelings of insecurity competing with smarter people
Other assorted psychological problems need to dominate, having a bad experience with say aggressive women or men.
Applying the conclusions from the Dictator game to OLO is Imo over interpreting it a lot.
It maybe a factor but I doubt that it is a major one. As a tool a screw driver is useful but isn't the best tool for hammering nails into prejudices.

I got to admit that this does my head in Fractelle. Dictator A gives me $50 and Dict B gives me $100 then takes back $30 leaving me with $70, and B is the bad guy?? I can understand the equation but cannot really 'get inside the head' of the response quoted.

I agree that we see the effect of negative responses escalating here on OLO alot. Boaz' negative response to Islam never failed to get reflexive responses from the same people, while others just started to ignore him.

I admit that the only person who ever suckered me in on OLO was Nichols from the Atheist Fdn. but for the most I try and respond with a bit of wry humour or ignore.

I guess my comment is that some might operate on this perceived level all the time, some sometimes and others rarely.

On another level, I read where taxes will have to increase sharply to pay for the Fed. governments stimulus package and cash giveaways. Surely this is will be bad news for the govt in light of the way we perceive negatives? Is Rudd sowing the seeds of his political demise in 4 years time?

Thanks for the responses people.

Now I'd just like to make the following points:

The "Dictator's Game" was never intended to be THE answer to the multi-faceted construction of the human persona. I just thought it would be interesting to consider how easily we can feel slighted in some way.

I like to view things from all angles, turn them around, upside down and inside out - laterally in other words.

I saw the game as eAnt does, merely a tool among many that we can use.

I see the fair/unfair POV occur in many situations where we are trying to create equality of opportunity, such as for indigenous people. It appears that if any group receives anything that may be considered 'special' in some way, there are those who will say that's unfair without considering the unique circumstances of a particular group.

I have tried to steer clear of specific examples in order not to get caught up in side issues, such as people who see a level of 20% or 30% women in politics as 'feminists taking over'. Humans have a tendency to see one swallow and think it’s Spring. In the "dictator game" the point of it was to show how a small unfairness can escalate into a perception that one is being treated with gross disrespect.

Palimpsest
Don’t get too caught up with the game, it is the results that are interesting; how antagonism can spiral.

RobP you stated:

"If you could trace it right back to their origins, you'd probably find as many reasons for people's behaviour and beliefs as there are people."

I think yes and no.

Consider the following brain teaser: http://www.smellybean.com/ViewVid.jsp?VidID=738

Are you among the 98% or 2%?

That was an odd one, Fractelle.

>>Are you among the 98% or 2%?<<

I came up with green spade.

And I don't even do any gardening.

Then again, I don't often pick up a hammer either.

All of which makes me wonder if I have a concentration problem... ooh look, a butterfly.