In an experiment in which respondents from different areas were asked to estimate the diameter of a coin, the intuitive estimates from respondents in slum areas were significantly larger than those made by respondents in wealthy areas. We might choose to interpret this as a result of psychological projection or of the personal circumstances of individuals. In either case, however, it reflects the complexity of issues concerning human beings. Simi-larly, the computerized lottery that was launched Jan. 17 provides a glimpse into the human condition.
People's explanations of events can be roughly divided into two types, theories of predisposition and theories of circumstance. Gamblers, for example, often feel that it is external circumstance rather than any lack of self-restraint on their part that leads to excessive behavior. Then, once the behavior becomes compulsive, they believe that their repeated inability to resist temptation comes from abiding characteristics inherent in their persons. In fact, specialists disagree about whether compulsive behavior is ultimately brought about by predisposition or is involuntary.
According to theories of predisposition, there are three primary components of excessively indulgent behavior: cravings or an urge to behave obsessively, a loss of control and a persistence with the behavior in question despite deleterious consequences.
This kind of gambling-control theory often highlights bizarre cycles arising in an individual's control systems. The more an individual gambles, the greater the chance he will lose control. And the more an individual experiences a loss of control, the more he throws himself into behavior surrounding gambling. The problem is that to attribute gambling exclusively to individual addiction and to evade public responsibility by labeling the problem as a psychological disorder is to oversimplify the matter.
As far as theories of circumstance are concerned, research shows that there are often serious consequences when gambling venues become more easily accessible or new lottery outlets open. Individuals may, for example, increase the frequency of their gambling as it becomes more convenient to do so, or they may simply spend more money on gambling. It is also possible that those who do not gamble will begin to develop the habit and that reformed gamblers will fall off the wagon.
For these reasons, with lottery fever continuing to rage, a recent proposal by some lottery vendors to open 24-hour ticket kiosks is cause for concern.
If we consider the interactions between individuals and their circumstances, there may be a number of reasons why lottery players believe that with a ticket in hand, their potential is infinite.
First, they overestimate the probability of winning. The media's incessant sensationalization of the winners creates a feeling of euphoria and acts as a catalyst to create an illusory sense of control.
Second, they may believe that by buying tickets from outlets that have sold winning tickets in the past, some of the fortune will rub off on them, or they may even believe good luck flows from person to person and will eventually come to them.
Third, they may believe that by continuing to gamble, they can increase their chances of winning and recover the costs.
Fourth, society creates a collective myth. Before the winning numbers are revealed, there is the sense that everyone has a chance. The media's sensationalizing of the countdown to the draw stimu-lates buying.
Due to the multiple obscuring effects and a lack of clear reference points, individuals constantly magnify their biased fantasies of winning a large prize.
Fifth, in lives that have become somewhat unpredictable, gamblers stake all hope on one last chance of redemption. Gradually, they form a dependent relationship with the lottery.
We could say that lottery fever is a naive form of optimism, a belief that good fortune will one day come knocking. Or we could say that it is cynical pessimism, a belief that life is hard and short and that one should enjoy life in the here and now.
Both responses reflect widespread feelings of uncertainty and risk in our daily lives. Under these circumstances, can it be that there are no other options apart from gambling with fate or throwing restraint to the wind?
Gambling is not merely a moral issue in which the focus is on whether individuals should gamble or not. It is a social issue as well. The gambling industry and its consumers come at a price -- in broken lives and public debts. The costs of our folly will be paid for by generations to come.
The recent wave of lottery fever can't be dismissed as a fait accompli because the government doesn't know who buys tickets and hence cannot take remedial action. This is an issue of inter-generational justice. When we put our money down to buy a hope, we are also rolling the dice on our futures.
Lin Yao-sheng is an assistant professor in the department of psychology at Kaohsiung Medical University.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations