Experimental Philosophy
@xphilosopher.bsky.social
An account for experimental philosophy - an interdisciplinary field at the intersection of philosophy and psychology https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_philosophy#:~:text=Experimental%20philosophy%20is%20an%20emerging,inform%20research%20on%20phi
A key assumption behind this question is that the way fraud works has changed over time
These days, fraudsters presumably create fake data and then run analyses on it, but back then, it seems likely that fraudsters would just directly make up the statistical results
These days, fraudsters presumably create fake data and then run analyses on it, but back then, it seems likely that fraudsters would just directly make up the statistical results
November 9, 2025 at 4:22 PM
A key assumption behind this question is that the way fraud works has changed over time
These days, fraudsters presumably create fake data and then run analyses on it, but back then, it seems likely that fraudsters would just directly make up the statistical results
These days, fraudsters presumably create fake data and then run analyses on it, but back then, it seems likely that fraudsters would just directly make up the statistical results
This is *exactly* the issue I was wondering about. Does the GRIM result arise because they made a mistake in calculating the means, or does it arise because this experiment was never actually run?
November 9, 2025 at 4:20 PM
This is *exactly* the issue I was wondering about. Does the GRIM result arise because they made a mistake in calculating the means, or does it arise because this experiment was never actually run?
Sorry, didn't mean to exclude David!
I also very much appreciated the points from @ericman.bsky.social and @bayesandbounds.bsky.social
I also very much appreciated the points from @ericman.bsky.social and @bayesandbounds.bsky.social
November 7, 2025 at 7:04 PM
Sorry, didn't mean to exclude David!
I also very much appreciated the points from @ericman.bsky.social and @bayesandbounds.bsky.social
I also very much appreciated the points from @ericman.bsky.social and @bayesandbounds.bsky.social
I agree! I really appreciated this debate between Willem Sleegers (author of the replication study) and Jake Quilty-Dunn (who disagrees with him about what the replication study shows
bsky.app/profile/will...
bsky.app/profile/will...
The whole idea about the paradigm we tested is that manipulation choice rules out the alternative explanations, so it can provide support for the theory, but we didn't find that. We only found effects that can be explained by alternative processes. (Also, I read the paper since I wrote it)
November 7, 2025 at 6:54 PM
I agree! I really appreciated this debate between Willem Sleegers (author of the replication study) and Jake Quilty-Dunn (who disagrees with him about what the replication study shows
bsky.app/profile/will...
bsky.app/profile/will...
When I first saw the GRIM results indicating that the findings were mathematically impossible, I assumed it was just a case of sloppiness… but interestingly, Nick Brown also seems to think there is something darker here. I’m not sure what to think
November 7, 2025 at 3:30 PM
When I first saw the GRIM results indicating that the findings were mathematically impossible, I assumed it was just a case of sloppiness… but interestingly, Nick Brown also seems to think there is something darker here. I’m not sure what to think
That’s a great point. Whereas if I just spontaneously decided to write a counterattitudinal essay tonight, it probably would have an effect
November 6, 2025 at 11:42 PM
That’s a great point. Whereas if I just spontaneously decided to write a counterattitudinal essay tonight, it probably would have an effect
Consider instead whether someone’s attitudes would change if we got them to just utter the one sentence “I am
in favor of the death penalty”
My guess is that would work too (maybe you disagree?),and it would call for some real explanation
in favor of the death penalty”
My guess is that would work too (maybe you disagree?),and it would call for some real explanation
November 6, 2025 at 11:31 PM
Consider instead whether someone’s attitudes would change if we got them to just utter the one sentence “I am
in favor of the death penalty”
My guess is that would work too (maybe you disagree?),and it would call for some real explanation
in favor of the death penalty”
My guess is that would work too (maybe you disagree?),and it would call for some real explanation
I was thinking more about this, and I see now that what you were saying is right
In the specific case where someone is writing a counterattitudinal *essay*, it’s just obvious that this would make them think of arguments on the other side. So there’s nothing here that even requires explaining
In the specific case where someone is writing a counterattitudinal *essay*, it’s just obvious that this would make them think of arguments on the other side. So there’s nothing here that even requires explaining
November 6, 2025 at 11:28 PM
I was thinking more about this, and I see now that what you were saying is right
In the specific case where someone is writing a counterattitudinal *essay*, it’s just obvious that this would make them think of arguments on the other side. So there’s nothing here that even requires explaining
In the specific case where someone is writing a counterattitudinal *essay*, it’s just obvious that this would make them think of arguments on the other side. So there’s nothing here that even requires explaining
It seems like you are thinking that we shouldn’t develop a more deflationary account of spreading of alternatives but should instead develop a more inflationary account of monkey cognition
Is that right? This sounds like an intriguing idea
Is that right? This sounds like an intriguing idea
November 6, 2025 at 11:22 PM
It seems like you are thinking that we shouldn’t develop a more deflationary account of spreading of alternatives but should instead develop a more inflationary account of monkey cognition
Is that right? This sounds like an intriguing idea
Is that right? This sounds like an intriguing idea
A question arises as to whether spreading of alternatives arises because of dissonance or something else
One possible view would be that the fact that it arises in monkeys indicates it is probably due to something else
However…
One possible view would be that the fact that it arises in monkeys indicates it is probably due to something else
However…
November 6, 2025 at 11:21 PM
A question arises as to whether spreading of alternatives arises because of dissonance or something else
One possible view would be that the fact that it arises in monkeys indicates it is probably due to something else
However…
One possible view would be that the fact that it arises in monkeys indicates it is probably due to something else
However…
My original point was just that the classic experiments themselves were bogus (e.g., with mathematically impossible results), but I have been getting a lot out of hearing your thoughts on the larger theoretical issues
November 6, 2025 at 11:19 PM
My original point was just that the classic experiments themselves were bogus (e.g., with mathematically impossible results), but I have been getting a lot out of hearing your thoughts on the larger theoretical issues
(It’s hard to convey tone on Bluesky, so I just want to say explicitly that I mean this as a friendly question, and I’m very interested to hear your thoughts!)
November 6, 2025 at 5:15 PM
(It’s hard to convey tone on Bluesky, so I just want to say explicitly that I mean this as a friendly question, and I’m very interested to hear your thoughts!)
In thinking about the ideas that are in fact true, are you thinking of certain surprising discoveries from Festinger and others? Are you thinking of things that we would have regarded as obviously true even in the absence of any studies?
2/
2/
November 6, 2025 at 5:14 PM
In thinking about the ideas that are in fact true, are you thinking of certain surprising discoveries from Festinger and others? Are you thinking of things that we would have regarded as obviously true even in the absence of any studies?
2/
2/
Thanks for your thoughts on this - I would love to discuss further
In thinking about dissonance, we might distinguish the things that we could have known were true without even running any experiments vs. the surprising findings obtained by social psychologists…
1/
In thinking about dissonance, we might distinguish the things that we could have known were true without even running any experiments vs. the surprising findings obtained by social psychologists…
1/
November 6, 2025 at 5:11 PM
Thanks for your thoughts on this - I would love to discuss further
In thinking about dissonance, we might distinguish the things that we could have known were true without even running any experiments vs. the surprising findings obtained by social psychologists…
1/
In thinking about dissonance, we might distinguish the things that we could have known were true without even running any experiments vs. the surprising findings obtained by social psychologists…
1/
I appreciate this 🙂 but I’m especially struck by the fact that GRIM shows that the original Festinger and Carlsmith results - so influential in launching this theory - are mathematically impossible
Do you have any thoughts about what we are learning from the GRIM analysis?
Do you have any thoughts about what we are learning from the GRIM analysis?
November 6, 2025 at 4:57 PM
I appreciate this 🙂 but I’m especially struck by the fact that GRIM shows that the original Festinger and Carlsmith results - so influential in launching this theory - are mathematically impossible
Do you have any thoughts about what we are learning from the GRIM analysis?
Do you have any thoughts about what we are learning from the GRIM analysis?
Just to clarify, do you mean that one wouldn’t have to even run a study to know that participants would feel more conflict in the counterattitudinal condition?
November 6, 2025 at 4:30 PM
Just to clarify, do you mean that one wouldn’t have to even run a study to know that participants would feel more conflict in the counterattitudinal condition?
Great point. And there are other promising theories about why we might change our attitudes to fit our behavior, such as @fierycushman.bsky.social’s theory that rationalization is rational
Rationalization is rational | Behavioral and Brain Sciences | Cambridge Core
Rationalization is rational - Volume 43
www.cambridge.org
November 6, 2025 at 3:50 PM
Great point. And there are other promising theories about why we might change our attitudes to fit our behavior, such as @fierycushman.bsky.social’s theory that rationalization is rational
Thanks Joseph! Can you say a little more about? Are you thinking that recent evidence speaks against the former interpretation but not the latter?
November 6, 2025 at 3:34 PM
Thanks Joseph! Can you say a little more about? Are you thinking that recent evidence speaks against the former interpretation but not the latter?
If we found an effect of perceived freedom, that would be beautiful evidence that the explanation is indeed dissonance
If we don’t, the question about what explains the effect feels more open
end/
If we don’t, the question about what explains the effect feels more open
end/
November 6, 2025 at 3:32 PM
If we found an effect of perceived freedom, that would be beautiful evidence that the explanation is indeed dissonance
If we don’t, the question about what explains the effect feels more open
end/
If we don’t, the question about what explains the effect feels more open
end/
For example, some of the effects explained by dissonance theory are also found in monkeys
But this finding might make one doubt that these effects are best understood in terms of dissonance
2/
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
But this finding might make one doubt that these effects are best understood in terms of dissonance
2/
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
Sage Journals: Discover world-class research
Subscription and open access journals from Sage, the world's leading independent academic publisher.
journals.sagepub.com
November 6, 2025 at 3:31 PM
For example, some of the effects explained by dissonance theory are also found in monkeys
But this finding might make one doubt that these effects are best understood in terms of dissonance
2/
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
But this finding might make one doubt that these effects are best understood in terms of dissonance
2/
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
I appreciate your continued engagement! Let’s continue this one more round
I agree that counterattitudinal behavior leads to attitude change, and I’m thinking that the question is whether this effect is explained by dissonance vs. something else
1/
I agree that counterattitudinal behavior leads to attitude change, and I’m thinking that the question is whether this effect is explained by dissonance vs. something else
1/
November 6, 2025 at 3:30 PM
I appreciate your continued engagement! Let’s continue this one more round
I agree that counterattitudinal behavior leads to attitude change, and I’m thinking that the question is whether this effect is explained by dissonance vs. something else
1/
I agree that counterattitudinal behavior leads to attitude change, and I’m thinking that the question is whether this effect is explained by dissonance vs. something else
1/
My point was that the classic findings are bogus, but I’m very open to hearing these ideas from you
So your thought is that inconsistency itself creates negative affect and people change their beliefs to minimize that negative affect?
So your thought is that inconsistency itself creates negative affect and people change their beliefs to minimize that negative affect?
November 6, 2025 at 3:18 PM
My point was that the classic findings are bogus, but I’m very open to hearing these ideas from you
So your thought is that inconsistency itself creates negative affect and people change their beliefs to minimize that negative affect?
So your thought is that inconsistency itself creates negative affect and people change their beliefs to minimize that negative affect?
Thanks Jake! I appreciate your comments elsewhere on this thread, but just to avoid sprawl, let’s continue the discussion here
November 6, 2025 at 3:16 PM
Thanks Jake! I appreciate your comments elsewhere on this thread, but just to avoid sprawl, let’s continue the discussion here