Showing posts with label human mind. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human mind. Show all posts
Sunday, December 18, 2011
A remarkable talk by Mark Pagel.
A tiny number of ideas can go a long way, as we've seen. And the Internet makes that more and more likely. What's happening is that we might, in fact, be at a time in our history where we're being domesticated by these great big societal things, such as Facebook and the Internet. We're being domesticated by them, because fewer and fewer and fewer of us have to be innovators to get by. And so, in the cold calculus of evolution by natural selection, at no greater time in history than ever before, copiers are probably doing better than innovators. Because innovation is extraordinarily hard. My worry is that we could be moving in that direction, towards becoming more and more sort of docile copiers.
If you're scrambling for time, I recommend reading the transcript. Pagel posits a thought provoking argument, the evidence of which you 'll find within your own environment.
A related article appeared in The New York Times, earlier this year.
Very few people discuss ideas, fewer still, come up with newer ones. The what if quotient of our generation has suddenly plunged.
Television, print media, movies and books don't seem to be helping either.
I don't know if it's to do with information overload, shorter attention span, lack of incentive, lack of desire to engage in meaningful dialogue or a killer combination of all of these.
But it sure is unnerving to be moving towards zombieland.
A tiny number of ideas can go a long way, as we've seen. And the Internet makes that more and more likely. What's happening is that we might, in fact, be at a time in our history where we're being domesticated by these great big societal things, such as Facebook and the Internet. We're being domesticated by them, because fewer and fewer and fewer of us have to be innovators to get by. And so, in the cold calculus of evolution by natural selection, at no greater time in history than ever before, copiers are probably doing better than innovators. Because innovation is extraordinarily hard. My worry is that we could be moving in that direction, towards becoming more and more sort of docile copiers.
If you're scrambling for time, I recommend reading the transcript. Pagel posits a thought provoking argument, the evidence of which you 'll find within your own environment.
A related article appeared in The New York Times, earlier this year.
Very few people discuss ideas, fewer still, come up with newer ones. The what if quotient of our generation has suddenly plunged.
Television, print media, movies and books don't seem to be helping either.
I don't know if it's to do with information overload, shorter attention span, lack of incentive, lack of desire to engage in meaningful dialogue or a killer combination of all of these.
But it sure is unnerving to be moving towards zombieland.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Okay, so this link has been waiting its turn in my drafts, since the last one month.
A revealing read into the human mind, and how we respond to new facts, which maybe contrary to our beliefs.
Please make no mistakes - the article is refering to deeply held beliefs and not everyday opinions.
Ergo, I hope you realise that both of us have wasted precious time in trying to make each other see our individual point of view w.r.t. belief in God, Atheism, Chance, Karma, Luck and other affiliated terminologies.
This also means that religious fundamentalism may not be curable.
Dread.
Dread.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
An interesting study on how the human mind can solve problems faster.
To cut to the chase : we think in more abstract terms about distant problems (or problems belonging to distant people) — and thinking at a more abstract level produces more creative solutions.
This is also probably why doctors prefer not to operate on their relatives or why a Bollywood hero has sidekicks to help patao the heroine.
Link via Rucha.
Monday, February 21, 2011
So says this study by a few Harvard professors.
While I don't have anything intelligent to add, I do wonder why creative people could be more dishonest than the rest...
The only reason my mind comes up with : Our society is generally closed to "out of the box"/deviant ideas.
So, for creative people to get ahead and make semblance of a structured world, lying/cheating/being dishonest is the only way to live life on their own terms and get away with/be appreciated for their ideas?!
Or is it that people (creative or oherwise) are genetically coded to cheat/be dishonest and the creative lot just has an upper hand due to its innate ingenuity?
Link via Prasad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
