But that is the supposed security of education and religion, isn't it?
On Sep 4, 3:51 am, Allan H <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 -
