Re: Mind's Eye Re: Aliens

My partner Sue is a psychologist - or at least has a first class degree in such and hence views the subject with even less credibility than me.  There is some stuff called critical psychology she can tolerate - practitioners might listen attentively to the interminable on personality and then ask what personality is.  Our dogs would like you.  They seem to make most of our decisions ... or at least the ones left over by the cat.

Your friends would be right to scoff.  I could send enough papers to bury them, but there are easier ways to get the joke.  Trapped in one of these psychological laboratories I'd probably cheat to glean a little amusement.  I'm more interested in how 'ordinary decent people' do such rotten things as not investigating the sexual exploitation of young kids or running bent banks - matters too dangerous for these psychologists.  To be creative is probably to be heretic and I have little doubt the ordinary will burn us at the drop of a mob mood - but there are plenty of pretend heretics in the establishment zoo wearing frocks or comedians' masks.  Tony Blair after all, was only Margaret Thatcher in drag, both comedians in one sense of the term.

The galaxies are flying apart because of dark energy (which we have never 'seen').  Maybe Bose-Einstein condensate dark matter (which we have never 'seen') will act as a recoiling spring at some point?  Maybe big bang never happened and we need to work out more of what constructs what we witness now - a new thermodynamics of what pathways work and what don't (David Deutsch).  But let's face it, we can't even stop those in charge burning the planet or local kids here dropping litter!

On Thursday, October 23, 2014 9:26:28 PM UTC+1, facilitator wrote:

My God Neil…I love your standup and glad it is not a routine!  I'm good with dogs.  Maybe not much better with people though.  Perhaps a "heavy petting zoo" would resolve some angst.

I will pass on the creative info to my not so friendly peers at the art dump.  They will scoff.  Which is actually a good thing.  I have to conclude that about ninety percent of people are opposed to change while the other ten percent of people like things the way they are.

Tony

On Thursday, October 23, 2014 4:03:48 PM UTC-4, archytas wrote:

The stuff I've seen is quasi-psychology.  Creatives are more likely to cheat - http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111128121547.htm - and go for the answers that pay more!  Another paper - http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110903142411.htm - has these findings on resistance to creative ideas

• 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.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.