Nothing should be done to impede people from teaching and doing their
research even if at that very moment it was being used to massacre and
destroy. [...] the radical students and I wanted to keep the labs on
campus, on the principle that what is going to be going on anyway
ought to be open and above board, so that people would know what is
happening and act accordingly. - In Noam Chomsky: A Life of Dissent,
referring to 1969
If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech
for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech
for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of
speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for
views you despise. - In Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the
Media, 1992
If we don't believe in free expression for people we despise, we don't
believe in it at all. - Interview by John Pilger on BBC's The Late
Show, November 25, 1992
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky#On_freedom_of_speech
On Sep 3, 3:53 pm, 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 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I dug up the file this afternoon- Spring "73- no mention of the
> > > > > professor's name but a reference to Tuft's- another university. He was
> > > > > older and soft spoken- his shirt sleeves had been shortened for some
> > > > > reason. I got an "A" for the final grade so I must have hooked into
> > > > > the material and my notes look complete and tidy. The course covered
> > > > > more than Plato- it was called Greek Thought/Classics Dept.- and I was
>
> ...
>
> read more »
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário