FOTO: ANP / SABINE JOOSTEN
PHOTO: HENK VEENSTRA
FOTO: REYER BOXEM
PROPOSITION
Sofia Marcolini – Faculteit Medische Wetenschappen
‘At times I fancy, Socrates, that anybody can know himself; at other times the task appears to be very difficult.’ (Alcibiades)
Daphne Brandenburg (1988) is assistant professor of Applied Ethics at the University of Groningen. She studied philosophy at the University of Amsterdam and obtained her PhD at Radboud University Nijmegen on the subject of free will and responsibility in psychiatric patients. Subsequently, she conducted postdoctoral research at Macquarie University in Sydney. She is a member of the Young Academy Groningen (YAG).
“
‘What does the
average person need,
in order to live a
better life?’
TEXT: DORIEN VRIELING / ILLUSTRATION: VERA POST
Social media, fast food, a comfy sofa. Society seems to be giving us a hard time about
behaving sensibly and doing the things we actually want to do. However, according to
philosopher Daphne Brandenburg, we do not have to put up with that.
With a little help, we can increase our autonomy.
Humans aren’t nearly as autonomous as they believe they are. This idea has become quite popular in the last few decades, and we have bestselling books such as ‘We Are Our Brains’ written by Dick Swaab, and ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ authored by Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman to thank for that. Daphne Brandenburg, assistant professor of Applied Ethics, does not question their message, but she wants to look beyond, she says from her new home in the city of Groningen – the walls have already been painted ochre yellow, but Brandenburg is still surrounded by moving boxes. ‘I just want to find out what’s next.’
Climbing centre
Even though we know that our autonomy is limited, there are many things we can do to strengthen it, according to Brandenburg ‘A simple example: I would like to visit the climbing centre three times a week, but coming home after a day’s work it can be quite a hurdle to go there. If I take that into account beforehand and put my gym clothes in the hallway, chances that I will actually end up going are much higher than if I have to go upstairs to get my clothes from the wardrobe first.
She knows every human being is contradictory: there is a discrepancy between what we want deep down in our hearts – for example, to exercise regularly – and what we tend to do at a given moment – lounging on the sofa with a bag of crisps. In our day-to-day lives, we can use all kinds of tricks to ensure that we are more inclined to do what is in line with our convictions. This not only applies to individuals in their private lives, but also to how we organize society.
Nudges
We call such tricks nudges, which literally means to push gently. Little pushes to get us moving in the right direction. ‘Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, both academics, wrote a book called “Nudge”’ Their idea is that, by applying nudges, society can be more successfully steered in a direction considered desirable by most people. You are not forced to do anything, but your environment is arranged in a way that makes you slightly more inclined to do what is healthy for you or good for society. They call it making changes to the “choice architecture” – a very promising way of thinking, in my opinion.’
Detoxing social media
An example of its application is social media. In December, Brandenburg published an article in the Dutch newspaper NRC titled ‘There is no need for a total ban: social media can be detoxed’. As with sports, there is a difference between what most people prefer to do and what they often end up doing on social media, and here too it is difficult to autonomously make the ‘right’, most healthy decision, especially for young people. ‘But there is no need to ban social media if you can organize it in a way that better promotes valuable use.’ For example, by ‘only enabling the current automatic exposure to addictive algorithms after explicit consent.’ You can still make your own choice: those who want to, can opt for the algorithms, but the default setting would be that these are turned off. That way we are not mindlessly at the mercy of our unconscious tendencies.
Philosopher card
An appealing prospect for anyone who spends much more time on Instagram, TikTok or LinkedIn than they would actually like to. But just how realistic is this kind of regulation? Brandenburg writes that it is ‘about time’ to ‘limit Big Tech’, but are governments willing or able to do so? ‘I find that very difficult. When answering that question, it is easy to play the philosopher card: I am just exploring the issue. How to accomplish it is not up to me.’
Playing the ‘philosopher card’ isn’t something she does to dodge the question, she says— in fact this is exactly what makes her profession so fascinating and relevant: she can look at things from a distance. ‘I believe the value of philosophy is that it makes you stop and think: just what are things supposed to look like, according to us all? These are seen separately from what is realistically achievable.’
Culpable or excused
If people are less autonomous than we assumed, are they also less responsible than we believed? ‘People often think in terms of culpability versus excusability, such as when someone does something undesirable, like a child who bullies, or a manager who regularly yells at his staff,’ says Brandenburg… If someone is culpable, they should have known better, and they deserve blame and punishment. If someone is excused – for example because they are just a child, or come from a culture with different customs, or lost control, or did not mean to do it – then they shouldn’t be punished.
But, according to Brandenburg, these two concepts are often overly emphasized, and as a result it seems as if blaming someone or excusing them are the only two options we have. That choice is a false dilemma, says Brandenburg, because it is not an either/or situation. Moreover, there is a third option: the nurturing stance, strengthening a certain form of autonomy – the subject of Brandenburg’s current research.
Nurturing stance
‘The nurturing stance is an alternative way of looking at a conflict. Whether or not someone is culpable or excused, the important thing is: how can you make that person more responsible in the future? What does that person need to do better in the future, to act more autonomously and responsibly from now on? She calls it a ‘more encouraging, development-oriented attitude’ in which you put the ball in the court of the person who has done something harmful or dishonest: that person is encouraged to act autonomously, and simultaneously you try to offer that person the necessary support.
After all, at what point is a person truly autonomous? Can we even call it autonomous decision-making if we only do something because we were nudged in that direction, sent by something in the outside world? Brandenburg takes a pragmatic view. She sees autonomy as acting according to your convictions, even if you have to resort to a trick to do so. ‘It’s not necessary to make conscious decisions every single moment of the day. Nudges don’t make you lazy, they just ensure that you can direct your energy towards something else than all your daily choices. If you are not constantly distracted by notifications on social media that you don’t really want to respond to, you have more time and energy to make plans for the weekend.’
PROPOSITION
Sofia Marcolini – Faculteit Medische Wetenschappen
‘At times I fancy, Socrates, that anybody can know himself; at other times the task appears to be very difficult.’ (Alcibiades)
Daphne Brandenburg (1988) is assistant professor of Applied Ethics at the University of Groningen. She studied philosophy at the University of Amsterdam and obtained her PhD at Radboud University Nijmegen on the subject of free will and responsibility in psychiatric patients. Subsequently, she conducted postdoctoral research at Macquarie University in Sydney. She is a member of the Young Academy Groningen (YAG).
PHOTO: HENK VEENSTRA
“
‘What does the
average person need,
in order to live a
better life?’
Humans aren’t nearly as autonomous as they believe they are. This idea has become quite popular in the last few decades, and we have bestselling books such as ‘We Are Our Brains’ written by Dick Swaab, and ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ authored by Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman to thank for that. Daphne Brandenburg, assistant professor of Applied Ethics, does not question their message, but she wants to look beyond, she says from her new home in the city of Groningen – the walls have already been painted ochre yellow, but Brandenburg is still surrounded by moving boxes. ‘I just want to find out what’s next.’
Climbing centre
Even though we know that our autonomy is limited, there are many things we can do to strengthen it, according to Brandenburg ‘A simple example: I would like to visit the climbing centre three times a week, but coming home after a day’s work it can be quite a hurdle to go there. If I take that into account beforehand and put my gym clothes in the hallway, chances that I will actually end up going are much higher than if I have to go upstairs to get my clothes from the wardrobe first.
She knows every human being is contradictory: there is a discrepancy between what we want deep down in our hearts – for example, to exercise regularly – and what we tend to do at a given moment – lounging on the sofa with a bag of crisps. In our day-to-day lives, we can use all kinds of tricks to ensure that we are more inclined to do what is in line with our convictions. This not only applies to individuals in their private lives, but also to how we organize society.
Nudges
We call such tricks nudges, which literally means to push gently. Little pushes to get us moving in the right direction. ‘Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, both academics, wrote a book called “Nudge”’ Their idea is that, by applying nudges, society can be more successfully steered in a direction considered desirable by most people. You are not forced to do anything, but your environment is arranged in a way that makes you slightly more inclined to do what is healthy for you or good for society. They call it making changes to the “choice architecture” – a very promising way of thinking, in my opinion.’
Detoxing social media
An example of its application is social media. In December, Brandenburg published an article in the Dutch newspaper NRC titled ‘There is no need for a total ban: social media can be detoxed’. As with sports, there is a difference between what most people prefer to do and what they often end up doing on social media, and here too it is difficult to autonomously make the ‘right’, most healthy decision, especially for young people. ‘But there is no need to ban social media if you can organize it in a way that better promotes valuable use.’ For example, by ‘only enabling the current automatic exposure to addictive algorithms after explicit consent.’ You can still make your own choice: those who want to, can opt for the algorithms, but the default setting would be that these are turned off. That way we are not mindlessly at the mercy of our unconscious tendencies.
Philosopher card
An appealing prospect for anyone who spends much more time on Instagram, TikTok or LinkedIn than they would actually like to. But just how realistic is this kind of regulation? Brandenburg writes that it is ‘about time’ to ‘limit Big Tech’, but are governments willing or able to do so? ‘I find that very difficult. When answering that question, it is easy to play the philosopher card: I am just exploring the issue. How to accomplish it is not up to me.’
Playing the ‘philosopher card’ isn’t something she does to dodge the question, she says – in fact this is exactly what makes her profession so fascinating and relevant: she can look at things from a distance. ‘I believe the value of philosophy is that it makes you stop and think: just what are things supposed to look like, according to us all? These are seen separately from what is realistically achievable.’
Culpable or excused
If people are less autonomous than we assumed, are they also less responsible than we believed? ‘People often think in terms of culpability versus excusability, such as when someone does something undesirable, like a child who bullies, or a manager who regularly yells at his staff,’ says Brandenburg… If someone is culpable, they should have known better, and they deserve blame and punishment. If someone is excused – for example because they are just a child, or come from a culture with different customs, or lost control, or did not mean to do it – then they shouldn’t be punished.
But, according to Brandenburg, these two concepts are often overly emphasized, and as a result it seems as if blaming someone or excusing them are the only two options we have. That choice is a false dilemma, says Brandenburg, because it is not an either/or situation. Moreover, there is a third option: the nurturing stance, strengthening a certain form of autonomy – the subject of Brandenburg’s current research.
Nurturing stance
‘The nurturing stance is an alternative way of looking at a conflict. Whether or not someone is culpable or excused, the important thing is: how can you make that person more responsible in the future? What does that person need to do better in the future, to act more autonomously and responsibly from now on? She calls it a ‘more encouraging, development-oriented attitude’ in which you put the ball in the court of the person who has done something harmful or dishonest: that person is encouraged to act autonomously, and simultaneously you try to offer that person the necessary support.
After all, at what point is a person truly autonomous? Can we even call it autonomous decision-making if we only do something because we were nudged in that direction, sent by something in the outside world? Brandenburg takes a pragmatic view. She sees autonomy as acting according to your convictions, even if you have to resort to a trick to do so. ‘It’s not necessary to make conscious decisions every single moment of the day. Nudges don’t make you lazy, they just ensure that you can direct your energy towards something else than all your daily choices. If you are not constantly distracted by notifications on social media that you don’t really want to respond to, you have more time and energy to make plans for the weekend.’
Social media, fast food, a comfy sofa. Society seems to be giving us a hard time about behaving sensibly and doing the things we actually want to do. However, according to philosopher Daphne Brandenburg, we do not have to put up with that. With a little help, we can increase our autonomy.
TEXT: DORIEN VRIELING / ILLUSTRATION: VERA POST