TIPS Digest for Sunday, August 03, 2008.
1. Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between us |
Technology | The Observer
2. psychological science and faith
3. Tenure denied
4. RE: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between us
| Technology | The Observer
5. Re: Six Degrees of Stanley Milgram and The Small World Problem
6. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between us
| Technology | The Observer
7. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
8. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between us
| Technology | The Observer
9. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between us
| Technology | The Observer
10. Re: Six Degrees of Stanley Milgram and The Small World Problem
11. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between
us | Technology | The Observer
12. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between
us | Technology | The Observer
13. re: psychological science and faith
14. Re: psychological science and faith
15. Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between
us | Technology | The Observer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation between
us | Technology | The Observer
From: Allen Esterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 04:21:11 -0400
X-Message-Number: 1
On 2 August 2008 Chris Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the
electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
Surely the advent of electonic mailing has appreciably *increased* the
probability of such connections. I "know" far more people in recent years
than previously -- just think of all the TIPsters for starters! Doesn't
this work undertaken by Microsoft researchers imply that before the advent
of large-scale emailing the "six degrees" theory was an overstatement?
From the Guardian article:
"But yesterday researchers announced the theory was right - nearly. By
studying billions of electronic messages, they worked out that any two
strangers are, on average, distanced by precisely 6.6 degrees of
separation."
Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
http://www.esterson.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: psychological science and faith
From: "David Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:02:11 -0400
X-Message-Number: 2
Dear colleagues,
Recent discussions of science-faith tensions lead me to think you might
occasionally have a student who would benefit from an explanation of how
faith can be science-affirming, healthy, and humane, and of how science
can
inform faith. That's the intent of my new little book due off the press
this month.
An overview and some of the content is available at
http://davidmyers.org/Brix?pageID=139. And feel free, of course, to
forward
this to anyone who might find it of interest.
Cordially,
Dave Myers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Tenure denied
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:34:37 -0400
X-Message-Number: 3
God was denied tenure because:
He had only one major publication
It had no references
It was not published in a referred journal
Some even doubt that he wrote it himself
It may be true that he created the world,but what has he done since then?
His cooperative efforts have been quite limited
The scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results
He never applied to the ethics board for permission to use human subjects
When one experiment went awry.he tried to cover it up by drowning the
subjects
When subjects did not behave as predicted he deleted them from the sample
He rarely came to class.Just told students to read the book
Some say he had his son teach the class
He expelled his first two students for learning
Although there were only ten requirements,most students failed his tests
His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountaintop.
Michael Sylvester,PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: Rick Froman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:40:35 -0500
X-Message-Number: 4
The messages tracked by the researchers were instant messages (like MSN
Messenger) which involves mainly one-on-one conversations between
individuals (although you can sometimes bring others into such a
conversation). The number of people with which a person is likely to have
messaged is likely to be much smaller than the number who have been
touched by one of their e-mails to a discussion list like TIPS.
Rick
Dr. Rick Froman, Chair
Division of Humanities and Social Sciences
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________
From: Allen Esterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 3:21 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
On 2 August 2008 Chris Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the
electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
Surely the advent of electonic mailing has appreciably *increased* the
probability of such connections. I "know" far more people in recent years
than previously -- just think of all the TIPsters for starters! Doesn't
this work undertaken by Microsoft researchers imply that before the advent
of large-scale emailing the "six degrees" theory was an overstatement?
From the Guardian article:
"But yesterday researchers announced the theory was right - nearly. By
studying billions of electronic messages, they worked out that any two
strangers are, on average, distanced by precisely 6.6 degrees of
separation."
Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
http://www.esterson.org
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Six Degrees of Stanley Milgram and The Small World Problem
From: "Mike Palij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 10:12:08 -0400
X-Message-Number: 5
On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:54:43 -0400, Christopher D. Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
A few points:
(1) Although there may be problems with the entry, one should
check out the "six degrees" entry on Wikipedia to get a better
sense of the history associated with the concept (it did not
originate with Stanley Milgram). See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_degrees_of_separation
(2) The article states:
|The theory of six degrees of separation contends that,
|because we are all linked by chains of acquaintance, you
|are just six introductions away from any other person on
|the planet.
I know that popular media often confuses things but
(a) isn't the "six degrees" supposed to be an empirical
finding or a fact in contrast to a theory, and
(b) as articulated by Milgram and others, isn't the theory
the "small world hypothesis", that is, because of the
creation of new forms of communication and travel,
the "seperation" between any two random people
(represented by the number of people one would have
to go through to establish contact between the two)
can be measured and described statistically? The actual
degree of seperation would depend upon whether one
is really trying to connect two random people or two
people who might have pre-existing "paths" (e.g.,
connecting two Ph.D.s in psychology; a number that
should be smaller than six, especially if the two have
email address, belong to professional organizations that
publish directories of their members, and/or have
contact info either in their email or associated website).
(3) The article states:
|In other words, putting fractions to one side, you are linked
|by a string of seven or fewer acquaintances to Madonna, the
|Dalai Lama and the Queen.
I assume that "the Queen" refers to Queen Elizabeth and not
some version of the rock band "Queen". And
|The database covered all the Microsoft Messenger instant-messaging
|network in June 2006, equivalent to roughly half the world's
|instant-messaging traffic at that time.
Perhaps the inference is unwarrented but since the two
statements above are seperated by only a couple of sentences,
there does seem to be the implication that Queen uses
instant messaging.
I did not know that.
(4) If, as the article asserts, that the 6.6 billion people on earth
are seperated by only six people, why haven't we caught
Osama bin Ladin? Does his IM program have a very exclusive
"White List"?
(5) The article summarizes the results from the Milgram and
Travers study, pointing out that 296 people were giving instructions
to contact a Boston stockbroker and found that 6.2 links or
degrees. However, only 64 contacts (letters) reached the
stockbroker or 64/296=.2162 or only about 22% of the attempts
were successful. In other words, 78% of the participants could
not contact the target person. Perhaps I am reading this wrong
but doesn't this mean that it was impossible in the majority of
cases to reach a target person, at least in the Milgram & Travers
version of the task?
(Travers, Jeffrey, and Stanley Milgram, "An Experimental Study of
the Small World Problem," Sociometry 32(4, Dec. 1969):425-443)
(6) Milgram originally published his "small world hypothesis" in
the following:
Stanley Milgram, "The Small World Problem", Psychology Today,
1967, Vol. 2, 60-67
I am in continual amazement at the power of the magazine
"Psychology Today" to influence popular culture as well as
psychology. Oh why oh why did the APA sell it!?!
;-)
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 10:36:13 -0400
X-Message-Number: 6
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How Everything in
Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for Business, Sciences,
and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. Despite the somewhat
new-agey, holistic title, it is actually about mathematical network
theory, and has all kinds of applications to the "real world,"
especially in the internet age. By the way, the "six degrees" idea did
not originate with Milgram, as many psychologists like to believe. It
instead dates back to a Hungarian author of the 1920s.
Regards,
Chris
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
=========================
Allen Esterson wrote:
On 2 August 2008 Chris Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the
electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
Surely the advent of electonic mailing has appreciably *increased* the
probability of such connections. I "know" far more people in recent years
than previously -- just think of all the TIPsters for starters! Doesn't
this work undertaken by Microsoft researchers imply that before the
advent
of large-scale emailing the "six degrees" theory was an overstatement?
>From the Guardian article:
"But yesterday researchers announced the theory was right - nearly. By
studying billions of electronic messages, they worked out that any two
strangers are, on average, distanced by precisely 6.6 degrees of
separation."
Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
http://www.esterson.org
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
From: "Mike Palij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 11:56:00 -0400
X-Message-Number: 7
On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 07:35:51 -0700, Christopher D. Green wrote:
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How Everything
in Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for Business, Sciences,
and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. Despite the somewhat
new-agey, holistic title, it is actually about mathematical network
theory, and has all kinds of applications to the "real world,"
especially in the internet age. By the way, the "six degrees" idea did
not originate with Milgram, as many psychologists like to believe. It
instead dates back to a Hungarian author of the 1920s.
It may be easier for folks to access the website for Barabasi's lab
which contains links and other info on his group's work on networks:
http://www.barabasilab.com/
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 09:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 8
I have never looked into it, and I haven't read the book,
but I find it very hard to believe that someone who lets say lived and
died in
the hills of Kentucky without leaving a local geographical area (with no
phone
or computer of course) would be 6 to 7 introductions away from a nomad who
lived and died in the mountains of Afghanistan in a similar small
geographic
area.
It sounds like one of those things which are based on
certain assumptions which may not be true (or the math is so exotic people
just
assume ¡they¢ must be correct).
--Mike
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of
separation between us | Technology | The Observer
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 7:36 AM
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How Everything in
Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for Business, Sciences,
and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. Despite the somewhat
new-agey, holistic title, it is actually about mathematical network
theory, and has all kinds of applications to the "real world,"
especially in the internet age. By the way, the "six degrees" idea did
not originate with Milgram, as many psychologists like to believe. It
instead dates back to a Hungarian author of the 1920s.
Regards,
Chris
--
Christopher D
#yiv622258729 p.p1 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:16.0px Times New
Roman;}
#yiv622258729 p.p2 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:16.0px Times New
Roman;min-height:18.0px;}
#yiv622258729 p.p3 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:12.0px Helvetica;}
#yiv622258729 span.s1 {font:16.0px Lucida Grande;}
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
=========================
Allen Esterson wrote:
On 2 August 2008 Chris Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the
electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
Surely the advent of electonic mailing has appreciably *increased* the
probability of such connections. I "know" far more people in recent years
than previously -- just think of all the TIPsters for starters! Doesn't
this work undertaken by Microsoft researchers imply that before the advent
of large-scale emailing the "six degrees" theory was an overstatement?
From the Guardian article:
"But yesterday researchers announced the theory was right - nearly. By
studying billions of electronic messages, they worked out that any two
strangers are, on average, distanced by precisely 6.6 degrees of
separation."
Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
http://www.esterson.org
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: "Jim Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 14:47:42 -0500
X-Message-Number: 9
Hi
To elaborate on Michael's point, the sampling of the human population
in Microsoft's demonstration is highly biased ... owners of computers,
users of instance messaging, .... The massive size of the sample is
absolutely no compensation for the bias. Might be a good example to use
for the importance of random sampling, along with the Dewey election
predictions.
As a separate point, I wonder if they could have demonstrated their
results with a much smaller, random sample of messages. Although it is
possible that the study of large networks does not benefit as much from
random sampling as the study of individual units.
Take care
Jim
James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03-Aug-08 11:51 AM >>>
I have never looked into it, and I haven't read the book,
but I find it very hard to believe that someone who lets say lived and
died in
the hills of Kentucky without leaving a local geographical area (with
no phone
or computer of course) would be 6 to 7 introductions away from a nomad
who
lived and died in the mountains of Afghanistan in a similar small
geographic
area.
It sounds like one of those things which are based on
certain assumptions which may not be true (or the math is so exotic
people just
assume *they* must be correct).
--Mike
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of
separation between us | Technology | The Observer
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 7:36 AM
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How Everything in
Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for Business,
Sciences,
and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. Despite the somewhat
new-agey, holistic title, it is actually about mathematical network
theory, and has all kinds of applications to the "real world,"
especially in the internet age. By the way, the "six degrees" idea did
not originate with Milgram, as many psychologists like to believe. It
instead dates back to a Hungarian author of the 1920s.
Regards,
Chris
--
Christopher D
#yiv622258729 p.p1 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:16.0px Times
New Roman;}
#yiv622258729 p.p2 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:16.0px Times
New Roman;min-height:18.0px;}
#yiv622258729 p.p3 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:12.0px
Helvetica;}
#yiv622258729 span.s1 {font:16.0px Lucida Grande;}
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
=========================
Allen Esterson wrote:
On 2 August 2008 Chris Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the
electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
Surely the advent of electonic mailing has appreciably *increased*
the
probability of such connections. I "know" far more people in recent
years
than previously -- just think of all the TIPsters for starters!
Doesn't
this work undertaken by Microsoft researchers imply that before the
advent
of large-scale emailing the "six degrees" theory was an overstatement?
From the Guardian article:
"But yesterday researchers announced the theory was right - nearly. By
studying billions of electronic messages, they worked out that any two
strangers are, on average, distanced by precisely 6.6 degrees of
separation."
Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
http://www.esterson.org
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Six Degrees of Stanley Milgram and The Small World Problem
From: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:09:28 -0400
X-Message-Number: 10
Mike Palij wrote:
I am in continual amazement at the power of the magazine
"Psychology Today" to influence popular culture as well as
psychology. Oh why oh why did the APA sell it!?!
Because it very nearly bankrupted the Association. (pity!)
Chris
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
"Part of respecting another person is taking the time to criticise his
or her views."
- Melissa Lane, in a /Guardian/ obituary for philosopher Peter Lipton
=================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:19:16 -0400
X-Message-Number: 11
Michael Smith wrote:
I have never looked into it, and I haven't read the book, but I find
it very hard to believe that someone who lets say lived and died in
the hills of Kentucky without leaving a local geographical area (with
no phone or computer of course) would be 6 to 7 introductions away
from a nomad who lived and died in the mountains of Afghanistan in a
similar small geographic area.
It sounds like one of those things which are based on certain
assumptions which may not be true (or the math is so exotic people
just assume ¡they¢ must be correct).
I am continually amazed how people can, in one and the same message,
decry someone else for not being empirical enough on the basis of a
feeling they happen to have.
If you read the book, you will find that hubs and spokes are extremely
important to naturally-forming social networks. The Kentucky hillbilly
knows someone who knows someone who is much better travelled, and that
someone knows someone else who is a few links from the Afghan nomad.
What is more, the claim is that we are six or seven links *on average*
from everyone else and, thus, it is perfectly consistent with two
particularly remote and isolated people being nine or ten or eleven
links from each other.
Chris Green
York U.
Toronto
==============
--Mike
--- On *Sun, 8/3/08, Christopher D. Green /<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:
From: Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of
separation between us | Technology | The Observer
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 7:36 AM
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How
Everything in Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for
Business, Sciences, and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi.
Despite the somewhat new-agey, holistic title, it is actually
about mathematical network theory, and has all kinds of
applications to the "real world," especially in the internet age.
By the way, the "six degrees" idea did not originate with Milgram,
as many psychologists like to believe. It instead dates back to a
Hungarian author of the 1920s.
Regards,
Chris
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
=========================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: "Jim Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 15:39:43 -0500
X-Message-Number: 12
Hi
Although the population sampled is not random and might lead to low
estimates of distance between people, it would also be worth noting that
computer connected is only one form of connection between people, which
would lead to high estimates of distance. How one could operationally
measure more diverse forms of connection could be challenging.
Take care
Jim
James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Jim Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03-Aug-08 2:47 PM >>>
Hi
To elaborate on Michael's point, the sampling of the human population
in Microsoft's demonstration is highly biased ... owners of computers,
users of instance messaging, .... The massive size of the sample is
absolutely no compensation for the bias. Might be a good example to use
for the importance of random sampling, along with the Dewey election
predictions.
As a separate point, I wonder if they could have demonstrated their
results with a much smaller, random sample of messages. Although it is
possible that the study of large networks does not benefit as much from
random sampling as the study of individual units.
Take care
Jim
James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03-Aug-08 11:51 AM >>>
I have never looked into it, and I haven't read the book,
but I find it very hard to believe that someone who lets say lived and
died in
the hills of Kentucky without leaving a local geographical area (with
no phone
or computer of course) would be 6 to 7 introductions away from a nomad
who
lived and died in the mountains of Afghanistan in a similar small
geographic
area.
It sounds like one of those things which are based on
certain assumptions which may not be true (or the math is so exotic
people just
assume *they* must be correct).
--Mike
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of
separation between us | Technology | The Observer
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 7:36 AM
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How Everything in
Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for Business,
Sciences,
and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. Despite the somewhat
new-agey, holistic title, it is actually about mathematical network
theory, and has all kinds of applications to the "real world,"
especially in the internet age. By the way, the "six degrees" idea did
not originate with Milgram, as many psychologists like to believe. It
instead dates back to a Hungarian author of the 1920s.
Regards,
Chris
--
Christopher D
#yiv622258729 p.p1 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:16.0px Times
New Roman;}
#yiv622258729 p.p2 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:16.0px Times
New Roman;min-height:18.0px;}
#yiv622258729 p.p3 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;font:12.0px
Helvetica;}
#yiv622258729 span.s1 {font:16.0px Lucida Grande;}
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
=========================
Allen Esterson wrote:
On 2 August 2008 Chris Green wrote:
The "six degrees" theory apparently holds up, even in the
electronic age.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/03/internet.email
Surely the advent of electonic mailing has appreciably *increased*
the
probability of such connections. I "know" far more people in recent
years
than previously -- just think of all the TIPsters for starters!
Doesn't
this work undertaken by Microsoft researchers imply that before the
advent
of large-scale emailing the "six degrees" theory was an overstatement?
From the Guardian article:
"But yesterday researchers announced the theory was right - nearly. By
studying billions of electronic messages, they worked out that any two
strangers are, on average, distanced by precisely 6.6 degrees of
separation."
Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
http://www.esterson.org
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: re: psychological science and faith
From: "Mike Palij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:51:08 -0400
X-Message-Number: 13
On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 05:02:23 -0700, David Myers wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Recent discussions of science-faith tensions lead me to think
you might occasionally have a student who would benefit from
an explanation of how faith can be science-affirming, healthy,
and humane, and of how science can inform faith. That's the
intent of my new little book due off the press this month.
Perhaps you can clarify a point: are you saying that your book
is oriented towards people who come from a science-denier
background (i.e., taught to accept the Bible as literal truth) and/or
subscribers to the Ben Stein perspective that Science=Nazism?
That is, torwards people who think that religion trumps science?
Is this what you mean by how science can inform faith?
An overview and some of the content is available at
http://davidmyers.org/Brix?pageID=139. And feel free, of course,
to forward this to anyone who might find it of interest.
For balance, people on the west coast might consider attending
the October 3-4, 2008 Skeptics Society Conference in Pasadena,
CA: it includes a session on "Origins", "Does Science Make
Belief in God Obsolete?" (panel and debate), and entertainment
provided by Mr. Deity. For info, download the brochure at:
http://origins.skeptic.com/
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: psychological science and faith
From: "David Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 18:25:49 -0400
X-Message-Number: 14
Thanks for your question, Mike. My perspective (as a science devotee and
a
skeptic of a sort, and as a person of faith) is to assist each side in
speaking to the other and in trying to find some common ground. Thus I
have
sought to offer scientific information and critical thinking to the faith
community, and to articulate a science-friendly faith perspective to those
who equate religion with the sort of science-denying viewpoint that you
mention.
Dave
www.davidmyers.org
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Mike Palij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 05:02:23 -0700, David Myers wrote:
>Dear colleagues,
>Recent discussions of science-faith tensions lead me to think
>you might occasionally have a student who would benefit from
>an explanation of how faith can be science-affirming, healthy,
>and humane, and of how science can inform faith. That's the
>intent of my new little book due off the press this month.
Perhaps you can clarify a point: are you saying that your book
is oriented towards people who come from a science-denier
background (i.e., taught to accept the Bible as literal truth) and/or
subscribers to the Ben Stein perspective that Science=Nazism?
That is, torwards people who think that religion trumps science?
Is this what you mean by how science can inform faith?
>An overview and some of the content is available at
>http://davidmyers.org/Brix?pageID=139. And feel free, of course,
>to forward this to anyone who might find it of interest.
For balance, people on the west coast might consider attending
the October 3-4, 2008 Skeptics Society Conference in Pasadena,
CA: it includes a session on "Origins", "Does Science Make
Belief in God Obsolete?" (panel and debate), and entertainment
provided by Mr. Deity. For info, download the brochure at:
http://origins.skeptic.com/
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of separation
between us | Technology | The Observer
From: Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 17:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 15
Actually, I think everyone should be skeptical of claims whether it comes
from science, or math, or psychology, etc. I believe my reaction to this
kind of thing to be healthy (and normal) and not in the least amazing.
Ignoring the factioid of 'an average of 6 links' so that people go "Wow,
really?" as the piece of scientific trivia that it is, perhaps the book
explains how they went about actually collecting the data and
demonstrating the verified empirical results in several test cases (maybe
10 or 20 cases?) such as the hillbilly and the nomad. I guess I will have
to read it to find out.
Of course if they didn't, and it's just a model, well...
--Mike
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of
separation between us | Technology | The Observer
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 1:19 PM
Michael Smith wrote:
I have never looked into it, and I haven't
read the book,
but I find it very hard to believe that someone who lets say lived and
died in
the hills of Kentucky without leaving a local geographical area (with
no phone
or computer of course) would be 6 to 7 introductions away from a nomad
who
lived and died in the mountains of Afghanistan in a similar small
geographic
area.
It sounds like one of those things which
are based on
certain assumptions which may not be true (or the math is so exotic
people just
assume ¡they¢ must be correct).
I am continually amazed how people can, in one and the same message,
decry someone else for not being empirical enough on the basis of a
feeling they happen to have.
If you read the book, you will find that hubs and spokes are extremely
important to naturally-forming social networks. The Kentucky hillbilly
knows someone who knows someone who is much better travelled, and that
someone knows someone else who is a few links from the Afghan nomad.
What is more, the claim is that we are six or seven links *on average*
from everyone else and, thus, it is perfectly consistent with two
particularly remote and isolated people being nine or ten or eleven
links from each other.
Chris Green
York U.
Toronto
==============
--Mike
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
From:
Christopher D. Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tips] Microsoft prove there are just six degrees of
separation between us | Technology | The Observer
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 7:36 AM
Allow me to recommend, once again, the book _Linked: How Everything in
Connected to Everything Else, and What It Means for Business, Sciences,
and Everyday Life_ by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. Despite the somewhat
new-agey, holistic title, it is actually about mathematical network
theory, and has all kinds of applications to the "real world,"
especially in the internet age. By the way, the "six degrees" idea did
not originate with Milgram, as many psychologists like to believe. It
instead dates back to a Hungarian author of the 1920s.
Regards,
Chris
--
Christopher D
#yiv1814606980 #yiv622258729 p.p1 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px
0.0px;font:16.0px Times New Roman;}
#yiv1814606980 #yiv622258729 p.p2 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px
0.0px;font:16.0px Times New Roman;min-height:18.0px;}
#yiv1814606980 #yiv622258729 p.p3 {margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px
0.0px;font:12.0px Helvetica;}
#yiv1814606980 #yiv622258729 span.s1 {font:16.0px Lucida Grande;}
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
=========================
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
END OF DIGEST
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
