[Mind's Eye] Re: "Confessions of an Ex-Moralist"

But that is the supposed security of education and religion, isn't it?

On Sep 4, 3:51 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That seems so true. It is scary,,  the God came out of a coffershop
> conversation. Only it w called a 'Bartonian' named after my father.
>
> It seem academics can only follow it teachings. You see the same thing to
> the extreme in the churches, there they spend their time proving their point
> by quoting their religious documents. Little to creativity or original
> thought.
> Allan
> On Sep 4, 2011 12:53 AM, "archytas" <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Icame across some recent research that says much I used to teach.
> > I'll paraphrase rather than linking to it. It fits with what Bill
> > says on politics, though the focus is 'creativity'
> > ScienceDaily (Sep. 3, 2011) — Most people view creativity as an asset
> > -- until they come across a creative idea. That's because creativity
> > not only reveals new perspectives; it promotes a sense of
> > uncertainty. The next time your great idea at work elicits silence or
> > eye rolls, you might just pity those co-workers. Fresh research
> > indicates they don't even know what a creative idea looks like and
> > that creativity, hailed as a positive change agent, actually makes
> > people squirm.
> > "How is it that people say they want creativity but in reality often
> > reject it?" said Jack Goncalo, ILR School assistant professor of
> > organizational behavior and co-author of research to be published in
> > an upcoming issue of the journal Psychological Science. The paper
> > reports on two 2010 experiments at the University of Pennsylvania
> > involving more than 200 people.
> > The studies' findings include:
> > Creative ideas are by definition novel, and novelty can trigger
> > feelings of uncertainty that make most people uncomfortable.
> > People dismiss creative ideas in favor of ideas that are purely
> > practical -- tried and true.
> > Objective evidence shoring up the validity of a creative proposal does
> > not motivate people to accept it.
> > Anti-creativity bias is so subtle that people are unaware of it, which
> > can interfere with their ability to recognize a creative idea.
> > For example, subjects had a negative reaction to a running shoe
> > equipped with nanotechnology that adjusted fabric thickness to cool
> > the foot and reduce blisters.
> > To uncover bias against creativity, the researchers used a subtle
> > technique to measure unconscious bias -- the kind to which people may
> > not want to admit, such as racism. Results revealed that while people
> > explicitly claimed to desire creative ideas, they actually associated
> > creative ideas with negative words such as "vomit," "poison" and
> > "agony."
> > Goncalo said this bias caused subjects to reject ideas for new
> > products that were novel and high quality.
> > "Our findings imply a deep irony," wrote the authors, who also include
> > Jennifer Mueller of the University of Pennsylvania and Shimul Melwani
> > of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. "Revealing the
> > existence and nature of a bias against creativity can help explain why
> > people might reject creative ideas and stifle scientific advancements,
> > even in the face of strong intentions to the contrary."
> > Uncertainty drives the search for and generation of creative ideas,
> > but "uncertainty also makes us less able to recognize creativity,
> > perhaps when we need it most," the researchers wrote. "Revealing the
> > existence and nature of a bias against creativity can help explain why
> > people might reject creative ideas and stifle scientific advancements,
> > even in the face of strong intentions to the contrary. ... The field
> > of creativity may need to shift its current focus from identifying how
> > to generate more creative ideas to identify how to help innovative
> > institutions recognize and accept creativity."
>
> > Actually, I ended up cutting and pasting - this summary stands for
> > itself. Academics, as a rule, wouldn't experience creativity if it
> > was a fish that walked across the room and slapped them in the face
> > and most can't accept that many ordinary people can do it and they
> > can't. I don't want to produce anything for the market either rigsy
> > (I really used to see that 'b' in your name - something reinforced by
> > finding your wit a bit like the character in the sit-com). And I'm
> > aware of the trance Orn and think a lot of the glitz rigsy mentioned
> > is needed by those in it as a kind of opium.
>
> > I never did the kind of research above, but this stuff matches the
> > broad tenets of my creativity classes and what I tried to do in
> > company change. The kids I've know (including me as one) hate
> > situations in which they discover something they didn't know. We are
> > kept in a perpetual 'child hood' though I have no objection to any
> > solace found in literature.
>
> > On Sep 3, 1:21 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Besides sharing different stories of political analysis with friends,
> >> I continue to drive home the truth that as long as people in the USA
> >> stay in the trance of believing that voting for someone not in the two
> >> main parties is 'throwing away a vote' (a notion most likely
> >>I came across promulgated by these two parties) there will be little to no
> >> responsiveness to what 'we the people' want…something that is
> >> obviously ignored these days. When a politician actually might have to
> >> be responsive and yes, even be congruent in word and deed, only then
> >> can our form of representative democracy have any impact on how those
> >> selected to lead will not only act but actually be chosen rather than
> >> remaining in the terror that one might vote for someone who stands the
> >> chance of not winning!
>
> >> To me, throwing away a vote is voting for the status quo.
>
> >> Sadly, the trance state remains in full force today.
>
> >> On Sep 3, 4:27 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > I am trying to think about how we could improve the minds/choices of
> >> > voters but get stumped. Part of the problem is that classical
> >> > educations do not always translate into common sense in real life- one
> >> > still must scrub the floors in those ivory towers. But I think most
> >> > attend college/grad studies with a work goal in mind these days. I
> >> > remember shop classes and vocational schools in public highschools but
> >> > perhaps that would invite a lawsuit by the ACLU these days- who knows?
> >> > And manufacturing/labor needs have changed drastically in our day due
> >> > to automation, robots and technology as well as every aspect of modern
> >> > life from home to office. So there is this vacuume. On the other hand,
> >> > I find great solace in my books and interests but since I refuse to
> >> > produce anything for the market, I guess I am worthless. :-) Oh- and I
> >> > decided to quit going to funerals altogether save my own.
>
> >> > The military is another consideration as a form of "education" and
> >> > employment.
>
> >> > I came across your screen name in my old class notes- just a line or
> >> > two re Plato and his visit.
>
> >> > Another problem with setting up a culture/form of government is that
> >> > you still are left with human nature!
>
> >> > On Sep 2, 10:14 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > I'm no expert on the Greeks to be sure.  I remember that women got to
> >> > > leave home when they were about 60 to go to funerals!  I understand
> >> > > the 'men of their time' arguments - and we tend to forget Greece is
> >> > > really middle eastern - but I have real problems with the 'high'
> >> > > philosophy and no grasp of the wrongs on the treatment of slavery,
> >> > > indenture and women.  It hardly suggests much of a route to a
> >> > > materially enlightened society.  The Italian aristocracy was almost
> >> > > exclusively homosexual in the 17th century and much of the Middle
> East
> >> > > remains 'homosocial'.  In scientific argument and practice we often
> >> > > work hard at excluding wads of common sense and religious muck under
> >> > > pretense of objectivity, yet we are really trying to include all
> >> > > options that aren't ludicrous (and we entertain these too to some
> >> > > extent).  I find human thinking that ends up with notions that a sex
> >> > > or race is 'unequal' or unmeriting not wrong but intolerable, but
> this
> >> > > doesn't lead me to believe we can't have abortion or not give deaf
> >> > > people hearing if we can (and so on) - the intolerable remains a
> >> > > heuristic open to situational particularism.  Equality doesn;t mean I
> >> > > won't lift the heavy box, think sport should be unisex, regard men as
> >> > > potential sexual partners and so on - but it does mean I don't
> approve
> >> > > of daft notions of banning girls from playing soccer because they
> >> > > can't share the changing rooms.  And it does mean I tend to despise
> >> > > argument that excludes what should matter in the pretense of
> >> > > objectivity.  Our people who can't do much academic are not
> sub-human,
> >> > > but I suspect much intellectualism is - including daft economists
> >> > > suggesting inter-generational mortgages, or that we have to have a
> >> > > super-rich for the benefit of all.  I am not led to conclusion much
> >> > > and think this is a result of perverse schooling and a fixation with
> >> > > 'strong leadership'.  My guess is we need moral assertion on the
> basis
> >> > > of likely outcomes on social issues and that we are ignoring an
> >> > > interesting history of this at our peril, including the distraction
> >> > > from actual change that wordy words becomes when we lack courage.
>  The
> >> > > key in this is probably deep in a form of mentality that can't work
> >> > > out the metaphor of fiddling while Rome burns or banksterism as a
> >> > > criminally organised road to serfdom.  Socrates called the unexamined
> >> > > life pointless and its easy to agree faced with yet another class of
> >> > > students who don't read, populations who vote 'on the economy stupid'
> >> > > knowing nothing of economics - yet he was wrong.  What we have failed
> >> > > to do is provide the technology of it that people can use.
>
> >> > > On Sep 2, 1:05 am, rigsy03
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -