Vam. Given the insecurity of life and the world, it's somewhat
understandable- except a good deal of the familiar has contributed to
the former.
I have to eat! Am thinking of trying to turn my son's salmon- sockeye
from AK- into gravlax this week- Now, that's fear of the unknown! :-)
On Sep 4, 6:21 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We need pragmatists and status quoists but can't depend on them for
> our future.
>
> For that, we must nurture creatives, rebels and blasphemes. Precisely
> what the social, political, judicial and business institutions are
> structured and pre-programmed to progressively discourage, oppose,
> reluctantly allow, absolutely oppose, and disallow. The majority of
> the rest of the population follows in " their " image and conforms !
>
> Don't get me wrong. Isn't that how it should be ? After all, we can't
> encourage, much less allow, monumental change everyday. Can we ?
>
> On Sep 4, 1:51 pm, 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
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário