When you have strong opinions, you may be wrong. When you have weak opinions, you may be wrong. When you think it's all too complicated to have an opinion, you may be wrong. If you keep having the same kinds of opinions (strong, weak, oppositional), you'll probably over-relying on heuristics and not trying hard enough.
What is the difference between “awareness” and focal attention? Is “awareness” the same as “consciousness”?... Is “awareness” of online focal attention possible, i.e., awareness simultaneous with and distinct from focal attention? Or is “awareness” really the same thing as focal attention? And if we are “aware” of focal attending, is it simultaneous with the attending or awareness of attending that just passed? Please answer and get back to me.
Denmark’s generous safety net is made possible by high taxes – and not particularly progressive taxes at that. Kicking in at incomes of roughly $6300/year, the lowest tax rate is 37.5%. The highest rate is 59%, starting at about $50,400/year. Counting all sources of taxation, taxes comprise 49% of GDP – the highest in Europe.
Ignoring possible human suffering and death caused by climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts is no different than drone pilots disassociating from the effects of their bombing runs. Of course, sometimes drastic – and lethal – measures are justified. But trade-offs are involved – and if you care about human life, trade-offs must be seriously considered.
“The problem with free speech is that it’s hard, and self-censorship is the path of least resistance. But once you learn to keep yourself from voicing unwelcome thoughts, you forget how to think them – how to think freely at all – and ideas perish at conception.” George Packer, p.20, The New Yorker April 13, 2015.
We often talk about thoughts as if they were an outpouring of words, with word after word reeling off like widgets coming off an assembly line. When I hear my thoughts they are more like participants in a conversation. As social animals, our behaviors are often communicative acts. And that includes cognitive behavior.
Can one truly embrace the scientific method and revere religious masters or teachings as depositories of wisdom? If so, is that because one has assigned different epistemological realms to science and religion? Or does one try to explain religious sentiments as compatible with an attitude of scientific scrutiny?
Viewing humans as primates-mammals-animals-life forms, the concept of “enlightenment” and of “enlightened” beings seems strange to me. If enlightenment exists, could animals other than humans become enlightened? Why? Why not?
We know that a lot of people will die because of the havoc wreaked by climate change. The (WHO) estimates that between 2030 and 2050, climate change will cause roughly 250 000 additional deaths per year, from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhea and heat stress.
Denmark draws the lines differently. Pro-union doesn’t mean anti-business. Having a strong safety net doesn’t mean squeeze the rich. Maybe it’s more accurate to say that the lines are not there to begin with- that the ideal of ending poverty, facilitating economic mobility, and making sure everyone has access to the basics – healthcare, education, and family services – doesn’t have to pit Most of Us against a Despised Other (or at least an Undeserving Other).
Between “toxic” thoughts and feelings, unawareness, cancer-prone personalities, and just plain ol’ stress*, the unmindful among us are in mortal danger. Delicate homeostatic inner balance has been put to the service of New Age fear-mongering.
Climate change action priorities, simplified version: reduce green house gases, protect habitats, protect wildlife and protect humans. For this post, I’m going to focus on protecting humans – operationalized as reducing the extra deaths caused by climate change. A huge factor in reducing climate-change related deaths is economic development. Specifically, as GDP increases, mortality rates decrease. Mean death rates fall by 15% for every 10% increase in GDP. And we’re not just talking about old people getting a couple extra years: on average, a 10% increase in income means a 5% fall in infant mortality.
... Instead of thinking about political differences in terms of values, think of these differences in terms of priorities. Priorities are informed by multiple, often competing, goals based on multiple, often competing, values. Since multiple goals and values are involved, at least some are likely to be shared across the political spectrum.
The world places conflicting demands on our brains. When we are intentionally paying attention to sense impressions or tasks, “stimulus-independent-thought” (aka “tasked-unrelated-thought” aka “mind wandering”) is unable to proceed. This is because focusing on something taps into the same general cognitive resource, one which can only “handle only one coherent data stream at a time” (Teasdale et al 1995, p 38).
This is a continuation of the Denmark explorations. This time around, we’ll be checking out Denmark’s pension system.
...from the website Science or Not?
Cherry picking: “In cherry-picking, people use legitimate evidence, but not all of the evidence. They select segments of evidence that appear to support their argument and hide or ignore the rest of the evidence which tends to refute it.”
"Climate change could kill more than 500,000 adults in 2050 worldwide due to changes in diets and body weight from reduced crop productivity, according to new estimates. The research is the strongest evidence yet that climate change could have damaging consequences for food production and health worldwide." - Springmann et al (2016)
Summary so far: Denmark has an extensive safety net and high taxes. As per usual, the situation is a lot more complicated than the buzz. Last time we looked at the health care system. Now we’re going to take a closer look at unemployment benefits.
Self-control operates much like a cybernetic feedback system and includes 3 interacting components: the setpoint, a discrepancy, and the correction (or reduction of discrepancy).
To “accept” a thought that just unfolded and then to redirect attention to something else is a type of shallow processing. It’s like listening to the first few notes of a song and then turning your attention to something else – all you can really say is you heard a few notes, not the entire song. What you’re really doing is accepting little notes of thoughts. If you’re already pretty sure where those notes lead to and you don’t want to listen to the rest of the song, then there’s no need to listen to the whole thing. But acknowledge that this is “acceptance” writ small.