Posts Tagged ‘Thomas Jefferson’

An Extremely Important New Year’s Resolution

December 31, 2019

One being to build a healthy memory through healthy practices, but most importantly growth mindsets. Growth mindsets require new learning and the development of critical thinking. Both of these involve Kahneman’s System 2 processing, more commonly known as thinking. However, it has become apparent this year that the development of healthy memories is essential to the maintenance of a healthy country.

Consider the following message from Karl Rove, senior advisor to George W. Bush in 2004:
“[You] in what we call the reality-based community…believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That’s not the way the world really works anymore. We create our own reality.”

and the following message from Kellyanne Conway, counselor to President Donald Trump in 2017:
“You’re saying it’s a falsehood. And they’re giving…our press secretary gave alternative facts.”

So, what is a good path to a healthy memory? Perhaps the best place to start is the Constitution of the United States. It appears that too few citizens are familiar with the Constitution. But what is more frightening is that many people in the Congress either do not know or disbelieve the Constitution and are behaving in a manner contrary to the Constitution that puts our democracy at risk. The name of our species is Homo sapiens, which means wise man. Too many humans are not living up to the name of their species.

Even for those who have read the Constitution, we should remember that people make it their life’s work to study the Constitution. Still, even being expert in the Constitution is insufficient. Critical thinking is also needed.

The following aphorism is attributable to, at least Daniel Moynihan and Thomas Jefferson: You’re entitled to your own opinions and your own fantasies but not your own facts—especially if your fantastical facts hurt people.

Understand that Kellyanne Conway was not offering alternative facts. There was no evidence underlying her facts. This is a further way that the water has been poisoned. Facts are being offered as facts for which there is no evidence. And all too often what is offered as evidence is in truth a fabrication.

Very often it is difficult determining what to believe. This is certainly true in scientific investigations where research may go on for decades or even centuries, before a consensus is achieved. Even after a consensus is accepted, scientists still should be open to a new theory if more evidence or a more comprehensive theory is offered.

Critical thinking is hard. Believing is much, much easier. The advance of mankind was very slow until the scientific method was developed that challenged beliefs and offered empirical evidence as an alternative. Technology is the result of this science. Perhaps it is a tad ironic that a product of the scientific method, the internet, is a tool for promoting disinformation and false beliefs.

There are a few keys that one can employ to facilitate critical thinking. Certain behaviors indicate which sources, be it individuals or publications, should be completely ignored. One is the claiming that information is false without offering alternative explanations supported by facts. Claiming conspiracies or witch hunts is another tool used by totalitarian dictators. Similarly, failing to allow access to individuals or documents indicates underlying guilt. Personal insults do not disguise the fact that a legitimate factual response is impossible.

The following passage comes from Hannah Arendt’s book, The Origins of Totalitarianism:
“A mixture of gullibility and cynicism have been an outstanding characteristic of mob mentality before it became an everyday phenomenon of masses. In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true…Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable evidence of their falsehood, they would take refuge in their cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness.”
Arendt published Origins of Totalitarianism when Stalin was in power and Hitler only six years gone.

The following is taken from FANTASYLAND: HOW AMERICAN WENT HAYWIRE: A 500-YEAR A 500-YEAR HISTORY by Kurt Andersen:
“The seven centuries of Greek civilization are divided into three eras—the Archaic, then the Classical, then the Hellenistic. During the first, the one depicted by Homer, Greeks’ understanding of existence defaulted to supernaturalism and the irrational. Then suddenly science and literature and all the superstar geniuses emerged—Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle—in the period we canonize as “ancient Greece.” But that astonishing era lasted less than two centuries, after which Athens returned to astrology and magical cures and alchemy, the end. Why? According to The Greeks and the Irrational, by the Oxford classicist Eric Dodd, it was because they finally found freedom too scary, frightened by the new idea that their lives and fates weren’t predestined or managed by gods and they really were on their own. Maybe America’s Classical period also lasted two centuries, 1800 to 2000, give or take a few decades on each end.”

So, for all who care about the United States, please engage your critical thought processes and build a growth mindset. This will benefit not only your memory, but also the survival of democracy in the United States.

© 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.

Economics

June 17, 2019

This is the seventh post based on a new book by Douglas Rushkoff titled “TEAM HUMAN.” The title of this post is identical to the title of the seventh section of this book.
Rushkoff writes, “What we now think of capitalism was born in the late Middle Ages, in the midst of a period of organic economic growth. Soldiers had just returned from the Crusades, having opened up new trade routes and bringing back innovations from foreign lands. One of them, from the Moorish bazaar, was the concept of ‘market money.’”

Prior to this time, European markets operated mostly through the direct exchange of goods, that is, barter, Gold coins were too scarce and valuable to spend on bread. Anyone who did have gold hoarded it. Market money let regular people sell their goods to each other. It was often issued in the morning, and then cashed in at the close of trading. Each unit of currency could represent a loaf of bread or a head of lettuce, and would be used by the seller of those items as a way of priming the pump for the day’s trade. The baker could go out early and buy the things he needed, using coupons good for a loaf of bread. Those coupons would slowly make their way back to the baker, who would exchange them for loaves of bread. This was an economy geared for the velocity of money, not the hoarding of capital. It distributed wealth so well that many former peasants rose to become the new merchant middle class. They worked for themselves, fewer days per week, with greater profits, and in better health than Europeans had ever enjoyed and as Rushkoff notes would not enjoy again for many centuries.

The aristocracy disliked this egalitarian development. When the peasants became self-sufficient, feudal lords lost their ability to extract value from them. Rushkoff notes that these wealthy families hadn’t created value in centuries, so they needed to change the rules of business to set this rising tide of wealth as well as their own demise.

So the aristocracy came up with two main innovations. The chartered monopoly was the first. It made it illegal for anyone to do business in a sector without an official charter from the king. So if you were not the king’s selected shoemaker, you had to close your business and become an employee of someone who was. Rushkoff writes, “The American Revolution was chiefly a response to such monopoly control by the British East India India Company. Colonists were free to grow cotton but forbidden from turning it into fabric or selling it to anyone but the company.” Clearly the colonists were being exploited. The East India Company transported the cotton back to England, where it was made into fabric, then shipped back to American and sold to the colonists. This monopoly charter was the progenitor of the modern corporation.

Central currency was the other main innovation. Market money was declared illegal; its use was punishable by death. People who wanted to transact had to borrow money from the central treasury, at interest. This allowed the aristocracy, who had money, to make money simply by lending it. Local markets collapsed. Money which had been a utility to promote the exchange of goods, instead became a way of extracting value from commerce.
Rushkoff writes, “That growth mandate remains with us today. Corporations must grow in order to pay back their investors. The companies themselves are just the conduits through which the operating system of central currency can execute its extraction routines. With each new round of growth, more money and value is delivered up from the real world of people and resources to those who have the monopoly on capital, That’s why it’s called capitalism.”

Rushkoff continues, “But corporations are not people. They are abstract, and can scale up infinitely to meet the demands of the debt-based economy. People can only work so hard or consume so much before we reach our limits, We are still part of the organic world, and subject to the laws of nature. Corporations know no such bounds, making them an awful lot like the digital technologies they are developing and inhabiting.”

Continuing further, “The pioneering philosopher of the political economy, Adam Smith, was well aware of the abstract nature of corporations—particularly large ones—and stressed that regulations would be necessary to keep them from destroying the marketplace, He argued that there are three factors of production, which must all be recognized as equally important: the land, on which we grow crops or extract resources; the labor, who till the soil or manufacture the goods; and, finally, the capital—either the money invested or the tools and machines purchased. He worried that in an abstract growth-based economy, the priorities of the capital would quickly overtake the other two, and that this, in turn, would begin to favor the largest corporate players over the local, human-scaled enterprises that fuel any real economy.”

Capital can keep growing, unlike land and humans. Moreover, it has to, because a growth-based economy always requires more money. And capital accomplishes this miracle growth by continually abstracting itself. If investors don’t want to wait three months for a stock to increase in value they can use a derivative—an abstraction—to purchase the future stock now. Should that that not be enough temporal compression, one can purchase a derivative of that derivative, and so on. Today, derivatives trading outpaces trading of real stocks. The New York Stock Exchange was actually purchased by its derivatives exchange in 2013. So the stock exchange, which is itself an abstraction of the real marketplace of goods and services, was purchased by its own abstraction.

In 1960, the CEO of a typical company made about 20 times as much as its average worker. Today, CEOs make 271 times the salary of the average worker. They probably would like to take less and share with their workers, but they don’t know how to give up the wealth safely. Thomas Jefferson once described the paradox of wanting to free his slaves but fearing their retribution if he did, “it’s like holding a wolf by the ear.”

Rushkoff ends this section as follows, “So with the blessings of much of the science industry and its collaborating futurists, corporations press on, accelerating civilization under the false premise that because things are looking better for the wealthiest beneficiaries, they must be better for everyone. Progress is good, they say. Any potential impediment to the frictionless ascent of technological and economic scale, such as the cost of labor, the limits of a particular market, the constraints of the planet, ethical misgivings, or human frailty—must be eliminated. The models would all work if only there weren’t people in the way. That’s why capitalism’s true believers are seeking someone,or better something, to do their bidding with greater intelligence and less empathy than humans.”

Figure and Ground

June 14, 2019

This is the fourth post based on a new book by Douglas Rushkoff titled “TEAM HUMAN.” The title of this post is identical to the title of the fourth section of this book. Rushkoff begins, “Human inventions often end up at cross purposes with their original intention—or even at cross purposes with humans, ourselves. Once an idea or an institution gains enough influence it changes the basic landscape. Instead of the invention serving people in some way, people spend their time and resources serving it. The original subject becomes the new object. Or, as we may effectively put it, the figure becomes the ground.”

The figure is that on which we focus, the ground is the background. And the perception of figure or ground can change in different circumstances or cultures. Most westerners when shown a picture of a cow in a pasture will see a picture of a cow. On the other hand most easterners will see a picture of a pasture. Their perceptions are so determined that people who see the figure may be oblivious to major changes in the background, and people who see the ground may not even remember what kind of animal was grazing there.

Rushkoff writes, “Neither perception is better nor worse, such much as incomplete. If the athlete sees herself as the only one that matters, she misses the value of her team—the ground on which she functions. If a company’s “human resources” officer sees the individual employee as nothing more than gear in the firm, he misses the value and autonomy of the particular person, the figure.”

Consider money. It was originally invented to store value and enable transactions. Money was the medium for the marketplace’s primary function of value exchange. Money was the ground, and the marketplace was the figure. Today, the dynamic is reversed: the acquisition of money itself has become the central goal, and the marketplace just a means of realizing that goal. Money has become the figure, and the marketplace full of people has become the ground.

Rushkoff writes, “Understanding this reversal makes it easier to perceive the absurdity of today’s destructive form of corporate capitalism. Corporations destroy the markets on which they depend, or sell off their most productive divisions to increase the bottom line on their quarterly reports. That’s because the main product of a company is no longer whatever it provides to consumers, but the shares it sells to investors. The figure has become the ground.”

Rushkoff says that the true legacy of the Industrial Age is to get people out of sight, or out of the way under the pretense of solving problem’s and making people’s lives easier. As an example Rushkoff considers Thomas Jefferson’s famous invention, the dumbwaiter. We think of it as a convenience: instead of carrying food and wine from the kitchen up to the dining room, the servants could place items into a small lift and convey it upstairs by pulling on ropes. Food and drink appeared as if by magic. But the purpose of the dumbwaiter had nothing to do with saving effort. Its true purpose was to hide the grotesque crime of slavery.

Rushkoff contends that in the Industrial Age there were many mechanical innovations, but in very few cases did they actually make production more efficient. They simply made human skill less important, so that laborers could be paid less.

Rushkoff contends that today Chinese laborers “finish” smartphones by wiping off any fingerprints with a highly toxic solvent proven to shorten the workers’ lives. That’s how valuable it is for consumers to believe that their devices have been assembled by magic rather than by the fingers of underpaid and poisoned children. Creating the illusion of no human involvement actually costs human lives.

The mass production of goods, requires mass marketing, which can be just as dehumanizing. Once products were moved from the people who made them, mass production separated the consumer from the producer, and replaced this human relationship with the brand. So where people once purchased oats from the miller down the block, now consumers go to the store and buy a box shipped from a thousand miles away. The brand image—in this case a Smiling Quaker—substitutes for the real human relationship, and is carefully designed to appeal to us more than a living person would.

When consumer culture was born, media technologies became the main way to persuade people to desire possessions over relationships and social status over social connections. The less fruitful the relationships in a person’s life, the better that person was for synthetic ones, thus undoing the social fabric.

Rushkoff writes, “Since the Industrial Age, technology has been used as a way to make humans less valued and essential to labor, business, and culture. This is the legacy that digital technology inherited.

Rushkoff concludes this section as follows: “…the new culture of contact enabled by digital networks was proving unprofitable and was replaced by an industry-wide ethos of “content is king.” Of course, content was not the message of the net; the social contact was. We were witnessing the first synaptic transmissions of a collective attempting to reach new levels of connectedness and wake itself up. But that higher goal was entirely unprofitable, so conversations between actual humans were relegated to the comments sections of articles or better, the reviews of products. If people were going to use the networks to communicate it had better be about a brand. Communities became affinity groups, organized around purchases rather than any sort of mutual aid. Actual “social” media was only allowed to flourish once the contact people made with one another became more valuable as data than the cost in missed shopping or viewing time. Content remained king, even if human beings were now that content.

Rest: Why You Get More Done When You Work Less

February 25, 2017

The title of this post is identical to the title of a new important book by Alex Soojung-Kim Pang.  HM wishes he had read this book a very long time ago, as he learned the lessons  of this book through personal pain.  HM’s original goal was co complete his bachelor’s degree in three years.  Unfortunately, he learned that his brain turned to mush trying to learn at that rate.  However, he did manage to earn his degree with distinction in psychology in 3.5 years.  Later during graduate school he would have liked to put in sixteen hour days working for his doctorate.  However, the mush brain problem surfaced again.  He could only work effectively for a limited number of hours.  The rest of the time he walked, swam, and went to bars.

What HM learned reading “Rest” that there is a limit of about four hours for effective mental work.  Moreover, non work time needs to be spent in restorative activities. Part I is titled Stimulating Creativity.  The titles of the chapter are Four Hours, Morning Routine, Walk, Nap, Stop, and Sleep.  Pang explains the importance of each of these topics to creativity and he documents their effectiveness by discussing the practices of famous scientists, mathematicians, novelists and other creative artists, and successful business people.

Part II is titles Sustaining Creativity and has chapter on Recovery, Exercise, Deep Play, Sabbaticals.  He again explains why these activities are restorative and provides interesting examples of the famous people who practiced them.

The book’s conclusion is titled The Restful Life.  It begins with the following quote from Thomas Jefferson:  “It is neither wealth nor splendor, but tranquility and occupation, which give happiness.”  So the book transcends working.  It is providing guidance for leading a fulfilling life.

HM’s primary complaint about the book is that the most effective practices for effective rest and restoration and for a fulfilling life are barely mentioned.  These are the practices of meditation and mindfulness.  The word “meditation” occurs five times and the word “mindfulness” only once.  This is most ironic because Pang’s previous book is “The Distraction Addiction.”  Ten healthy memory blog posts were based on this book. The final chapter pf this book is titled “Eight Steps to Contemplative Computing.”  Meditation and mindfulness are central to this work.  Why they are omitted from this book  is baffling.  Perhaps he thought that he had adequately covered mindfulness and meditation in that book.  Regardless, he should have cited that work in “Rest” and repeated the benefits of mindfulness and meditation.
© 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.

Risk Intelligence

November 11, 2014

Risk Intelligence: How to Live with Uncertainty is the title of a book by Dylan Evans. This title should immediately grab you attention as we must live with uncertainty. Actually our cognitive processes lead us to believe that we live in a world with much more certainty than there actually is. The first chapter begins with a quote by Thomas Jefferson: “He who knows best, best knows how little he knows.” And there is also the human tendency to think we know more than we know. I’ve found that in continuing my education through the Ph.D plus decades of additional experience and learning that I know much less than I thought I knew when I graduated from high school! I’ve discovered vast new landscapes of ignorance.

Given the ubiquity of risk, we might well as is there such a thing as risk intelligence and can it be measured? Given the title of the book, you will probability not be surprised to learn that the answer to both questions is yes, Evans book contains a Risk Intelligence (RQ)Test or you can go online to projectionpoint.com. There are also expert RQ tests targeted for specific areas of expertise.

A fear I had when I first encountered RQ tests was whether they would result in debates and research on the issue of whether RQ is innate or learned. Fortunately, RQ can be developed through education and training. Perhaps a good first step would be to read the book. Moreover, it has the additional merits of being interesting and entertaining.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2014. 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.