Viewing entries in
Explorations Outside
Over the multi-month exchange, this individual mocked and misrepresented counter-arguments and never budged from her original position. Nothing could penetrate her fortress of moral certainty or widen her perspective beyond a narrow moral reasoning. She repeatedly brushed off considerations such as evidence of culpability and constitutional protections as nothing but a smokescreen used by bad people to hide their bad values.
Retrieval practice forces ours brains to actively reconstruct knowledge, which boosts understanding and higher-order thinking like problem-solving and metacognitive awareness.
A final question: assuming the not-so-grim future is plausible, what needs to happen between now and then to make it a reality?
One would think if people truly cared about achieving a valued social good - say, the elimination of poverty - they would also sweat over the details as to how to achieve this social good without jeopardizing other social goods. Which means they and their shared-values fellows would be having robust and thoughtful arguments on policy, no consensus expected.
I am not quoting Paxton as the ultimate authority on fascism. No scholar is. Historians and political scientists (aka “experts”) differ in their definitions of fascism and opinions of Trump. However, I have noticed that definitions of fascism have morphed over time, perhaps repurposed to boost present-day relevance and create a tighter fit with current figures or political movements.
Just what is the American Dream? Depends on who you ask. Here’s a smattering of definitions, as well as some survey data on whether Americans still believe in the Dream, as defined by the survey makers and takers
James Truslow Adams is credited with coining the phrase ‘American Dream’ in his 1931 bestseller The Epic of America. Adams provided several definitions in his book, including “a dream of a better, richer and happier life for all our citizens of every rank” and “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement.”
Sensing danger increases vigilance and vigilant behavior discourages criminals by reducing opportunities (easy victims) and increasing costs (time, effort) relative to payoff (money, status, sex). Here are some examples of what I’m talking about…
I’ve often seen “perception” contrasted with “reality” as if they were mutually exclusive: perception versus reality. But perceptions don’t erupt out of nothing. They have some foundation in the real world. In the case of perceived public safety, that foundation includes…
If one wants to return to an issue in a conversation, one can simply say, “I’d like to return to subject xyz…” and then proceed to restate and elaborate the original subject. There’s no need to label the other person’s imputed intentions. And if that person keeps changing the subject, mention that and ask them why.
So, “emphasizing the absurdity and inequity of singling out a person to rake over the coals” for a common behavior is justified whataboutism? Basically, that’s the defense of pointing out double-standards and hypocrisy, which is usually condemned as just plain ole whataboutism
The term "whataboutism" first appeared in print in 1978, but wasn’t much used until 2007-2008, when British journalist Edward Lucas popularized the term in The Economist. The use of whataboutism in American political discourse increased sharply around the 2016 US presidential election…
The whys and what-fors of whataboutism accusations are the two sides of speech motivation: belief and purpose. Behind every utterance is a felt-truth - which may or may not be conscious or expressed - but the reason we actually say something is to achieve a goal. So what felt-truths are behind accusations of whataboutism, and what do the accusers hope to accomplish?
The accusation of whataboutism often stings, because it implies a moral deficiency in the accused. It’s less about logic and evidence than the accuser’s moral convictions.
But how do we know another’s intent? What appears to be an attempt to change the subject may actually be an attempt to improve the quality of a discussion, to add proper context or examine the speaker’s assumptions. Besides, what’s wrong with trying to redirect attention (“distract”) from a topic if one takes issue with how a claim is presented or defended and wants to sort that out first? And what’s wrong with pointing out double standards or hypocrisy?
So people go along to get along and cultures ossify. But every once in a while, alternative perspectives break through and the whole thing crumples, sometimes very quickly. That may be happening now, in America.
There are a few differences though: corporate statements about company culture or core values don’t mention devotion or commitment to the organization itself and they have little to say about individual fulfillment. They’re more about working together on a mission, e.g., customer satisfaction, better products, fixing problems. Patriotism is also about working together towards common goals (e.g., the “American Project”) but love of country (the overarching organization) is central. And in the U.S., love of country is bound up with its gift to the individual: liberty, opportunity, and the pursuit of happiness.
Information: “Any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts, data or opinions in any medium or form”. National Institute of Standards and Technology
Human behavior is the outcome of multicausal pathways. For example, in the theory of planned behavior, beliefs, intentions and perceived behavioral control are all parts of a causal chain that lead to a behavior, whether it’s cramming for an exam or stealing a car. The outcomes of behavior provide information relevant to beliefs, intentions and perceived behavioral control and so are part of the causal chain. Intervening at any point in the chain may change the behavior.
A root cause is not fixed: its effects are not fixed. What gets the ball rolling may not keep it going. What keeps it going may change. What keeps the ball rolling may lose potency with repetition, or be worn down by contrary forces. In other words, causal pathways are subject to decay.