Skip to main content

Home/ All Things TOK/ Group items tagged believing

Rss Feed Group items tagged

anonymous

Patternicity: Finding Meaningful Patterns in Meaningless Noise: Scientific American - 0 views

  •  
    "Why do people see faces in nature, interpret window stains as human figures, hear voices in random sounds generated by electronic devices or find conspiracies in the daily news? A proximate cause is the priming effect, in which our brain and senses are prepared to interpret stimuli according to an expected model. UFOlogists see a face on Mars. Religionists see the Virgin Mary on the side of a building. Paranormalists hear dead people speaking to them through a radio receiver.\n1\nConspiracy theorists think 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush administration. Is there a deeper ultimate cause for why people believe such weird things? There is. I call it "patternicity," or the tendency to find meaningful patterns in meaningless noise."
anonymous

Freakonomics Radio: Do More Expensive Wines Taste Better? - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  •  
    "When you take a sip of Cabernet, what are you tasting? The grape? The tannins? The oak barrel? Or the price? Believe it or not, the most dominant flavor may be the dollars. Thanks to the work of some intrepid and wine-obsessed economists (yes, there is an American Association of Wine Economists), we are starting to gain a new understanding of the relationship between wine, critics and consumers."
  •  
    Thanks to Felix (TAS2010) for passing this one on!
anonymous

The War on Logic - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  •  
    "We are, I believe, witnessing something new in American politics. Last year, looking at claims that we can cut taxes, avoid cuts to any popular program and still balance the budget, I observed that Republicans seemed to have lost interest in the war on terror and shifted focus to the war on arithmetic. But now the G.O.P. has moved on to an even bigger project: the war on logic. "
anonymous

A Thrift-Shop Jackson Pollock Masterpiece? - 60 Minutes - CBS News - 0 views

  •  
    "Teri Horton is a 74-year-old retired truck driver with an eighth grade education. She likes to gamble a bit, and now she thinks she has hit the jackpot. Not in a casino, but in the high-stakes world of modern art. Teri isn't the kind of person who knows-or cares-much about art. But as CNN's Anderson Cooper reports, she has caused a stir in the upper reaches of the art world because of a painting she bought years ago, a painting she now believes is the work of the famous abstract expressionist Jackson Pollock. If Teri's painting is by Pollock, it would likely be worth tens of millions of dollars. Not bad, considering she bought it as a gift for a friend and only paid $5 for it in a thrift shop in San Bernardino, Calif."
anonymous

The New Humanism - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  •  
    "I've come to believe that these failures spring from a single failure: reliance on an overly simplistic view of human nature. We have a prevailing view in our society - not only in the policy world, but in many spheres - that we are divided creatures. Reason, which is trustworthy, is separate from the emotions, which are suspect. Society progresses to the extent that reason can suppress the passions. This has created a distortion in our culture. We emphasize things that are rational and conscious and are inarticulate about the processes down below. We are really good at talking about material things but bad at talking about emotion. When we raise our kids, we focus on the traits measured by grades and SAT scores. But when it comes to the most important things like character and how to build relationships, we often have nothing to say. Many of our public policies are proposed by experts who are comfortable only with correlations that can be measured, appropriated and quantified, and ignore everything else. Yet while we are trapped within this amputated view of human nature, a richer and deeper view is coming back into view. It is being brought to us by researchers across an array of diverse fields: neuroscience, psychology, sociology, behavioral economics and so on. "
anonymous

Invasive Amphibian Species Upend a Darwin Idea - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  •  
    "Charles Darwin has had a remarkable record over the past century, not only in the affirmation of evolution by natural selection, but in the number of his more specific ideas that have been proved correct. He may, however, have been wrong about invasive species, at least where amphibians are concerned. Darwin believed that when an invasive species entered a region where a closely related species already existed, it would most likely be unsuccessful because of a competition for resources. "Instead, we found the opposite pattern with amphibians," said Reid Tingley, a biologist at the University of Sydney. "When frogs and toads and salamanders invade an area where a similar species exists, they are more, not less, likely to establish themselves." "
  •  
    So, sometimes even Darwin's predictions turn out to be wrong!
anonymous

Language in Apes: How Much Do They Know and How Much Should We Teach Them - 0 views

  •  
    Humans have often asserted a fundamental difference between themselves and other animals. One of these assertions which has had many proponents into the twentieth century is that humans differ from animals in their use of language. In the past thirty years this assertion has been the subject of much debate as scientists have researched language use by apes. (I use the term "ape" to refer to "great ape" in this essay, as many of my sources do. There have apparently been no language experiments with gibbons or siamangs.) Extraordinary claims have been made by some researchers about the linguistic capabilities of their subjects, mostly chimpanzees. These claims have been refuted and counter-refuted many times, and the literature on the subject is extensive. In this essay I will examine the question of how much, if at all, primates are able to communicate using language. I will then examine the ethical issues surrounding the teaching of language to apes. What is language? First, what is language, and how does it differ from other forms of communication? There does not exist a universally accepted definition of language, or criteria for its use; this is one of the reasons for the disagreement among scientists about whether apes can use language. Language consists of various aspects which people believe are more or less important, for example, grammar, symbol usage, the ability to represent real-world situations, and the ability to articulate something new (Wallman 1992: 6). Duane Rumbaugh describes language as "an infinitely open system of communication" (Rumbaugh 1977b: xx). Some people say that anything an ape can do is not language; of course, if these are the same people who say that language defines us as humans, and an ape can learn sign language, then they are saying that deaf people who use sign language are not human (Patterson & Linden 1981: 119-120). One famous view of language is Charles Hockett's seven key properties: duality, productivity, arbitrariness,
anonymous

'Molyneux's question' gets answered after 300 years | Space, Military and Medicine | Ne... - 1 views

  •  
    "RESEARCHERS say they have solved a conundrum about human perception that has stumped philosophers and scientists alike for three centuries. Irish politician William Molyneux first posed the question in a letter to the great British thinker John Locke written 323 years ago. Imagine, Molyneux wrote, that a man blind from birth who has learned to identify objects - a sphere and a cube, for example - only through his sense of touch is suddenly able to see. The puzzle, he continued, is: "Whether he Could, by his Sight, and before he touch them, know which is the Globe and which the Cube?" For philosophers of the time, answering "Molyneux's question", as it became known, would resolve a fundamental uncertainty about the human mind. Empiricists believed that we are born blank slates, and become the sum total of our accumulated experience. So-called "nativists" countered that our minds are, from the outset, pre-stocked with ideas waiting to be activated by sight, sound and touch. If a blind man who miraculously recovered his sight could instantly distinguish the cube from the globe it would mean the knowledge was somehow innate, they argued. More recently, this "nurture vs. nature" debate has found its counterpart in modern neuroscience."
anonymous

Photo-Op - Believing Is Seeing - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  •  
    "The alteration of photos for propaganda purposes has been with us as long as photography itself; it is not an invention of the digital age. But while digitally altered photographs can easily fool the eye, they often leave telltale footprints that allow them to be unmasked as forgeries. There are many famous altered photographs, from a Matthew Brady photograph of Abraham Lincoln's head composited on to John Calhoun's body to the endlessly altered photographs from Soviet Russia. An entire book, "The Commissar Vanishes," by David King, is devoted to Soviet whims about who should be included (or deleted) in photographs. In the series shown above, Stalin is accompanied by three officials, then two, then one, as they successively fall out of favor and are cropped and airbrushed into non-existence. (In the end, in a painting based on the photograph, he stands alone.) We understand Stalin's intentions by removing comrades, but what is the purpose of these Iranian missile photographs? They are clearly altered. The question remains: Why, and to what end?"
anonymous

BBC News - 'Survival of fittest' is disputed - 1 views

    • anonymous
       
      Scientific theories are always subject to future questioning.
  • The new study proposes that really big evolutionary changes happen when animals move into empty areas of living space, not occupied by other animals.
  • This concept challenges the idea that intense competition for resources in overcrowded habitats is the major driving force of evolution. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote What is the impetus to occupy new portions of ecological space if not to avoid competition?” End Quote Professor Stephen Stearns Yale University Professor Mike Benton, a co-author on the study, explained that "competition did not play a big role in the overall pattern of evolution".
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • However, Professor Stephen Stearns, an evolutionary biologist at Yale University, US, told BBC News he "found the patterns interesting, but the interpretation problematic".
  • It proposes that Charles Darwin may have been wrong when he argued that competition was the major driving force of evolution.
  • But new research identifies the availability of "living space", rather than competition, as being of key importance for evolution.
  •  
    Isn't this kind of like the reading we had...with the Uncertainty of Knowledge assignment? It talks about how science theories can be true because we believe them to be true, but because time changes and everything is different all the time, they are always easy to be proven wrong, and subject to change. That is like what you said about scientific theories being subject to future questioning. What we perceive to be an atom may not be what Socrates perceived as an atom, or some scientist from year 3000 perceives it. Science is always changing and therefore I agree that the laws that are made are always "refinable".
anonymous

Basics - Primal, Acute and Easily Duped - Our Sense of Touch - NYTimes.com - 0 views

    • anonymous
       
      The tactile map is not the territory...we always change what we come into contact with by our very presence; the observer effect.
  • The signals from the various touch receptors converge on the brain and sketch out a so-called somatosensory homunculus, a highly plastic internal representation of the body. Like any map, the homunculus exaggerates some features and downplays others.
    • anonymous
       
      Even our internat tactile maps of ourselves are not the true territory of our bodies.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • But on some tactile tasks, touch is all thumbs. When people are given a raised line drawing of a common object, a bas-relief outline of, say, a screwdriver, they’re stumped. “If all we’ve got is contour information,” Dr. Lederman said, “no weight, no texture, no thermal information, well, we’re very, very bad with that.”
    • anonymous
       
      Touch, like all senses, is best used in concert with the others.
  • Touch also turns out to be easy to fool. Among the sensory tricks now being investigated is something called the Pinocchio illusion. Researchers have found that if they vibrate the tendon of the biceps, many people report feeling that their forearm is getting longer, their hand drifting ever further from their elbow. And if they are told to touch the forefinger of the vibrated arm to the tip of their nose, they feel as though their nose was lengthening, too.
    • anonymous
       
      We'll discuss illusions in class, I've never been able to get the Pinocchio illusion to work but we can try it.
  • People who watch a rubber hand being stroked while the same treatment is applied to one of their own hands kept out of view quickly come to believe that the rubber prosthesis is the real thing, and will wince with pain at the sight of a hammer slamming into it.
    • anonymous
       
      This one we can try in class, but I lost my prosthetic hand last year.
  • Biologically, chronologically, allegorically and delusionally, touch is the mother of all sensory systems. It is an ancient sense in evolution: even the simplest single-celled organisms can feel when something brushes up against them and will respond by nudging closer or pulling away. It is the first sense aroused during a baby’s gestation and the last sense to fade at life’s culmination. Patients in a deep vegetative coma who seem otherwise lost to the world will show skin responsiveness when touched by a nurse.
  • “Touch is so central to what we are, to the feeling of being ourselves, that we almost cannot imagine ourselves without it,” said Chris Dijkerman, a neuropsychologist at the Helmholtz Institute of Utrecht University in the Netherlands. “It’s not like vision, where you close your eyes and you don’t see anything. You can’t do that with touch. It’s always there.”
  • For all its antiquity and constancy, touch is not passive or primitive or stuck in its ways. It is our most active sense, our means of seizing the world and experiencing it, quite literally, first hand. Susan J. Lederman, a professor of psychology at Queen’s University in Canada, pointed out that while we can perceive something visually or acoustically from a distance and without really trying, if we want to learn about something tactilely, we must make a move. We must rub the fabric, pet the cat, squeeze the Charmin. And with every touchy foray, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle looms large. “Contact is a two-way street, and that’s not true for vision or audition,” Dr. Lederman said. “If you have a soft object and you squeeze it, you change its shape. The physical world reacts back.”
anonymous

To Slow Speeders, Philadelphia Tries Make-Believe - NYTimes.com - 1 views

  •  
    Fake speed humps, as flat as the street, but designed to appear three-dimensional, fool drivers into slowing down.
  •  
    Are these Philly speed bump illusions better than Vancouver's? Does this suggest that Canadians are just plain demented? For more on Canadians: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pILPiB-07uI
anonymous

Does Your Language Shape How You Think? - NYTimes.com - 6 views

  •  
    The idea that your mother tongue shapes your experience of the world may be true after all.
anonymous

Retracting a Medical Journal's Autism Study - Well Blog - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  • The study was retracted after concerns about ethical breaches by one of the study authors. In addition, 10 of the 13 co-authors have disavowed the study’s conclusions. ”We fully retract this paper from the published record,” The Lancet editors said in a statement. But the damage has been done. The paper has fueled fears about the risks of childhood vaccinations and autism, particularly the M.M.R. vaccine, despite numerous studies showing no link.
  • So I think yeah, too much information in this particular case is a bad thing, which seems to go against every kind of democratic principle that we believe in. But in the case of science, it seems to be true.
  •  
    Last week, the highly regarded medical journal, The Lancet, retracted a much debated 1998 study that had linked the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to autism. The study was retracted after concerns about ethical breaches by one of the study authors. In addition, 10 of the 13 co-authors have disavowed the study's conclusions. "We fully retract this paper from the published record," The Lancet editors said in a statement. But the damage has been done. The paper has fueled fears about the risks of childhood vaccinations and autism, particularly the M.M.R. vaccine, despite numerous studies showing no link.
anonymous

YouTube - The Rubber Hand Illusion - Horizon: Is Seeing Believing? - BBC Two - 1 views

  •  
    "Horizon explores the strange and wonderful world of illusions - and reveals the tricks they play on our senses and why they fool us."
anonymous

The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science | Mother Jones - 0 views

  •  
    "In the annals of denial, it doesn't get much more extreme than the Seekers. They lost their jobs, the press mocked them, and there were efforts to keep them away from impressionable young minds. But while Martin's space cult might lie at on the far end of the spectrum of human self-delusion, there's plenty to go around. And since Festinger's day, an array of new discoveries in psychology and neuroscience has further demonstrated how our preexisting beliefs, far more than any new facts, can skew our thoughts and even color what we consider our most dispassionate and logical conclusions. This tendency toward so-called "motivated reasoning" helps explain why we find groups so polarized over matters where the evidence is so unequivocal: climate change, vaccines, "death panels," the birthplace and religion of the president (PDF), and much else. It would seem that expecting people to be convinced by the facts flies in the face of, you know, the facts. The theory of motivated reasoning builds on a key insight of modern neuroscience (PDF): Reasoning is actually suffused with emotion (or what researchers often call "affect"). Not only are the two inseparable, but our positive or negative feelings about people, things, and ideas arise much more rapidly than our conscious thoughts, in a matter of milliseconds-fast enough to detect with an EEG device, but long before we're aware of it. That shouldn't be surprising: Evolution required us to react very quickly to stimuli in our environment. It's a "basic human survival skill," explains political scientist Arthur Lupia of the University of Michigan. We push threatening information away; we pull friendly information close. We apply fight-or-flight reflexes not only to predators, but to data itself."
‹ Previous 21 - 37 of 37
Showing 20 items per page