21世紀COE 「心の文化・生態学的基盤に関する研究」 第1回ワークショップ 2002年11月29日 基調講演 Making Cultural Beliefs Self-sustaining 拠点リーダー 山岸俊男 適応合理的な 心をもつ人間 相互作用が生 み出すマクロパ ターン =社会・文化 目的 人間が作り出す生態環境である社会や文 化への適応システムとして人間の心を捉え,社会 を可能にする心の“しくみ”を解明する 社会的知性と社会的適応課題分析 協力行動の 進化的・適応論 的基盤分析 理論研究 実験研究 社会規範の シミュレーション研究 適応論的分析 フィールド研究 文化の進化ゲーム論的分析 組織構成 文学研究科人間行動システム科学専攻の行動システム科 学講座(社会心理学)を中核として、同専攻の心理システ ム科学、文学研究科文化価値論専攻の北方文化論講座、 そして教育学研究科の一部が参加. 拠点リーダー 山岸 俊男(社会心理学) 副リーダー 亀田 達也(社会心理学) 事業推進担当者 ミラー・アラン(宗教社会学)、大津起夫(計量心理学)、高 橋伸幸(社会心理学)、結城雅樹(社会心理学)、瀧川哲夫(認知心理 学)、阿部純一(認知心理学)、菱谷晋介(認知心理学)、川端康弘(認 知心理学)、安達真由美(認知心理学)、増地あゆみ(認知心理学)、眞 嶋良全(認知心理学)、煎本孝(文化人類学)、佐々木亨(文化人類学)、 小杉康(考古人類学)、佐藤公治(発達心理学)、室橋春光(発達生理 心理学)、石黒広昭(発達心理学)、片山順一(生理心理学) 適応合理的な 心をもつ人間 社会環境(社 会・ 文化)の形成 適応合理的な人 間の相互作用が 生み出すマクロパ ターン =社会・文化 適応のための道具 としての心の使用 心と社会のマイクロマクロ・ダイナミックス Micro-Macro Dynamics of Mind and Society 自己維持的な心と社会の相互構成システムの解明 出発点 適応の道具としての心 = 心の本質的社会性 心の道具を使って適応すべき社会環境の性質の中に、 心の性質を理解する鍵が潜んでいる。 アプローチ 心と制度のゲーム理論的分析 制度と心の均衡化(共進化) 制度=自己維持的な信念体系 研究目的 制度と心の均衡 =心の(制度の)自己維持性を支える、心理的・社会的 メカニズムの解明 社会的地位追求 社会的領域の重要性 心の本質的社会性 道具箱としての心 領域限定性 自動的情報処理 協力関係形成 適応合理性をもつ 心の道具箱 社会的知能 心と社会・文化との関係(マイク ロマクロダイナミックス)を分析 するための3つのアプローチ Evolutionary Psychological Cultural Psychological Comparative Institutional 進化心理学的アプローチ 心は適応のための道具箱 マクロ = 均衡状態にある心(=行動戦略および、戦略 の適用を可能とする能力)の分布 文化心理学的アプローチ (文化的な)心は、人工物(文化の内容)の利用者 マクロ = 文化的人工物 (meanings, beliefs, logic) 比較制度分析アプローチ 心は適応のための道具箱 マクロ = 制度 = 自己維持的な共有された信念体系 進化心理学的アプローチ 静的アプローチ(現在の多くの進化心理学的研究) 安定した適応課題=淘汰圧 cheater detection; mate preference; sex differences no micro-macro dynamics Less静的アプローチ(evolutionary biological): 均衡化分析 e.g., 孔雀の羽根、タカハト・ゲーム 行動ないし戦略のマクロな分布が、適応課題=淘汰 圧を構成する。 = Standard evolutionary game theoretic analysis of behavioral equilibrium どのような心の性質が適応的になるかは、心の性質(戦 略)の分布に依存する。 文化心理学的アプローチ 心は、文化的な人工物をうまく利用する「文化的な 心」 例:文化的自己観 Various psychological attributes and traits are acquired (e.g., self-enhancement vs. effacement) to behave appropriately given the artifact (self construal) 心の性質に文化的な一貫性を与えているのは、人工物の 性質(特に、意味体系) 例:「自己」についての意味づけが、他の様々な心の 働きに影響を与える。 心の性質に一貫性を与えているのは、環境の中にある適応課題 大工の道具箱と、自動車修理工の道具箱では、中身が違う 現在の文化心理学には、文化的人工物のマク ロな分布が「文化的心」によりどのように生み出 されるかについての議論が欠けている。 Distribution of artifacts mind Dynamic model of culture and mind Distribution of artifacts mind How to incorporate the MicroMacro Linkage This question is translated into the question of: How a particular psychological functioning (or a set of functionings) becomes self-sustaining. Example: How an interdependent model of agents becomes self-sustaining. It becomes self-sustaining when having the belief (and behaving based on the belief) is adaptive (I.e., leads to better outcomes than the outcome of having an alternative belief). How the preference for the majority can be selfsustaining among Koreans? What is the advantage of having preference for the majority? Why white cars are so popular among Japanese? Because white cars are popular! Their resale value is higher. Having preference for white cars is adaptive to the degree that others have the same preference. (Peacock’s feather) “Join the crowd” is an implicit rule of thumb (decision heuristic) that has an adaptive advantage to the degree that others are adopting the same heuristic. The preference is self-sustaining: The collective use of such heuristics create a social environment in which the use of such heuristics becomes adaptive. SELF-SUSTAINING SET OF TOOLS 特定の心の道具の使用が、その道具の使用を 適応的にする環境を生み出し維持する。 ダイナミックな進化心理学(進化ゲーム理 論) 比較制度分析は、ダイナミックな進化心理学とどう違 うのか? 行動の分布が適応環境を構成するという点では同じ。 行動の分布が、他者の行動の予測、ないし(人間の 行動や社会のしくみについての)信念に媒介されてい る点を考慮するかどうかが、これら2つのアプローチ の違いを生み出す。 Self-Sustaining Beliefs (Heuristics, Cultural Schemas, Scripts, etc.) Beliefs related to the maintenance of the generalized exchange system: A generalized exchange system is maintained within a closed group by the shared belief of ingroup-favoritism (or particularistic morality; a naïve theory of groups according to which the group is where people help each other). Kiyonari (2001): One-shot PD with minimal group members 90 80 70 Partner believes you are: In ??? 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Ss contributed at a high level to the welfare of an ingroup member only when they expected the same ingroup-favoring treatment from other ingroup members. InTheir expectations ??? that ingroup members are helpful to them are thus confirmed, and a Partner’s Group system of generalized exchange emerged. Karp, Jin, Yamagishi & Shinotsuka (1993) Ingroup 300 Outgroup 250 Not a PD!! S’s reward was fixed, and not dependent on other participants’ behavior. 200 150 100 50 0 Target Not a Target Money allocated to an ingroup and an outgroup member (out of 500 yen) by subjects who were also a target by other subjects' allocations (Target Condition: mutual fate control) and those who were paid a fixed amount (Not a Target Condition: unilateral fate control) Ingroup 300 Outgroup 250 200 150 100 50 0 Target Not a Target The same result was replicated by Jin, Yamagishi & Kiyonari (1996) 350 Ingroup 300 Furthermore, only those who expected their favors to the ingroup member to be reciprocated practiced ingroup favoritism. 250 200 150 100 50 0 Outgroup Expected a return Did not expect a return Ingroup-favoring behavior in the minimal group situation is mostly a matter of adaptive heuristic than of social identity. Or, conversely, social identity is mostly a matter of adaptive heuristic. 孔雀の羽根と集団ヒューリスティック は何が違うのか? Self-sustaining preference: 単純な進化ゲーム Self-sustaining expectations: 人間社会にのみ 可能な制度を生み出す(例:一般交換) Avner Greif’s analysis of Maghribi and Genoa as collectivist and individualist equilibriums between institutions and beliefs Maghribi Traders 11th Century Mediterranean trades They faced the agent problem (lemons problem) Their solution to the problem Hire only another Maghribi merchant as an agent. Spread reputation of an agent who cheated to the Maghribi coalition. Refrain from hiring a Maghribi merchant who has acquired such a reputation. Their solution to the problem Hire only another Maghribi merchant as an agent. Spread reputation of an agent who cheated to the Maghribi coalition. Refrain from hiring a Maghribi merchant who has acquired such a reputation. Reputation shared within a bounded circle of traders facilitates the solution of the agent problem. This solution is viable only when members share a “collectivist” belief that most members care about the reputation—the belief that the one who cheats me will be kicked out of the coalition by all other members. This solution is viable only when members share a “collectivist” belief that most members care about the reputation. In the 11th –12th Century Genoa where people shared an “individualistic” belief that people don’t care what happens between others, this solution could not be adopted. The solution for the Genoese required costly secondparty enforcement mechanisms (formal organizations) such as courts of law. These two types of solutions lead the two societies to different sets of institutional arrangements. Maghribi The generalized exchange system supported by shared reputation provided solution to the collective action problem. Inter-group trading was restricted eventual demise of Maghlibi coalition “Collectivist cultural beliefs constituted part of the Maghribis’ collective enforcement mechanism and induced investment in information, segregation, horizontal economic interactions, and a stable pattern of wealth distribution. The endogenous partition of society restricted economic and social interactions to a small group and further facilitated in-group communication and economic and social collective punishments.” Collectivist Equilibrium Closure of the group boundaries and collectivist beliefs are mutually reinforcing. To the degree that informal mutual monitoring and sanctioning provide “secure” environment for the members, they will accept the beliefs and cultural schemas (proverbs, stories, etc.) that make them behave properly (i.e., in ways not to be rejected by their own group members). To the degree that members behave in accordance to such beliefs and cultural schemas, group boundaries are closed to outsiders. Life-time employment among major Japanese companies Workers share the belief that other major companies will not accept mid-life career changers. Thus, they invest in relation-specific assets rather than universally valued assets. This reduces their open market value, and limits their opportunities outside the current work place. Because they don’t move, external labor market does not develop, and their opportunities outside the current work place is further limited. Their beliefs create an institution of life-time employment that makes their “collectivist” beliefs an adaptive one. Genoa Costly formal organizations provided solution to the collective action problem. Inter-group trading was not restricted eventual rise of Genoa in Mediterranean trade “Individualist cultural beliefs constituted a part of the secondparty enforcement mechanism of the Genoese and induced a low level of communication, a vertical social structure, economic and social integration, and wealth transfer to the relatively poor. These manifestations of individualist cultural beliefs weakened the dependence of each individual on any specific group, thereby limiting each group’s ability to use economic, social, and moral sanctions against individual members. Individualist cultural beliefs led to a societal organization based on legal, political, and (second-party) economic organizations for enforcement and coordination.” Contemporary Cultural/Institutional Transition People in collectivist societies (especially business people) are currently realizing the disadvantages of the collectivistic institutions (which was their strength until 10 years ago). They desperately want to change the institutional arrangements in their society (from the Maghribi type to Genoese types), and face the obsolete cultural beliefs and cultural schemas as serious obstacles to this transition. They are no longer useful tools. This institutional transition requires a simultaneous transition in the cultural beliefs, schemas, heuristics, etc., and vise versa. If this transition is successful, the current East-West differences in psychological functioning, at least most of them, will Concluding Remarks 心の働きの文化的多様性について、文化心理 学は貴重なデータを提供してくれる。 我々は心 の働きの文化的多様性の背後に、社会的適応 課題の差を見つけ出すことで、その多様性の 意味を明らかにしようとする。さらに、文化的な 心の安定性を、制度=self-sustaining system of shared beliefsとして捉え、心と制度との相補 的な関係の分析を進める。 カントリー&ウェスタンとロック・ミュージック 心と制度の均衡は、その集約表現としての文化的人工 物を生み出す。 終身雇用制に代表される集団主義的制度が、やくざ映 画を生み出す。高卒の暮らしに伴う社会的制約がカント リー&ウェスタンの歌詞における「運命を積極的に受け 入れる」への賞賛を生み、大卒の生活に伴う選択の自 由がロックの歌詞における自由と決定の賞賛を生む。 重要なのは均衡の存在であり、その集約表現としての 文化的人工物にあるのではない。 適応合理的な 心をもつ人間 社会環境(社 会・ 文化)の形成 適応合理的な人 間の相互作用が 生み出すマクロパ ターン =社会・文化 適応のための道具 としての心の使用 21世紀COE 「心の文化・生態学的基盤に関する研究」
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc