Thursday, December 20, 2012

More "Personal Relationship with Jesus" thoughts


To say that one can have a personal relationship with Jesus is vague because what does this mean? If you have a personal relationship with someone you typically use one of your sensory apparatuses: your touch, your ears, your eyes, your nose and most importantly, your tongue. You use these to learn more about the other person and to “experience” them.

If you are not using one of your senses to interact with someone surely the experience you are having is inside your brain (perhaps a hallucination or just a strong, irrational case of wishful thinking).

“Ahh, but your brain is ultimately responsible for any and all of the senses you experience in the first place; a faulty brain can render certain fake experiences—that is, generate seemingly real experiences”. The religious individual might say this in an attempt to denigrate our reliance upon the human brain as a standard to draw accurate conclusions about reality (this seems nihilistic from my perspective).

The above is most certainly plausible. Perhaps the brain isn’t a reliable medium to gauge and represent the world around us.  However, since science has a comparison of a functional brain to a faulty brain, we can readily distinguish the difference and thus draw accurate conclusions about a functional brain and the results that it should produce (and vice versa). We don’t have to jump into the grand descent towards nihilism and “What can we know then?”

We know that a functional/healthy brain requires physical stimuli (physical (i.e. reality-based, drugs are physical too, remember) to respond—if Jesus is immaterial, how can the brain respond to him? Thus, how can you have a personal relationship with him?


Tuesday, December 11, 2012

A Christmas satire advertisement I wrote a few years back...


Christmas Package Picker
By Renee


 Those of us at Christmas Package picker understand the difficult experience of picking out acceptable presents for loved ones during the holiday season. Needless to say, most of us experience anxiety and panic attacks just thinking about furnishing that thoughtful, just-right gift for that special someone.  Nobody wants to contribute to friendship destruction, divorce or sudden death. Considering the extreme importance of material possessions this season and the bearing your special gift may have on your long-term future with your spouse or friend, Package Picker offers an easy way to avoid interpersonal family or friendship conflict.

Because bad gifts are usually the start to bad years, Package Picker makes extensive efforts to get the results you’re looking for by providing you with outstanding gift-giving options, most of them unsurpassed in originality.  We also have many thoughtful insights to offer you in all your gift hunting challenges.

Our reliable search engine will offer pointers on good gift giving vs. bad and also make creative, practical and highly laudable suggestions “Have you thought about getting her the plastic monkey that screams “I love you” when squeezed?  What about getting him that puzzle of a Christmas wreath? Everyone loves a mass-produced knitted Christmas sweater with snowflakes, Frosty and/or angels, so we offer one that has all three!  You could never go wrong here.

Instead of going for that cute purse, jeans in the brand she’s always wanted, modern musical electronic gizmos or a useful kitchen gadget, most women are fond of highly caloric, edible treats--especially during this holiday season where such edible goodies are often scarce.

Don’t forget about those fun, dangly Christmas tree earrings that can be worn for several weeks each year.  What about a pair of red socks with bells and little encrusted--albeit painful to walk on--sparkly sequins woven throughout the fabric?  Practicality and comfort is something we strive for here at Christmas Package Picker.

What about a deliciously aged, non-alcoholic fruit cake, studded with scores of nuts and fruits that are sure to get caught in your recipients teeth? When presenting this gift to a friend or loved one, make certain that they know the time and effort you spent making it and letting it age.  Ask them to brew some Folger’s coffee so the two of you can enjoy your fruitcake creation immediately.

Fake flower arrangements are a must during the holiday season.  Red and white silk carnations go well with plastic holiday ivy all made into one lovely bouquet. For a fun and exciting change, consider ordering a mauve or neon pink bouquet of silk carnations for that special someone.  These can be used all year and usually won’t wither.

Homemade gifts such as cards with cutouts and heapings of glitter, bath accessories or Christmas jellies that utilize your precious and limited “thoughtfulness” or “goodwill” are not your friends this season. Instead, Christmas Package picker presents a concoction of more original, heart-warming ideas. Consider getting your friend one of our enormous selections of impersonal gift cards to their favorite department store, such as Walmart or from any fast food restaurant that they haven’t complained about recently.

Christmas Package Picker also offers a wide selection of hip hop holiday tunes for that holiday bash you’ve been planning for decades.  We’ve made certain to include all your favorite Christmas classics and reformat them into more inviting, fashionable tunes, such as a nice medley of rap and country for your listening pleasure.  Only the coldest of hearts can resist a blend of Christmas country and rap.

Presenting 6 or 7 dozen Thomas Kinkade Christmas cottage paintings is sure to delight any scrupulous connoisseur of art.  Make it clear to your recipient that you’d like to see the paintings up year round.  Explain how the lovely pastel colors work well for the seasons of spring and summer too.

Did you receive a hideous gift last year and want to exchange it for a few quarters or put it towards a gift picked out randomly by Christmas Package Picker? Contact us!  We have a recycling program that is unparalleled in its efficiency and success.


If you like my "satire"...here is another WEIGHT LOSS SATIRE ADVERTISEMENT I wrote. Follow the link here:  http://asliceofmind-suva.blogspot.com/2010/12/weight-loss-advertisement-satire.html

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

How Anxiety Effects the Brain


“Being under pressure alters how different areas of the brain communicate. In a nutshell, the prefrontal cortex works less well and decouples—or stops talking to---other brain areas that are important for maximal cognitive horsepower.  When a particular brain area stops communicating with other areas, this can have dire consequences for our thinking and memory capabilities.” Sian Beilock, Choke 

Some people are more prone to worry, anxiety and self-doubt than others. As if these vexing feelings of inadequacy and lack of competence were not enough, the mental performance of these individuals is also negatively impacted.

According to Sian Beilock, an expert on cognitive science at the University of Chicago, a person suffering from worry will have diminished cognitive function. Specifically, the working memory of the self-doubting individual will be impaired, simply because they are perplexed with worry and anxiety.

When a person is overcome daily by worry, fears of failure and self-doubt (stressors to the brain) the prefrontal cortex of their brain is less able to communicate with other regions of the brain when performing cognitive tasks. It’s as if just the mere presence of worry shuts down the normally fluid connections between the various portions of the brain and the individual ends up with fewer mental reserves to draw from when performing intellectually demanding tasks. The anxiety-riddled person is truly at a disadvantage.

Sian Beliock discusses a very interesting study. Generally speaking, students with higher working memory tend to be more prone to worry and anxiety during tests whereas students with lower working memory experience less anxiety and worry during tests

It isn’t clear why people who score higher on tests of working memory are more prone to worry (especially during test-taking situations).

Could it be that individuals with higher working memory take things more seriously, internalizing test scores as diagnostic of their ability, which ends up creating an influx of worry? These students unwittingly create a “do or die” situation in their brain and worry intensifies. Once worry and self-doubt enter the brain, cognitive performance declines.

For those of us who are chronic worriers…self-doubters…it is very crucial to make efforts to work through this.  The book highlights the importance of venting—verbally expressing how one feels or, even better, writing down how you feel.  You need to find a way to prevent feelings of worry and inadequacy from entering. Because, once these feelings arise, they direct mental energy away from important cognitive functions—like coming up with a creative idea, performing well on a test, or playing a musical piece to perfection.

It is also a very good idea to avoid and actively ignore negative, critical people if you are a worrier. After all, you already have to deal with the harsh criticisms regularly generated by your own brain, you don’t need additional help from other people.

What's the good news? According to Beilock, for those of us continually plagued by worry, we are not performing at optimum cognitive capacity and there is GREAT room for improvement. (However, if you are not a worrier, you are probably already performing at your optimum cognitive capacity.)



Saturday, November 17, 2012

Happiness is...Lowering Your Expectations?



“The amount of pleasure and satisfaction we derive from experience has as much to do with how the experience relates to expectations as it does with the qualities of the experience itself.”   The Paradox of Choice, Barry Schwartz, 


Are many people unhappy these days due to the surfeit of choices? Developed nations are richer and offer their citizens more choices than at any other time in human history.  The internet offers us access to unlimited information, entertainment and things to spend our money on. Arranged marriages are becoming increasingly rare. Some grocery stores offer as many as 30 different types of jams and jellies.  Yet, despite so many choices, depression is on the rise in developed nations and people seem to be remarkably disappointed by many (or most) of their daily experiences and the choices they make.

As Barry Schwartz puts it in his book “The Paradox of Choice”

“If I’m right about the expectations of modern Americans about the quality of their experiences, almost every experience people have nowadays will be perceived as a disappointment, and thus regarded as a failure—a failure that could have been prevented with the right choice.”

Choices for education, careers, kitchen appliances and partners abound. Having many choices increases a person’s expectations of what is possible for them. This may set the individual up with such high expectations that almost any choice they do make, ends up being a disappointment in comparison to that amalgamated mental expectation that they had derived from all those choices they were exposed to.

I see it like this: When you have a lot of choices it results in you inadvertently summing up all the good qualities from the gamut of those choices.  At this point, you have the expectation that someone or something (job, career, education, mate, sex, kiss, hobby, dinner, fluffy cat, etc) will amount to your new, heightened expectation of it. If the person/thing/event is even just slightly less than your expectations, you experience emotionally negative feelings of disappointment and sometimes, bouts of depression.

If you live throughout every day with such high expectations, don’t plan on ever being extremely happy; plan on being regularly disappointed. The key to happiness is lowering your expectations and relating your experience to a situation that could be worse (not better). This action creates gratitude because then you are happy about your situation, realizing it could be much worse.

Happiness doesn't necessarily require fewer choices, but it does require the ability to modulate our expectations of those choices.  If you are one of those people who frequently says, “I’ve heard/seen/had better” you probably have high expectations and frequently experience disappointment/boredom/and/or lack of contentment in your life.

The more choices you have the more opportunity costs come at you, assault you, and niggle at your mind.  You may have been okay or happy with the one choice presented to you—but, when you have a bunch of choices presented to you and you make a choice, the choice that you do end up making becomes difficult (and less wonderful) because you are evaluating this choice in light of the other choices that were also available. You begin to reflect upon what you lost from not choosing any of those other choices. Disappointment ensues. 

According to the Barry Schwartz, high expectations (due to choices) and disappointment is very common--most people think in this way. The good news is that we can change this kind of thinking by resorting to downward couterfactuals. Downward counterfactual thinking is conjuring up states of existence that are worse than reality. So...basically...lower your expectations?

Thursday, October 18, 2012

In Group vs. Out Group thoughts...


“If an out-group member steps on my toes, I am more likely to say, “He is an inconsiderate person” though, with an in-group member I will describe the behavior exactly: “He stepped on my toes.” In contrast, an out-group member acting nicely is described specifically—“She gave me directions to the train station.”—while an in-group member is described as being “a helpful person”.The Folly of Fools, Robert Trivers, PhD Professor at Rutgers

In-Group vs. Out-Group behavior isn’t just found between differing religious/philosophical groups, differing socioeconomic backgrounds and differing ethnic groups, it is found in almost any setting where a “group” can form.  Consider how children “group up” in elementary and middle school. Consider the labels of “popular” and “unpopular” that children give to each other to serve as identification markers of who’s who.

 When you’re a child (between the ages of 8-16) and you are socially excluded from the popular students and their cliques, you start to make observations about group behavior. Of course, you, yourself, are not entirely dispassionate or free of bias, but you can definitely start to notice more things about group behavior from the outside. I would wager that these observations are more transparent and less affected by bias than from an in-group perspective. Why? Well, for one, you are less fraught by an emotional, irrational attachment to the group when you are on the outside. Being a loner, you have less reason to maintain cohesion with members.

As a child, what I noticed—often repeatedly---was how unfair and capricious the popular group members behaved and how inordinately arbitrary their responses were depending on who they were talking to.  For instance, I remember being talked to in a derogatory tone for asking a certain question, yet, if one of the in-group members asked a roughly similar question, they would elicit no such response. Instead, their questions were often acknowledged with kindness and a noticeable level of respect. Sometimes, the in-group member might try and rationalize that “my question was actually more stupid than the in-group member’s question” but in all reality, the difference of my question was insignificant compared to the difference in how they responded to me. The critical difference seemed to be that I wasn’t part of their group, thus, their response to me differed.

If you look carefully, you will start to notice this behavior exhibited by many people.  We all do it from time to time—irrationally treating our close friends’ ideas as superior to the stranger who proposes a similar or even identical idea. We might latch onto the “slight” difference in the stranger’s idea to justify our alliance to our in-group member (friend) instead.

 To observe this behavior among humans, pay special attention to how people respond to their friends ideas/behaviors/suggestions compared to how they respond to their acquaintances/strangers/homeless people/ people they’ve met for the first time/ comments, behaviors, and suggestions.   We all know that our close friends make mistakes—the question is, do we treat their mistakes with less harshness than we treat the similar mistakes of strangers or “out-group members”?

The in-group bias is one of my biggest pet-peeves because it interferes with truth and the acquisition of knowledge. It adds an extra layer on top of what is actually needed to examine. More specifically, the person—not what they’re saying—is factored into the equation. If your friend said something stupid and then a homeless guy said a similar thing, you may very likely treat the homeless guy with more derision than your friend—and that is irrational, not to mention obnoxious. 

 If you consider yourself a rational person your critique should be on what the person is saying—the objective facts being presented.  This is very hard to do.

Since the studies show that we are biased towards treating our friends and kin (group members) more kindly than outsiders, we must exert considerable effort to avoid doing this. We should always ask ourselves, is this individual being ridiculed because the facts he/she presents are anathema to current scientific analysis?... or because he/she isn’t a member of “our group” or maybe because we personally find this individual to be annoying?

 I would prefer that people treat each other equally. It doesn’t matter what they look like, whether they’re male or female, whether they are annoying or aloof, what they’re wearing, what they’re socioeconomic status is, whether or not they are friends with that person or what kind of cultural or ethnic background they have.  What matters is the claims that are made.  A person’s choice of words will always be unique, so what needs to be focused on are the specific claims presented.

If you don’t like the person you don’t like the person—but don’t try and twist it into a case of the other person (most-likely someone not in your group) being “stupid” or “unreasonable”--especially when your own group members are saying very similar things and receiving credit for very similar things.







Monday, October 8, 2012

The Mechanics of Lying


“The results have been remarkably consistent. When it comes to lie detection, the public might as well simply toss a coin. It doesn’t matter whether you are male or female, young or old, few people are able to detect deception with any degree of reliability.”
          Quirkology, Richard Wiseman


I’ve never accepted---nay, I’ve resented the common sense understanding that “Liars can be spotted by their lack of eye contact or their nervous body language, mannerisms and/or posture”.  While I don’t want to make this into a case of “I knew it all along” I have to say in this particular area, I’ve always questioned this notion. Thankfully, the studies reveal that body language and lack of eye contact are NOT strategies that a typical liar will resort to or employ subconsciously.

In his book Quirkology, author Richard Wiseman highlights a study conducted by Psychologist Charles Bond.  Bond wanted to find out why so many people tend to inaccurately predict when someone is lying by determining what the typical person thinks of as the best strategy of how to detect a lie.  So, what does the average person think of as the best way to “detect lies”?

“He asked thousands of people from more than sixty countries to describe how they go about telling whether someone is lying. People’s answers are remarkably consistent. From Algeria to Argentina, Germany to Ghana, Pakistan to Paraguay, almost everyone thinks that liars tend to avert their eyes, nervously wave their hands around and shift about in their seats.”

In fact, when examining the liars in the study, it was found“…liars are just as likely to look you in the eye as truth-tellers, they don’t move their hands around nervously and they don’t shift in their seats (if anything, they are a little more static than truth-tellers).”

Bond’s conclusion is that most people are unable to distinguish lies from truths because they base their criteria for duplicity on behaviors that are not associated with real deception.

How, then, does one spot a liar? Bond suggests that there is actually a language of lying.  Anyone can control their body language and their quantity of eye contact; what is more difficult to control Bond says, is “the words we use and how we use them.”

“Liars often distance themselves psychologically from their falsehoods, and so they tend to include FEWER references to themselves and their feelings and their stories."

Lies tend to be SHORTER and LESS DETAILED than truths. If you are lying, you are more likely to incriminate yourself if you add too many details and speak on and on about your story.  While liars tend to speak BRIEFLY and are less detailed in their descriptions, they do tend to memorize certain necessary (non-random) details to maintain their lies—details that non-liars wouldn’t bother memorizing.
"The most reliable signs of lying are in people’s voices and in their unconscious choices of language: THE LACK OF KEY DETAILS in their descriptions, the increase in pauses and hesitations and avoiding the use of the word “I."

Cognitive Load?

Another interesting facet of lying involves the nature of cognitive load.  In the book “The Folly of Fools” author Robert Trivers posits that cognitive load is the most important variable playing a role in deception.  

What is meant by cognitive load?  In the activity of lying, the brain must consciously attend to many important operations at once.  This takes a considerable amount of effort. Think about it, to lie successfully you must be able to suggest a plausible alternative to the actual truth, speak in a tone and manner that convinces the other person, remember certain important details of your story as it unfolds, say things that do not contradict information that the listener is aware of and you must have your story memorized to recall when the need arises.

What about blinking and nervousness?

Triver’s mentions another study regarding blinking and its response to cognitive load when one is deceiving another: “Recent studies of deception suggest that we blink less when we are deceiving—cognitive load rules.  Also, contrary to usual expectation, people fidget less in deceptive situations. While someone is nervous they will fidget more, but cognitive load has the opposite effect. ”

 In other words, since the brain has so much more to attend to while lying, there is less effort put out to perform the actions of blinking and feeling nervous. Nervous energy often comes from undirected “extra energy” that one has. When you are concentrating, that extra energy is focused towards the activity at hand (i.e. lying) instead of transpiring into nervous behaviors.  

My personal “take-home” lesson from these books on spotting liars.


1.  Look for brevity in their response—an avoidance to elaborate on the subject being questioned about (liars would rather change the subject—people telling the truth don’t have a problem discussing the issue at hand and the more words they use won’t increase the chances of contradictions or incoherencies in their story).
 2. Look for fewer details in their descriptions
3. Look for fewer self references—liars tend to avoid the use of the word “I”
4. Look at the particular kind of language (and lack thereof), and language pattern that the person chooses most always trumps their particular body language and quantity of eye contact.
5. Liars blink LESS often while deceiving.



Books I refer to in blog post:

Book: Quirkology, 2007
Author: Richard Wiseman, PhD—Professor of Public Understanding of Psychology at the University of Hertfordshire
Chapter: Trust Everyone but Always Cut the Cards (discussing lying)
Page: Starting at 57

Book: The Folly of Fools: The Logic of Deceit and Self-Deception in Human Life, 2011
Author: Robert Trivers, professor of Anthropology and Biological Sciences at Rutgers University, Winner of Crafoord Prize
Chapter: The Evolutionary Logic of Self Deception
Page:  11

Also, please read “Lying” by Sam Harris. Fantastic read!




Saturday, September 29, 2012

Characteristics of Over Confident People (link at bottom)


We have all heard the studies that suggest over-confident people are generally less competent than those who tend to be more modest (and less confident) in their evaluation of their abilities (Dunning Kruger effect). 

As someone who is reminded on a daily basis from co-workers, bosses etc who know me personally that I “need to exhibit more confidence and pride” I’ve always wondered, what exactly are those specific qualities that over-confident people exude? What kinds of behaviors and actions do these individuals display that give them an edge? Yes, according to the article, over-confident people are socially rewarded for simply being over-confident.  This is not to suggest that problems do not arise from our human tendency to elect the over-confident (possibly less competent) individual over the less-popular (likely more competent) individual.

It appears that over-confident individuals tend to exhibit the following:

“…videos revealed that overconfident individuals spoke more often, spoke with a confident vocal tone, provided more information and answers, and acted calmly and relaxed as they worked with their peers. In fact, overconfident individuals were more convincing in their displays of ability than individuals who were actually highly competent.”

 I guess this means we should never allow someone’s convincing display or “presentation” (smooth talk free of glitches and a “calm relaxed” way of handling oneself) trick us into thinking that they are automatically more capable or qualified (according to the studies, they are usually LESS competent).
  
One more fact discovered: Surprisingly, overconfident people were the most socially admired; these individuals were NOT thought of as narcissistic but instead, “beloved”.