Concurrent Session 1-B

Location

Bryant Hall, Room 207

Start Date

14-3-2025 9:45 AM

End Date

14-3-2025 11:00 AM

Description

  • The Dead as a Resource for the Living: On the Moral Psychology and Motivation of Memorializers
    Patrick Hopkins, Jennie Carlisle Golding Professor of Philosophy, Millsaps College
    As part of my work on the NEH-funded research into the history of the Mississippi States Lunatic Asylum (1855-1935) I have been examining the role of the Asylum in the memory, moral psychology, and self-identifications of Mississippians. While the work was intended to be historical, a fascinating phenomenon has arisen in which the memory of the Asylum, and the significance and disposition of the approximately 7,000 burial remains of Asylum patients recently discovered in an unmarked cemetery, has taken on contemporary meaning. The archaeological excavation of the Asylum burials has generated a very specific response related to memorialization, the moral status of the dead, and the psychological reaction to humans remains. In this presentation I will discuss this response and the way in which it is both indicative of our own very specific historical context as well as indicative of a major social and psychological function of memorialization. In particular, I will discuss how memorialization is far less about the people who are memorialized (who are deceased and cannot be affected) and far more about the self-identity of the memorializer. What the living want to think about themselves is the primary motivation of those who create memorials and the dead provide a rich, but passive, resource for the living to exploit.
  • Memorialization of Courage
    Cynthia Pury, Professor of Psychology, Clemson University; Charles B. Starkey, Professor of Psychology, Clemson University
    Monuments commonly commemorate courageous actions, but what do we know about the psychology of deciding if an action is courageous? We review research on accolade courage, or labeling an action as courageous to commend it, and its relation to memorialization through monuments. Such labeling constitutes an illocutionary act, praising the courageous action and, in doing so, reflecting the values and experiences of the labeler, who is declaring that they believe the actor took a worthwhile risk. Building on Rate’s (2007) research on implicit theories of courage, we present theoretical and empirical evidence that for a group to label an action courageous it is communicating that a voluntary action is 1) taken despite real or perceived risk to the actor; and 2) taken in pursuit of a purportedly worthwhile or noble cause. We propose that various types of courage (moral, physical, psychological, etc.) include commonly occurring goal-risk pairs, although many acts of courage are actions that do not cleanly fit these categories. We then examine ways in which accolade courage accounts for the relative abundance of monuments to courageous acts in combat and in rescue efforts, particularly those that support and promote certain civic and societal values, and commemorate actions that involve extreme physical peril to the actor, often to the point of death. Conversely, other types of courageous actions are underrepresented by memorials, including those involving less agreed-upon risks, such as risks to psychological well-being or to social standing; unsuccessful attempts that did not result in realized risks to the actor; actions discovered later to be based on a faulty premise; and actions taken for goals that are not supported by groups funding monuments. Finally, we take up the specific case of monuments erected to goals that were once considered noble but are now considered condemnable.
  • Chair: Adekunle Taofeek, M.A. Candidate, Philosophy, University of Mississippi

Relational Format

Conference proceeding

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Mar 14th, 9:45 AM Mar 14th, 11:00 AM

Concurrent Session 1-B

Bryant Hall, Room 207

  • The Dead as a Resource for the Living: On the Moral Psychology and Motivation of Memorializers
    Patrick Hopkins, Jennie Carlisle Golding Professor of Philosophy, Millsaps College
    As part of my work on the NEH-funded research into the history of the Mississippi States Lunatic Asylum (1855-1935) I have been examining the role of the Asylum in the memory, moral psychology, and self-identifications of Mississippians. While the work was intended to be historical, a fascinating phenomenon has arisen in which the memory of the Asylum, and the significance and disposition of the approximately 7,000 burial remains of Asylum patients recently discovered in an unmarked cemetery, has taken on contemporary meaning. The archaeological excavation of the Asylum burials has generated a very specific response related to memorialization, the moral status of the dead, and the psychological reaction to humans remains. In this presentation I will discuss this response and the way in which it is both indicative of our own very specific historical context as well as indicative of a major social and psychological function of memorialization. In particular, I will discuss how memorialization is far less about the people who are memorialized (who are deceased and cannot be affected) and far more about the self-identity of the memorializer. What the living want to think about themselves is the primary motivation of those who create memorials and the dead provide a rich, but passive, resource for the living to exploit.
  • Memorialization of Courage
    Cynthia Pury, Professor of Psychology, Clemson University; Charles B. Starkey, Professor of Psychology, Clemson University
    Monuments commonly commemorate courageous actions, but what do we know about the psychology of deciding if an action is courageous? We review research on accolade courage, or labeling an action as courageous to commend it, and its relation to memorialization through monuments. Such labeling constitutes an illocutionary act, praising the courageous action and, in doing so, reflecting the values and experiences of the labeler, who is declaring that they believe the actor took a worthwhile risk. Building on Rate’s (2007) research on implicit theories of courage, we present theoretical and empirical evidence that for a group to label an action courageous it is communicating that a voluntary action is 1) taken despite real or perceived risk to the actor; and 2) taken in pursuit of a purportedly worthwhile or noble cause. We propose that various types of courage (moral, physical, psychological, etc.) include commonly occurring goal-risk pairs, although many acts of courage are actions that do not cleanly fit these categories. We then examine ways in which accolade courage accounts for the relative abundance of monuments to courageous acts in combat and in rescue efforts, particularly those that support and promote certain civic and societal values, and commemorate actions that involve extreme physical peril to the actor, often to the point of death. Conversely, other types of courageous actions are underrepresented by memorials, including those involving less agreed-upon risks, such as risks to psychological well-being or to social standing; unsuccessful attempts that did not result in realized risks to the actor; actions discovered later to be based on a faulty premise; and actions taken for goals that are not supported by groups funding monuments. Finally, we take up the specific case of monuments erected to goals that were once considered noble but are now considered condemnable.
  • Chair: Adekunle Taofeek, M.A. Candidate, Philosophy, University of Mississippi