Found a report over at the LA Times about an interesting study comparing responses to hypothetical ethical situations in two groups: one control group of twelve normal folks and one experimental group of six people with a specific sort of frontal-lobe brain damage (and another control group of twelve with a different sort of brain damage). Turns out that the experimental group, though the same as the two controls controls on most other ethical quandaries, was much more willing to sacrifice one to save many. The upshot is that this sort of empathy is part of the default circuitry in your head. The study doesn’t rule out any possible cultural effects. It was conducted in the states, where individualism reigns supreme. But I’ll assume, for the moment, that it might point to a more universal truth.
Side note: What struck me about the news item is that the head researcher is neurologist Dr. Antonio Damasio, whose work made a brief appearance in my thesis. I had seen Damasio on a television program (20/20 or something) explaining a case study that had a particular resonance with an off-hand remark in Julian Barnes’ Before She Met Me and tracked down the same case in one of his books.
Speaking of Barnes, I picked up a copy of his latest, Arthur & George, a few days ago at, of all places, Target. Turns out is a “breakout book” they are promoting. So it looks like the main stream is catching on to one of my favorite literary authors. The book was shortlisted for the Booker Prize, so I don’t have any worry that Barnes is capitulating to the Oprah book club crowd. And, to be fair, the “O,” or her staff of researchers, do sometimes happen upon a good piece of contemporary fiction.