It's still that village suspicion of the stranger or the new-fangled, 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[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 > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
