I thought the concept of mind bugs was so interesting. I know that what we think we are seeing is not always the truth, but it surprised me how wrong that we can be. The fact that our brains have evolved so much is miraculous, but there are still so many shortcomings. There are real consequences to having our brain trick us into seeing something we are not. This is seen in recalling crimes or dramatic events because our brains jump to conclusions and make pathways that are not there. Depending on how our brains perceive information, two people could possibly convince themselves and recall two very different events. I thought the idea that we could misidentify a suspect or a random person for a criminal was frightening because that is unfair. Our brain adds details that can be damaging because it’s hard to determine where we stray from the exact truth. I thought this was important especially in criminal cases because, when identifying suspects in a lineup, you could have filled in a blank that is incorrect. I also think criminal lineups are unreliable because, as the reading mentioned, word choice really matters when talking about previous events. The fact that jurors can be swayed by the simple addition of one detail is also extremely frightening. I think that, while the criminal justice system in the U.S. is technically functioning, there are a lot of changes to be made to ensure that biases and mindbugs don’t play as big of a role in it (even though I have no clue how that would look or if it’s even possible! My biggest guess is education on biases and stuff like this).

Another thing that I think is really important to include while talking about this subject is biases. Biases can make those jumps in your brain happen even faster which makes it all the more complicated. I have taken a couple implicit bias tests before and they all have been really impactful. Some I was happy to see that there was no implicit bias and then others left me a little disheartened. However, I think the fact that we get to study and understand this is amazing. While implicit biases exist and affect our thinking, the more conscious we are of them and how they work, the easier they will be to dismantle. Like these mindbugs, hopefully we can start to understand what is really there and what is our brain trying to reach conclusions faster. I think it is really incredible that we are so far evolved that we can understand this, so I think it should be standard practices to see where your biases lie and how you can be aware and actively fight against them, even though they will be almost impossible to get rid of. We all need to do our part to make sure we each are treating others fairly and equitably because I think that will make for healthier and happier environments!

I thought this reading was really interesting. At first, I was a little confused about where it was going as I have never fully stopped to think about morally in the form of arguments. I have always let my own morals guide me and that has not really failed me yet. However, when you look deeper, there is clearly a lot more there. I thought that argument forms for moral actions were really fascinating because I could understand them. It feels like a natural progression from our readings in Warren and about logic. However, I do think it is easier to wrap my brain around. While all the forms varied slightly, the main concept of “should you do or not do this action and why” remained. I think this will make it a lot simpler going forward when it comes to mapping and breaking down these arguments.

Moral arguments are basically trying to prove why you should act a certain way based on one’s morals, but there is an issue when everyone’s morals are different. I thought the section differentiating between universalism and egoism (pg 156-57) was extremely important. Not everyone bases their morals the same way and will act differently according to that. Some find it advantageous to only act in their own self-interest, while others believe that it is moral to act if it will maximize happiness for all. I think that while the latter is an amazing goal, it is very unlikely. In this day and age, there are very few things you can actually improve the lives of all. This is why I think it is important to not focus on helping everyone, but helping the most you can. What frustrates me the most about this is that there seems to be a pattern of people we put in power (aka like the whole government) being egoists. A lot of their policymaking is based on whether or not they think they would get reelected or what they have a financial interest in. I think it is really sad that we (or at least I) cannot trust the people who are supposed to protect us to always do so. Either way, I hope that one day I could be in a position where I get to work on completing actions that have the most net happiness!