Posts Tagged ‘medical care’

The Second Mountain

May 10, 2019

The “Second Mountain” is a book by David Brooks: The subtitle is “The Quest for a Moral Life.” The first mountain referred to in the title is Hyper-Individualism. The second mountain is Relationalism. The first phase of his life was characterized by his hyper-individualism. This phase of his life ended in divorce and unhappiness. He moved on to Relationalism, concern for his fellow humans, and is now happy. He argues that Relationalism is the way to go. Although HM agrees, Brooks falls short on his Relationalism.

Before HM explains how Brooks falls short, he would like to underscore two parts of his book that HM finds praiseworthy. Brooks writes, “In eighteenth-century America, Colonial society and Native American society sat, unhappily, side by side. As time went by, settlers from Europe began defecting to live with the natives. No natives defected to live with the colonials. This bothered the Europeans. They had, they assumed, the superior civilization, and yet people were voting with their feet to live in the other way. The colonials occasionally persuaded natives to come with them, and taught them English, but very quickly the natives returned home. During the war with the Indians, many European settlers were taken prisoner and lived in Indian tribes. They had plenty of chances to escaped and return, but did not. When Europeans came to “rescue’ them, they fled into the woods to hide from their ‘rescuers.’

The difference was that people in Indian villages had a communal culture and close attachments. They lived in a spiritual culture that saw all creations as a single unity. The Europeans had an individualistic culture and were more separable. When actually given the choice, a lot of people preferred community over self. The story made HM think that it’s possible for a whole society to get itself into a place where it’s fundamentally disordered.”

The second praiseworthy point is his calling out the soul specifically. Too many religions are preoccupied with biological life. Biological life should be irrelevant to religions and spiritual beliefs. It is the soul that is of central concern.

Here are two paragraphs from the Conclusion with which HM strongly agrees.

“The world is in the midst of one of those transition moments. The individualistic moral ecology is crumbling around us. It has left people naked and alone. For many, the first instinctive reaction is to the evolutionary one: Revert to tribe. If we as a society respond to the excesses of “I’m Free to Be Myself” with an era of “Revert to Tribe,” then the twenty-first century will be a time of conflict and violence that will make the twentieth look like child’s play,

There is another way to find belonging. There is another way to find meaning and purpose. There is another vision of a healthy society. It is through relations. It is by going deep into ourselves and finding there our illimitable ability to care, and then spreading outward in commitment to others.”
The examples he provides of building relations are definitely commendable. But these alone will fall short. Government programs and government assistance are also needed and often provide the most efficient means of dealing with problems. Brooks is blinded because he looks at the world through Republican lenses. Unfortunately, in the United States too many Democrats are also suffering from faulty lenses. All other advanced countries have government supplied medical care. The data show that not only are these programs more effective with respect to medical care, they are also cost effective. Political propaganda and lies in the United States blind people to these results replicated in every other advanced country.

The preceding paragraph provides a good example of how beliefs and compartmentalization preclude or hinder critical thinking. Brooks identifies himself as a conservative. There is nothing wrong with that in itself. Politics needs both liberal and conservative approaches. Unfortunately, his conservatism leads him to compartmentalize. He has beliefs as to what functions government should perform and which functions they should not. Unfortunately, this compartmentalization puts medical care as something government should not do. So even in spite of the voluminous data that government supplied health care is both more economical and provides better medical care, he remains blind to that evidence. And it is quite likely he never looked for it. But good critical thinking requires examining how to justify the data in support one’s political decision and not just by blind belief.

College educations in these countries are also more affordable. It is not surprising that the United States always finished behind these countries when the survey is on happiness.

Brooks also makes derogatory comments on meditation. Meditation and contemplative prayer are central to finding meaning and purpose. But Brooks is entirely focused on western civilization and apparently is oblivious of the wisdom of the east.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Final Post (for the time being)

December 11, 2018

In the series “Linguistics and Cognitive Science in the Pursuit of Civil Discourse.” The title of this series promises civil discourse. So here are the guidelines:

Show respect
Respond by reframing
Think and talk at the level of values
Say what you believe

These points are not just a matter of being civil and polite. Ignoring these points would also be nonproductive. When there is disagreement, nothing is to be gained by informing the other party that they are wrong. Rather, propose by reframing another point of view. If the other party is not willing, then just agree to disagree, perhaps to address the topic at another time. It is unlikely that the other party will change views immediately, but it may start them rethinking, perhaps at an unconscious level.

HM agrees with Lakoff that values are important, but at some point facts, data, or possible research should be discussed. Truly advanced democracies would give data and research primary importance. Moreover, a democracy can see what other democracies are doing to see what is working. A good example is medical care. The United States is the only advanced country that does not use the government to provide medical care to everyone. In addition to lower medical costs, all these countries have much better medical statistics and healthcare results than the United States. One would think that the United States would avail themselves of these results and use them to develop their own healthcare.

But the United States continues to ignore the obvious. This is reflected in surveys of country’s welfare. The United States rarely fares well in these surveys and some citizens delude themselves by thinking that they live in the best country in the world.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Ivan Pavlov: Socialism

August 13, 2018

Ivan Pavlov was the Russian physiologist who discovered classical conditioning. Pair a bell with the presentation of food to a dog and after a few trials the dog will start drooling at the sound of the bell.

So how does that relate to socialism? To way too many Americans, the response to socialism is evil, no way. For these people, this is a classically conditioned response to the word/idea socialism. Consider in the context of Nobel Winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman’s two process theory of cognition. System 1 refers to our normal mode of cognition.  It is very fast and allows for fluent conversations and skilled performance.  It is the default mode of cognition.  System 2 is called reasoning and corresponds to what we colloquially call thinking.  System 2 requires attention and mental effort.  One of the jobs of System 2 is to monitor System 1 for errors.  However, this requires mental effort and thinking.

System 1 is emotional and it is an emotional response that too many people have to the term socialism. It would be interesting to ask these people to define socialism. Actually the definition would need to be very long. There are many different types and flavors of socialism. Indeed, since we have Social Security and Medicare, some would argue that we have a socialist system. And indeed, there are individual who would like to get rid of both Social Security and Medicare for this reason.

A major problem with political discourse is that it is emotional and almost always a System 1 process. Politicians are asked, “are you a socialist?’ with the implication that if the answer is “Yes”, then they can go to hell.

A good example of the ramifications of this problem is medical care in the United States. The United States has, by far, the most expensive medical system in the world. Unfortunately, in terms of the results of this system, the United States falls to a third level country. Now every other advanced country has solved this problem. And they all have variants of everyone being covered and a single payer, the government. Sure call all these countries socialist. But to use this label to preclude the obvious solution to the health care problem is ridiculous. The excuse provided for not doing the obvious is to say that the United States is an exception. HM would agree and flesh that out by saying the United States is exceptionally stupid.

Labels should be eschewed in politics. Rather needs should be identified and discussed. What are different policies for addressing these needs and what are the costs?

Another statement, which is on the same level as exceptionalism, and that is ‘big government.” Big government is bad and needs to be avoided. The size of government is irrelevant. The question is whether the government, private industry, or some combination could better address the problem. If someone is against big government, then the quickest way to make government smaller would be to eliminate the defense department, veterans affairs, and social security, and to hell with social welfare in general.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Beliefs: Necessary but Dangerous

February 13, 2018

Most of our actions and behaviors are produced by habits and beliefs. Both are necessary and are what Kahneman terms System 1 processes. That is, they occur almost automatically. But we can have bad habits and erroneous beliefs.  Correcting these requires attention to correct via System 2 processes. And this can take significant time and effort.

When we are growing up the default setting for beliefs is to accept them. If we consistently questioned what we were being told, our growth would likely be retarded. Later when we see or hear something that is discordant with our beliefs, the brain notices it. We are aware that this is something new and perhaps wrong. Usually we just ignore the discordant information and go on with what we’re doing. Resolving the discrepancy can take quite a bit of effort to resolve.

The older we get, the more our actions are determined by our beliefs. And our beliefs become more hard set. The term used here is hardening of the categories. We do not question why things happen attributing them to God’s will or nature taking its course.

Beliefs can be dangerous to a democracy. Too be sure, some beliefs are necessary, such as“All men are created equal” and the beliefs as expressed in the constitution. Some people might argue that “all men are not equal,” or what about women? What the phrase means is that all men are equal with respect to rights. At the time it was written, women were not included because they could not vote and did not have rights. Matters have improved as women can vote, but there is still some distance to go. Slaves certainly were not equal. Although slavery has been abolished, civil rights issues remain. The intended meaning of the phrase is that all human beings should have equal rights.

However, with respect to lawmaking beliefs can be pernicious, as they constrain thinking. For example, consider the proposition that the government should provide health care to all residents of the country. The immediate response of some will be to shout “socialism,” cutting off further discussion. One can try to continue the discussion by asking, do you like Social Security, isn’t that socialism? Some would answer they don’t like Social Security. Others might confess to liking social security but claim that it is not truly socialism.

One could also begin a discussion by stating that the United States is the only advanced country that does not provide effectively free medical care to its citizens. This could be followed by the facts that the medical statistics in the United States are much worse than the statistics in the other advanced countries, and their medical costs are much less. All these countries have single payer systems and that payer is the government. So why should the United States not emulate these other countries? Here “exceptionalism” would likely be shouted. The notion here is that the United States is an exception to the other countries of the world. This is a tad similar to Hitler calling the Germans the master race. Exceptionalism is nothing but a belief—an incorrect belief. Stupidity can be readily substituted for exceptionalism.

Some beliefs are good, but they can be compartmentalized. The Christian teaching is to “love they neighbor as thyself.” So one might conclude from this that Christians would strongly be in favor of providing effective medical care for everyone in the country. But many do not because of another belief, that government should be as small as possible. Apparently in cases like these the less inconvenient belief is taken.

Another belief is in the universality of market forces. Now, there is no argument that free enterprise is very good. But one problem is that free markets tend not to last long. Monopolies develop and small players are pushed out. Government needs to intercede here, but bad connotations about government might preclude this. The problem with people seeing the role of market forces to all problems is analogous to the person who only has a hammer and sees all problems as nails.

The common complaint is that the United States has become polarized and that this polarization is precluding us from solving problems. Political parties exacerbate polarization and political parties are based almost solely on beliefs.

Political parties might be necessary for some functions of government, but the best way to lubricate a democracy is to preclude the expression of beliefs in political discourse. Participants would be told that before entering into the discussions they should role up all their beliefs into a ball, and insert it as far as they can up their keister. Courses of action could be argued, but the arguments would need to consist solely of data and logical arguments. When questions arose regarding the validity of the data or the soundness of the arguments, then studies could be done and experiments conducted to resolve the issues. Were we to do these, then we would indeed be worthy of the title homo sapiens. Currently titles such as homo stupididus or homo blow hardidus might be more appropriate.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Politics Needs Science

January 22, 2017

The article in the 21 January 2017 issue of the Washington Post by Sarah Kaplan titled “New group encourages scientists to enter politics” was good news.  STEM the Divide is a group that will push to have more scientists involved in politics.  This initiative was set up by the political action committee 314 Action.  The goal  is to connect people with backgrounds in science, technology, engineering and math to the expertise and money needed to run a successful campaign.   The article stated that scientists who have been interested in getting into politics were rarely encouraged and sometimes discouraged.

Shaughnessy Naughton  is the founder of this organization.  When asked whether this raised a risk of politicizing science—framing scientific questions as ideological questions, rather than matters of fact—Naughton argued that that ship has already sailed.  Her  response follows:  “People might think that science is above politics, as it should be, but increasingly we see that politics is not above bringing itself into science.  At a certain point, there’s diminishing returns to not getting involved.”  HM would change “diminishing returns” to “serious existential dangers.”

Moreover, the question she was posed, “framing scientific questions as ideological issues, rather than as matters of fact,” betrays the erroneous concept that science is simply a bunch of facts.  Science can be an ideology, an ideology that should provide the basis for governing.  Science is not a monolithic entity, but rather a set of methodologies devoted to arriving at truth in the various disciplines.  This truth is arrived at by reasoning and data.  Moreover, it is fluid in that as circumstances or facts change, truth is corrected or refined.  Science provides the basis for our standard of living, and it can be argued that social problems are due to the failure to apply scientific approaches to social problems.

A good example of this is medical care in the United States.  Medical care in the United States is the most expensive in the world, with results suitable for a third world country.  All other advanced countries provide superior medical care for all their citizens at a fraction of the costs in the United States.  The Affordable Care Act was the best that could be done given the political environment.  One party wants either to exclude the federal government entirely or severely limit its participation due to ideology.  They use fear, lies, and misinformation to destroy attempts to bring the United States into line with the truly advanced countries of the world.

A good question is why this is the case.  The general argument is against big government.  Any argument about the size of government without considering the question of  what the government can best do versus what private industry can best do is moronic.  Yet it is repeated ad nauseum.

People say that they are followers of Reaganism with great pride.  Ronald Reagan is also regarded as a great communicator, which he was.  But what is overlooked is the reason his ideas were so easy to communicate is that they were so simple.  Reagan demanded that his staff provide brief descriptions of the issues so he could formulate brief descriptions of his policy.

The problem is that simple ideas do not adequately solve complex problems. For example, people will say that they believe in free markets.  One would be hard pressed to find many economists who do not believe in free markets, but they also realize that free markets do not remain free for long.  They are manipulated and monopolies emerge.  The manipulations achieve a variety of ends, one being the financial collapse of 2008.

Moreover, there are always complaints about the excessive regulations that come from big government.  Just think back over time and consider what life would be like without government regulations.  How long would the work week be?  What would salaries be without the minimum wage?  If these are exclusively left to “market forces” they would leave the majority of people in misery.  Were it not for unions, it is quite likely that Marx’s prediction of the revolution of the proletariat would have occurred.  But Marx’s analysis was superficial and did not consider the possibility of workers organizing to achieve a decent wage and working conditions.

Government regulations have also goaded businesses into actions that benefited them.  Gas mileage standards is an example.  And God protect us from what the atmosphere would be like absent government regulations.  One of the costs that decreased the competitiveness of the US Auto Industry in the international market, were the costs of medical insurance.  Had medical insurance been provided by the government, the industry would have been more competitive.  Their ideology acted against their business interests.

One of the most disturbing actions that Trump has promised to undertake is the dismantling of financial regulations taken to prevent another market collapse.  It should be obvious by now that the financial industry does not self regulate.  Smart manipulators cash in, while everyone else in the country and the country itself collapses.

The argument here is not that business is evil and government is good.  There are ample examples of government being a monster.  The reality is that the individual citizen stands between two giants, business and government.  Either one can step on and crush the individual citizen.  The citizen needs to be watchful of both and play each against the other to get the best result.

How should this be done?  By employing science, conducting research, and analyzing data to decide what policies are, and who should do what.  This does not guarantee a good result, but science is self correcting.  So when something does not work, the reason why it didn’t work will be studied, and new approaches will be developed and evaluated.

The fundamental problem is with the individual voter.  Thee is ample evidence that voters do not vote in their own interest.  See the healthy memory blog post, “The Low Information Electorate.” It is also true that voters are governed by their emotions rather than carefully considered opinions.  Previous posts have argued that decisions of most people are governed by their guts, which are System 1 processes.  That certainly is the best explanation of the results of the 2016 presidential election.  People need to invoke their System 2 processes.   System 2 processes require cognitive effort.  The vernacular term for them is thinking.  Entering “System 1” or “System 2” or “Kahneman” into the healthymemory blog search block should yield ample posts on this topic.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

2015 Labor Day Post

September 4, 2015

Every Labor Day I go back to my boyhood and remember what future was predicted then for us to be enjoying today.  This was the fifties and at that time it was very unusual for mothers to work outside the home.  The basic prediction was that advances in technology would result in significant leisure time for everyone.   Back then no one dreamed of anything like a personal computer, the internet, iPADs, or wifi.  In other words, technology went far beyond what was imagined.  So I ask again, what I’ve asked in every healthy memory blog post for Labor Day, “Why Are We Working So Hard?”  Today both marriage partners are working.  The predicted increase in leisure time has not materialized.  And we in the US work more hours than those in most advanced countries.  Often this announcement is made with pride, when it should be uttered in shame.

Some of the answers to the question, “why are we working so hard,” can be found in the three immediately preceding healthymemory blog posts.  “The Wellbeing of Nations:  Meaning, Motive, and Measurement” explained why the primary metric for measuring economies, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is seriously flawed.  This metric fails to capture many factors that make for well-being and happiness.  Moreover, it requires that economies continue to grown and expand.  Eventually the capacity for growth of the GDP will be limited and the resources for continuing this growth will be depleted.  The blog post also explained that this is an extremely difficult topic and the work in this area is still in its early stages.  Nevertheless, it has begun, so let us hope it will continue.

The healthymemory blog post “Behavioral Economics”  reviewed how classical economics is based on the model of a rational human.  There is ample evidence that we humans are not rational.  Behavioral economics is devoted to identifying behaviors that lead to desirable outcomes.  Again, there is much work to do, but it least it has started.

The  blog post “Why Information Grows”  presents a novel view of what makes economies successful.  The answer is knowledge and know how.  Again, these ideas are very new, but they offer the potential to guide us in the right direction.

Labor Day is a holiday, but  unfortunately it signals the end of summer and the traditional time for vacations and recreation.  I would suggest that Memorial Day, a holiday for the somber remembrance for those who have died fighting for our country, be switched with Labor Day.  Then Labor Day would signal the beginning of vacation and recreation time.

Nevertheless, as Labor Day is a holiday, let us engage in a fantasy so we can enjoy the holiday.  First of all, there would be a heavy investment in education, which would be free at all levels.  Moreover, education would continue throughout our lives.  This provides both for personal growth and facilitates the advancement of new technologies.  There would be ample free time.  Medical care would be guaranteed and free so people would not need to work for medical coverage.  People could drop out from time to time so that they could simply enjoy leisure time.  They could take classes in anything that
caught their fancy and found to be enjoyable.   Retirement, per se, would become obsolete as people would continue to learn and grow throughout their senior years

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.