Foreign Language Syndrome
Title: Foreign Language Syndrome Just FYI. The woman who is afflicted with this disorder (following a stroke) was interviewed on the Today show yesterday and she not only had a mild British accent but timbre of her voice had changed rather radically. That's not surprising. What was surprising (and contrary to some of the speculation on TIPS, she had started using words such as loo (for bathroom, lift (for elevator) and brolly (for umbrella). Very strange. Ed Edward I. Pollak, Ph.D. West Chester University of Pennsylvania For a complete list of area jams see http://mywebpages.comcast.net/epollak/jam.htm ~ The MillCreek Bluegrass Band Performs Every Wednesday Night 7:30-10:30 at Dugal's Station II in Gap, PA. See http://mywebpages.comcast.net/epollak/millcreek.htm for details and directions --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Teaser
Confucius Freud Thomas Jefferson -Original Message- From: Stephen Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 3:12 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Teaser According to a source I may reveal in the fullness of time, who are the three most cited intellectuals in history? For full marks, list them in order. Hint: two are predictable; one is sufficiently surprising that I'm not sure I believe it. Stephen ___ Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm ___ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Teaser: May I have the envelope please?
My question was to name the three most cited individuals in history, in order. I received the following nominations, ranked by number of votes Freud, Darwin, Einstein [4 each] Aristotle, Plato, Chomsky [3 each] Shakespeare [2] Confucius, Jefferson, Aquinas, James (William, not Jesse or Henry), Lenin, Marx (Karl, not Groucho), and Jesus [1 each] Using a 1, 2, 3 system for the top 3, the rank ordering of the top 3 according to your votes is: Einstein and Darwin are tied for no. 1 and 2 Freud is no. 3 That's close but no cigar. My source is an obituary in the Sunday Times (Sepember 7, 1997), where Helmuth Nyborg, a Danish psychologist is quoted on this matter. He said the list is: 1. Karl Marx 2. Sigmund Freud 3. Stephen Black No, he didn't. He actually had Hans Eysenck in third place, a claim which I find hard to accept, despite Eysenck's acknowledged great contributions to psychology. Apparently, Nyborg made this claim in his 1997 book _The Scientific Study of Human Nature: Tribute to Hans J. Eysenck at 80_, which I haven't read. But surely this is a difficult matter to determine, even in this Age of the Computer, and I have no idea whether there's more to Nyborg's claim that a guess. Beth contributed a list from Judge Richard Posner of public intellectuals, and the judge apparently derived his list in a systematic manner, although I didn't spend time trying to understand it. But his conclusion that, of all people, Henry Kissinger, leads the list as the number 1 public intellectual boggles the mind and calls his methodology into question. Henry Kissinger? Leading intellectual? Geddoutahere! An easy but suspect way of deriving a list is to see how many Google hits each man (because that's what they are) gets. It's suspect because Google hits are very different from citations. But it's certainly easy. For what it's worth, here are the results, per million hits, and with no concern for conflation of names. God: 62.30 Christ: 18.90 Jesus: 9.12 Newton: 7.83 Shakespeare: 5.82 Jennifer Lopez: 4.92 ( OK, I do realize she's not a man] Darwin: 4.25 Einstein: 3.79 Marx: 3.21 Freud: 2.04 Skinner: 2.00 Brad Pitt: 1.62 Aristotle: 1.24 Chomsky: 0.77 Eysenck: 0.55 (so he hardly rates) Kissinger: 0.48 (him too) (Funny thing. I re-did them just before sending and they were all up substantially, one ranking even changing place. I guess the Google hits aren't stable for some reason) If we disallow deities on the grounds that they're not really intellectuals, even if they are all-knowing (although we'd then have to remove Freud for the same reason), then it has not escaped my notice that the intellectual receiving the most number of hits is Newton (God said, Let Newton be! And all was light) This may reflect the technological bias of the web. Can anyone name another who might attract a greater number of hits? And I'd like to hear whether anyone thinks it plausible that Eysenck could rank so high in citedness. Stephen __ Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm ___ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Teaser: May I have the envelope please?
Well, according to this way of doing things, Stephen, you rank at 5,520 (not millions, this is a raw number) which is not bad! The thing is, there are many Stephen Blacks. Google is a great search engine, but not very discriminative. Darwin, for example, brings up many Team Darwin, or Darwin City (that's near Inyo County, California, near Death Valley). The reslutls are therefore not very valid. This is too bad, becasue I really enjoyed the pop quiz. How to keep track of citations becomes quite the challenge in our days of information technology. There is so much out there, how can we keep track? The one hit that has brought up more than anyone was quite obvious: sex. It generated 224,000,000 hits. Not bad! On the other hand, love generated just under half, which seems to be quite the proof that there can be sex without love! Granted, these are not individuals... but I could not think of anyone who would generate more than God, so I figured I'd go with God's gifts to the human kind! ;-) Cheers to that! JM Stephen Black wrote: My question was to name the three most cited individuals in history, in order. I received the following nominations, ranked by number of votes Freud, Darwin, Einstein [4 each] Aristotle, Plato, Chomsky [3 each] Shakespeare [2] Confucius, Jefferson, Aquinas, James (William, not Jesse or Henry), Lenin, Marx (Karl, not Groucho), and Jesus [1 each] Using a 1, 2, 3 system for the top 3, the rank ordering of the top 3 according to your votes is: Einstein and Darwin are tied for no. 1 and 2 Freud is no. 3 That's close but no cigar. My source is an obituary in the Sunday Times (Sepember 7, 1997), where Helmuth Nyborg, a Danish psychologist is quoted on this matter. He said the list is: 1. Karl Marx 2. Sigmund Freud 3. Stephen Black No, he didn't. He actually had Hans Eysenck in third place, a claim which I find hard to accept, despite Eysenck's acknowledged great contributions to psychology. Apparently, Nyborg made this claim in his 1997 book _The Scientific Study of Human Nature: Tribute to Hans J. Eysenck at 80_, which I haven't read. But surely this is a difficult matter to determine, even in this Age of the Computer, and I have no idea whether there's more to Nyborg's claim that a guess. Beth contributed a list from Judge Richard Posner of public intellectuals, and the judge apparently derived his list in a systematic manner, although I didn't spend time trying to understand it. But his conclusion that, of all people, Henry Kissinger, leads the list as the number 1 public intellectual boggles the mind and calls his methodology into question. Henry Kissinger? Leading intellectual? Geddoutahere! An easy but suspect way of deriving a list is to see how many Google hits each man (because that's what they are) gets. It's suspect because Google hits are very different from citations. But it's certainly easy. For what it's worth, here are the results, per million hits, and with no concern for conflation of names. God: 62.30 Christ: 18.90 Jesus: 9.12 Newton: 7.83 Shakespeare: 5.82 Jennifer Lopez: 4.92 ( OK, I do realize she's not a man] Darwin: 4.25 Einstein: 3.79 Marx: 3.21 Freud: 2.04 Skinner: 2.00 Brad Pitt: 1.62 Aristotle: 1.24 Chomsky: 0.77 Eysenck: 0.55 (so he hardly rates) Kissinger: 0.48 (him too) (Funny thing. I re-did them just before sending and they were all up substantially, one ranking even changing place. I guess the Google hits aren't stable for some reason) If we disallow deities on the grounds that they're not really intellectuals, even if they are all-knowing (although we'd then have to remove Freud for the same reason), then it has not escaped my notice that the intellectual receiving the most number of hits is Newton (God said, Let Newton be! And all was light) This may reflect the technological bias of the web. Can anyone name another who might attract a greater number of hits? And I'd like to hear whether anyone thinks it plausible that Eysenck could rank so high in citedness. Stephen __ Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm ___ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jean-Marc Perreault Yukon College Whitehorse, Yukon 867-668-8867 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Teaser: May I have the envelope please?
Stephen Black wrote: This may reflect the technological bias of the web. Can anyone name another who might attract a greater number of hits? And I'd like to hear whether anyone thinks it plausible that Eysenck could rank so high in citedness. Public Figures: Oprah: 1.79 million Paris Hilton: .424 million (a little short of Kissinger) George W. Bush: 4.64 million (a little short of Jennifer Lopez) Cher: 5.29 million Paul Smith: .544 million (hardly rates territory, but still ahead of Paris Hilton. It helps that I have a men's clothing and fragrance line, a small college, a book on oscilloscopes...) Technological bias? Al Gore: 1.87 million (ahead of Oprah? I'm impressed) Bill Gates: 2.82 million Steven Jobs: 24,300 (okay, Steve Jobs has .424 million) Linux: 94.9 million Windows: 99.7 million (but I'll bet that ALL the Linux references are about software, while a couple million windows references are about windows, not Windows) William Shockley: 11,000 (so much for a consistent technological bias) This is addicting. I'd better stop now. I don't buy the Eysenck thing for one minute - there must be some kind of counting bias going on there. Paul half a million Smith Alverno College Milwaukee --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Teaser: May I have the envelope please?
I wrote: Technological bias? Al Gore: 1.87 million (ahead of Oprah? I'm impressed) Bill Gates: 2.82 million Steven Jobs: 24,300 (okay, Steve Jobs has .424 million) Linux: 94.9 million Windows: 99.7 million (but I'll bet that ALL the Linux references are about software, while a couple million windows references are about windows, not Windows) William Shockley: 11,000 (so much for a consistent technological bias) On the other hand... Linus Torvalds: .807 million In light of what I take to be an indisputable fact that in the real world, Linus Torvalds is nowhere NEAR half as famous as Oprah, I guess the technological bias is pretty apparent. Paul Smith Alverno College Milwaukee --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Teaser: May I have the envelope please?
I yahooed instead of googling and I found that every name I typed in, including the infamous Annette Taylor, came up the same: 221,000 hits. HmmmI guess I like being on a par with the biggies :-) annette Quoting Paul Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I wrote: Technological bias? Al Gore: 1.87 million (ahead of Oprah? I'm impressed) Bill Gates: 2.82 million Steven Jobs: 24,300 (okay, Steve Jobs has .424 million) Linux: 94.9 million Windows: 99.7 million (but I'll bet that ALL the Linux references are about software, while a couple million windows references are about windows, not Windows) William Shockley: 11,000 (so much for a consistent technological bias) On the other hand... Linus Torvalds: .807 million In light of what I take to be an indisputable fact that in the real world, Linus Torvalds is nowhere NEAR half as famous as Oprah, I guess the technological bias is pretty apparent. Paul Smith Alverno College Milwaukee --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Department of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
