Behavior is motivated by desire to do or have something, either for pleasure or the relief of discomfort. Conflict is the perception that there’s a reason not to act on the desire. Temptations are desires that conflict with one or more of our goals. We resist temptations through exercising self-control.
Mozart, when asked, in effect, "how do you do it?!", responded: "I don't: it just happens - I have nothing to do with it."
Will and self-discipline matter, of course - but they don't generate, they prepare the field for generation. And they know when to get out of the way and when to rein in.
Although “wandering” conveys an impression of thoughts adrift, unanchored and chaotic, it may be more accurate to view such thoughts as triggered by a sense of concern and seeking some resolution. The Wandering Mind is theExploring Mind: exploring the problem space, a few moves at a time.
The basic message of the last few posts: climate change projections require assumptions about human behavior and these assumptions may be questionable. For instance, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has presented a “business-as-usual” trajectory of green house gas concentrations that would result in a mean global temperature rise of 3.7°C (2.6 to 4.8°C range) by 2100, meaning that such concentrations are plausible if present trends continue.
I've often suspected that one of the appeals of a Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) is the idea that in the ideal society, people would only do what they feel like doing and that people shouldn't feel compelled to do something they didn't feel like doing (a teenage boy utopia). Some think this ideal is about to be realized because work is going the way of the dinosaurs, thanks to robots.
I work in scientific research and have seen its dirty underbelly. Diving in headlong, full of idealism about the scientific method and its inherent humility.
“Coal is the slowest-growing energy source in the IEO2016 Reference case, with 0.6%/year average increases in total world coal consumption from 2012 to 2040, considerably slower than the 2.2%/year average over the past 30 years. The EIA forecasts declines from 40% of total generation in 2012 to 29% in 2040.” (IEA)
According to the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and 2011, gross median household income, adjusted for inflation, rose from $59,400 to $75,200, or 26.5%. However, once adjusted for household size and looking at taxes from an after-tax perspective, real median household income grew 46%.
Imaginary conversations and scenarios are like the brain running through hypotheticals and counterfactuals, just in case. The imagined events may never happen but something like them may and the process of playing them out in the brain is a kind of problem-solving exercise that can sharpen one’s readiness for whatever may come one’s way.
We replay moments of accomplishment in our heads to feel something – a sense of pride, confidence, or optimism. That feeling is expansive and diffuse. We also replay bad experiences but even if the motivation if partly to re-experience the emotion, there seems to be something else driving the impulse to go over and over the bad thing that happened. Something is wrong and we’re dwelling on the problem...
“Relishing” triumphs is another way of saying replaying them in our minds. It feels good and we replay these moments over and over to have that feeling again. Our relation to negative experiences is different...
Just like with speech, thoughts aren’t only about their literal content but also their function. Morin et al (2011) found that one function of inner speech was self-motivation. Some inner outbursts do serve to boost confidence by self-praise (“that was brilliant”!) or motivate corrective behavior by self-chastisement (“that was stupid”!).
Temporal discounting undermines persistence in the pursuit of difficult long-term goals. It's too bad that the period of life associated with temporal discounting - aka youth - is also the time of greatest potential for skill/expertise building, which, unfortunately, also requires self-control, grit, emotion management, and conscientiousness.
In terms of predicting climate change and its effects, it’s essential to get population projections right. And in terms of climate change mitigation, the fewer humans the better. Per O’Neill et al, every 1% decrease in global population would mean a 1% decrease in emissions.
According to the scientists who proposed RCP8.5 [the scariest projection of atmospheric GHG concentrations], its trajectory is plausible based on assumptions of “…low income, high population and high energy demand due to only modest improvements in energy intensity.” Are these assumptions reasonable based on current trends - that is, do they represent a plausible“business-as-usual” scenario? Let's look at income first.
The problem with providing grants, low-interest loans, tuition waivers, and free tuition is that they exert no pressure on educational institutions to increase efficiencies, productivity, or otherwise keep costs down.
One thing I love about the scientific mindset is its humility. Scientific proposals about the nature of reality are tentative, provisional, and mindful of their limitations. That very humility feeds the wonderful feeling of awe and adventure that accompanies the scientific quest to understand something better.
I’ve written a lot about the Basic Income Guarantee, aka BIG, which is a proposal that all adults get some non-means-tested check from the federal government every month. Arguments for the BIG come from both the left and the right. Progressives consider it a compassionate way to eliminate poverty. Libertarians see it as an efficient way to provide a safety net.
Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) represent possible trajectories of atmospheric concentrations of green house gases (GHGs) over the next century. The RCPs are named after their targeted heating effects. For instance, RCP8.5 represents a trajectory that could result in atmospheric heating of 8.5 watts per meter squared by 2100. RCP8.5 is the most extreme of the four RCPs considered by the IPCC. It projects a mean temperature rise of 3.7°C and a likely increase range of 2.6 to 4.8°C by 2100, wreaking all sorts of havoc along the way.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has laid out a range of scenarios for what might happen to the planet, atmosphere, biosphere, and human society over the course of the next century. These scenarios are based on different “Representative Concentration Pathways” (RCPs), each with its own story line about population growth, economic activity, land use patterns, energy use, lifestyle, climate policy, and mitigation efforts.