scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Subconscious

About: Subconscious is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1304 publications have been published within this topic receiving 20225 citations.


Papers
More filters
01 Jan 1986

1,569 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: Haidt as mentioned in this paper argues that the visceral reaction to competing ideologies is a subconscious, rather than leaned, reaction that evolved over human evolution to innate senses of suffering, fairness, cheating and disease, and that moral foundations facilitated intra-group cooperation which in turn conferred survival advantages over other groups.
Abstract: The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion Jonathan Haidt Pantheon Books, 2012One has likely heard that, for the sake of decorum, religion and politics should never be topics of conversation with strangers. Even amongst friends or even when it is known that others hold opposing political or religious views, why is it that discussion of religion and politics leads to visceral-level acrimony and that one's views are right and the other's views are wrong? Professor Jonathan Haidt of the University of Virginia examines the psychological basis of our "righteous minds" without resorting to any of the pejorative labeling that is usually found in a book on politics and religion and eschews a purely comparative approach. Haidt proposes the intriguing hypothesis that our visceral reaction to competing ideologies is a subconscious, rather than leaned, reaction that evolved over human evolution to innate senses of suffering, fairness, cheating and disease, and that moral foundations facilitated intra-group cooperation which in turn conferred survival advantages over other groups. These psychological mechanisms are genetic in origin and not necessarily amenable to rational and voluntary control - this is in part the reason debating one's ideological opposite more often leads to frustration rather than understanding. Haidt also suggests that morality is based on six "psychological systems" or foundations (Moral Foundations Theory), similar to the hypothesized adaptive mental modules which evolved to solve specific problems of survival in the human ancestral environment.While decorum pleads for more civility, it would be better, as Haidt suggests, dragging the issue of partisan politics out into the open in order to understand it and work around our righteous minds. Haidt suggests a few methods by which the level of rhetoric in American politics can be reduced, such that the political parties can at least be cordial as they have been in the past and work together to solve truly pressing social problems.There are a number of fascinating points raised in the current book, but most intriguing is the one that morality, ideology and religion are products of group selection, as adaptations that increased individual cooperation and suppressed selfishness, thereby increasing individual loyalty to the group. That morality, political ideology and religion buttress group survival is probably highly intuitive. However, given the contemporary focus on the individual as the source of adaptations, to the exclusion of all else, to suggest that adaptations such as religion and political ideology arose to enhance survival of groups is heresy or, as Haidt recounts, "foolishness". While previous rejection of group selection itself was due in part to conceptual issues, one could also point out the prevailing individualist social sentiment, "selfish gene" mentality and unrelenting hostility against those who supported the view that group selection did indeed apply to humans and not just to insects. Haidt gives a lengthy and convincing defense of group selection, his main point being that humans can pursue self- interest at the same time they promote self-interest within a group setting - humans are "90 percent chimp, 10 percent bees". One can readily observe in the news and entertainment mediate that religion is a frequent target of derision, even within the scientific community - Haidt points to the strident contempt that the "New Atheists" hold for religion. They claim that religion is purely a by-product of an adaptive psychological trait and as a mere by-product religion serves no useful purpose. However, the religious "sense" has somehow managed to persist in the human psyche. One explanation by the New Atheists of how religion propagated itself is that it is a "parasite" or "virus" which latches onto a susceptible host and induces the host to "infect" others. As a "virus" or "parasite" that is merely interested in its own survival, religion causes people to perform behaviors that do not increase their own reproductive fitness and may even be detrimental to survival, but religion spreads nonetheless. …

1,388 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
18 Sep 1987-Science
TL;DR: Findings suggest a tripartite division of the cognitive unconscious into truly unconscious mental processes operating on knowledge structures that may themselves be preconscious or subconscious.
Abstract: Contemporary research in cognitive psychology reveals the impact of nonconscious mental structures and processes on the individual's conscious experience, thought, and action. Research on perceptual-cognitive and motoric skills indicates that they are automatized through experience, and thus rendered unconscious. In addition, research on subliminal perception, implicit memory, and hypnosis indicates that events can affect mental functions even though they cannot be consciously perceived or remembered. These findings suggest a tripartite division of the cognitive unconscious into truly unconscious mental processes operating on knowledge structures that may themselves be preconscious or subconscious.

1,174 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Sensory marketing as discussed by the authors is defined as marketing that engages the consumers' senses and affects their perception, judgment and behavior, which can be used to create subconscious triggers that characterize consumer perceptions of abstract notions of the product (e.g., its sophistication or quality).

950 citations

BookDOI
01 Jan 1995
TL;DR: Wertsch, Pablo del Rio and Amelia Alvarez as mentioned in this paper have discussed the need for action in sociocultural research and the importance of action in the formation of the individual.
Abstract: Part I. Introduction James V. Wertsch, Pablo del Rio and Amelia Alvarez: Part II. Human Action: Historical and Theoretical Foundations: 1. Cultural-historical psychology and the psychological theory of activity: retrospect and prospect Vladimir P. Zinchenko 2. The need for action in sociocultural research James V. Wertsch 3. Theories of action, speech, natural language, and discourse Jean-Paul Bronckart Part III. Mediation in Action: 4. Writing and the mind David R. Olson 5. An approach to an integrated sensory-motor system in the human central brain and a subconscious computer Tadanobu Tsunoda Part IV. Sociocultural Setting, Intersubjectivity, and the Formation of the Individual: 6. Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: participatory appropriation, guided participation, apprenticeship Barbara Rogoff 7. The constitution of the subject: a persistent question Ana Luiza B. Smolka, Maria Cecilia R. Dee Goes, Angel Pino Part V. Sociocultural Settings: Design and Intervention: 8. Socio-cultural-historical psychology: some general remarks and a proposal for a new kind of cultural-genetic methodology Michael Cole 9. Tossing, praying, and thinking: the changing architectures of mind and agency Amelia Alvarez Rodriguez and Pablo del Rio Pereda.

687 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Cognition
99.9K papers, 4.3M citations
78% related
Personality
75.6K papers, 2.6M citations
75% related
Government
141K papers, 1.9M citations
75% related
Ethnic group
49.7K papers, 1.2M citations
74% related
Politics
263.7K papers, 5.3M citations
73% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
2023145
2022270
202139
202052
201947
201845