Cognitivizing 'Norms'. Norm Internalization and Processing

• Autore: Cristiano Castelfranchi
• Pagine: 75-76

Cognitivizing “Norms”. Norm Internalization and Processing

CRIS TIA NO CAS TEL FRA NCH I∗

SUMM ARY:1. Our Perspective and Claims – 2. Norm Internalization – 2.1. Goal-

adoption – 2.2. Reasons for Goal-adoption – 2.3. Goal-adhesion – 3. Not Only Pre-

scribed Behaviors But Expected Mental Attitudes – 3.1. Interpersonal Rights – 4. Nor-

mative Adhesion – 4.1. Generalized Goal-adoption – 4.2. Spontaneous Norm Moni-

toring for Strong Reciprocity – 5. Against the Reduction of Norms to Sanctions, In-

centives, and “Utility” – 6. “Internalization” (and Why It Matters) – 6.1. Conformity

and Punishments as Messages – 6.2. Subjects Not Cooperators: The A-technical, Non-

rational Nature of the Deontic “Ought” – 6.3. Educating to Norms – 6.4. The “Alien-

ated” Nature of Norm Adoption – 7. Inf‌luencing Devices in a “Prevention Focus” –

8. Norm Processing from Beliefs to Goals and Intentions – 9. From Goal-adoption,

Decision, Intention, . . . to Routines – 10. Norms As Multi-agent Artifacts – 11. Con-

cluding Remarks.

1. OUR PE RSP ECT IVE AND CL AIM S

What we present is not an agent-based simulation work1; it is more a the-

oretical contribution to normative cognition, the “psychology” of norms in

∗The Author is researchassociate at the Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies,

National Research Council of Italy (ISTC-CNR), “GOAL” Group, Theoretical Psychology

Project, Rome. This work is the estended text of a talk given at the European University

Institute in Fiesole for a WS on “Norm compliance”, July 2010, https://sites.google.com/

site/normcompliance2010/program. I thank the participants for the nice discussion. I am

also in debt with Rosaria Conte (many years working together or in parallel on these is-

sues), Luca Tummolini, Giulia Andrighetto (for specif‌ic contributions on these issues) and

the other members of the GOAL group forthe general framework and precious feedback.

1I am sorry to disappoint my reader, but my contribution is not a discussion of the lit-

erature (philosophical, sociological, psychological, and AI) on norms and their working.

It is more a restatement of the main issues of our work on norms in the last 15 years,

work that has signif‌icantly contributed to social simulation studies on norms (see LABSS

work http://www.istc.cnr.it/group/labss; R. CONT E, G. ANDR IGH ETTO, M. C AMPEN NÌ

(eds.), Minding Norms. Mechanisms and Dynamics of Social Order in Agent Society, Ox-

ford Series on Cognitive Models and Architectures, New York, Oxford University Press,

forthcoming, and to the Agent and MAS research (see, for example, NorMAS WS and

its community, G. BOELL A, P. NORI EGA, G. PI GOZ ZI, H. VE RHAG EN (eds.), Norma-

tive Multi-agent Systems, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 09121, 2009; G. AN DRI GHET TO,

G. GOVER NATOR I, P. NORIEG A, L. VAN DER TO RRE (eds.), Normative Multi-agent Sys-

tems, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 12111, 2012; and the Agreement Technology EU

Project, http://www.agreement-technologies.eu/wg2,and G. A NDRI GHET TO, C. CA STEL -

“Informatica e diritto”, Vol. XXII, 2013, n. 1, pp. 75-98

XXXIX annata – Seconda Serie - Fasc. monografico S. Faro, N. Lettieri (a cura di), "Law and Computational Social Science", ESI, Napoli, 2013, 352 p.