Psychoanalytic explanation: Justin Bieber is hated because every adult who has survived youth knows that the prepubescent mind is prone to fantastic delusions which his music engenders in the fragile minds of tween girls. Yet, many of us still believe in these fantasies and so project our hatred through the unconscious, whence we must ratiocinate explanations after the fact - for example saying we don't like his hair, or teeth or something.
As I understand it; locked-in syndrome is caused by a lesion of the pons. The pons doesn't have anything to do with consciousness or cognition except in acting as a bridge for sensory feedback. A person with a lesion of the pons cannot initiate motor activity or receive feedback from their extremities and trunk because the signal is severed above the brain-stem but below the cerebral cortices and limbic system. Consciousness is localizable to activity of the cortico-thalamic complex which doesn't involve the pons. The pons is a relay station between parts of the brain and the body. A person with locked-in syndrome can be fully rational and lucid while not being able to communicate at all. I would be asking is there any evidence that they are not? Are there any additional lesions affecting other brain areas associated with consciousness and cognition?
The word "honor" might have some effect as a subconscious command or primer to virtuous thought and behavior. Additionally this may not work so well for a large food chain. When something is regarded as more abstract it is easier to dehumanize it as well. This would explain other results of studies that showed college students were more likely to cheat on a test when they were expected to grade themselves and shred their test without it being examined by the professor or anyone else. Under the same conditions of grading their own tests, but being primed with a copy of a Code of Conduct attributed to the college, students were less likely to cheat than controls who were graded by the professor. The honor code has major significance for the prevalence of cheating, however this is not always the case, where honor is valued and nurtured part of a community honor codes may simply be redundant. IMHO, this is because people want to be seen as good so they uphold whatever values are salient to them, if "honor" is not a salient value within a culture it won't have an effect unless specifically primed for. In a culture where getting good grades is emphasized more than honesty one might expect there to be an additional need to prime students for honesty (e.g., McCabe and Trevino, 1993).
For a review of the research (2001): http://faculty.mwsu.edu/psychology/dave.carlston/Writing%20in%20Psychology/Academic%20Dishonesty/Gropu%203/review.pdf
atoptics.co.uk has an article on "Circumhorizon arc" that mentions the term "Fire rainbow" once in the naming of the phenomena "circumhorizon arc (also a circumhorizontal arc but never 'fire rainbow')" and once in the footnotes "** 'Fire rainbow' - This ridiculous and unrecognised name appears to have been coined by a journalist after the great 2006 Spokane display. The halo is not a rainbow and has nothing to do with fire."
That "it's all ???????? fault" feeling is properly called "Shame" and not guilt. Though the differences tend to remain elusive to all but sociologists.
Neurologically speaking, the primary site of difference is likely to be the Orbital-Frontal Cortex (OFC) as this region is implicated in the empathy-producing ability to reflect on one's own behavior relative to normativity. The OFC is listed as part of the Frontolimbic system (Review of Clinical and Functional Neuroscience - Swenson). I'd really like to read the original paper but I don't see it referenced anywhere.
When people with OFC damage perform behaviors that harm others they are typically unaware of the affect their behavior has, but when shown videos of the same behavior they succeed at making accurate moral judgments. Some researchers suggest that seeing the video strengthens the signal propagating through whatever remaining OFC tissue the patient has (most OFC patients retain some OFC tissue).
"When a person begins with a guilt experience ("Oh, look at what a horrible ???????????????????? I have ????????????????") but then magnifies and generalizes the event to the self ("and aren't I a horrible ????????????????????????"), many of the advantages of guilt are lost. Not only is a person faced with tension and remorse over a specific behavior that needs to be fixed, but he or she is also saddled with feelings of contempt and disgust for a bad, defective self. And it is the shame component of this sequence - not the guilt component - that poses the problem."
Maybe what makes this "warm and fuzzy" is the fact that just about every human being is victim of this warmness and fuzzyness associated with being a member of a group. Having people go to bat for your group can make you feel good, but ultimately by allying yourself with one group and thereby opposing other groups, you're just as much the hostile prick the macho man is, but you cover over this prejudice with a "warm and fuzzy" sense of belonging. It's really your own sense of inner security, approval and worth that is being promoted by the in-group and threatened by the out-group, so stuff that boosts the in-group identity also bolsters the "warm and fuzzies" that come with a sense of "togetherness", but still there is that out-group which you dislike, hate, plot against, possibly even maim and kill. And you can't have an "in-group" without having an "out-group", by definition an "in-group" is exclusive and in opposition of the associated "out-group".
They are still being aggressive and hostile it's just directed toward out-group members.
This is entirely consistent with what we already know about differences in in-group and out-group behavior of dominant and aggressive males.
Male chimps will smack subordinate in-group chimps around a bit, but they will violently tear the testicles off of an out-group chimp and beat him with his own nads until he's dead.
and its world is empty like a fantasy." - Buddha (Gautama Siddhartha)
Using props to influence the impression you leave on guests in your home is like photoshopping your personality.
For a review of the research (2001): http://faculty.mwsu.edu/psychology/dave.carlston/Writing%20in%20Psychology/Academic%20Dishonesty/Gropu%203/review.pdf
Source: http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/cha2.htm
Neurologically speaking, the primary site of difference is likely to be the Orbital-Frontal Cortex (OFC) as this region is implicated in the empathy-producing ability to reflect on one's own behavior relative to normativity. The OFC is listed as part of the Frontolimbic system (Review of Clinical and Functional Neuroscience - Swenson). I'd really like to read the original paper but I don't see it referenced anywhere.
When people with OFC damage perform behaviors that harm others they are typically unaware of the affect their behavior has, but when shown videos of the same behavior they succeed at making accurate moral judgments. Some researchers suggest that seeing the video strengthens the signal propagating through whatever remaining OFC tissue the patient has (most OFC patients retain some OFC tissue).
"When a person begins with a guilt experience ("Oh, look at what a horrible ???????????????????? I have ????????????????") but then magnifies and generalizes the event to the self ("and aren't I a horrible ????????????????????????"), many of the advantages of guilt are lost. Not only is a person faced with tension and remorse over a specific behavior that needs to be fixed, but he or she is also saddled with feelings of contempt and disgust for a bad, defective self. And it is the shame component of this sequence - not the guilt component - that poses the problem."
- The Handbook of Self and Identity
They are still being aggressive and hostile it's just directed toward out-group members.
This is entirely consistent with what we already know about differences in in-group and out-group behavior of dominant and aggressive males.
Male chimps will smack subordinate in-group chimps around a bit, but they will violently tear the testicles off of an out-group chimp and beat him with his own nads until he's dead.
"warm and fuzzy" yea, right.