scandal
“i know things they don’t know!” the role of need for uniqueness in belief in conspiracy theories
anthony lantian et al. 2017
https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000306
too special to be duped: need for uniqueness motivates conspiracy beliefs
roland imhoff, pia karoline lamberty 2017
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265
お願いナビゲーション
onegai navigation
one piece
the elephant in the brain hidden motives in everyday life
kevin simler and robin hanson
to read next
confabulation: why telling ourselves stories makes us feel ok
lisa bortolotti 2018
https://aeon.co/ideas/confabulation-why-telling-ourselves-stories-makes-us-feel-ok
irrationality
lisa bortolotti 2015 9780745687278
irrationality: the enemy within
stuart sutherland 1992
the irrational ape: why flawed logic puts us all at risk and how critical thinking can save the world
david robert grimes 2019 not yet read
オレンジジュース
orange juice
social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends
douglas guilbeault et al. 2018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1722664115
“But,” Centola adds, “the biggest surprise — and perhaps our biggest lesson — came from how fragile it all was. The improvements vanished completely with the mere suggestion of political party. All we did was put a picture of an elephant and a donkey at the bottom of a screen, and all the social learning effects disappeared. Participants’ inaccurate beliefs and high levels of polarization remained.”
That last finding reveals that even inconspicuous elements of a social media environment or of a media broadcast can hinder bipartisan communications. “Simple ways of framing a political conversation, like incorporating political iconography, can significantly increase the likelihood of polarization,” Guilbeault says.
Instead, Centola says, put people into situations that remove the political backdrop. “Most of us are biased in one way or another. It’s often unavoidable. But, if you eliminate the symbols that drive people into their political camps and let them talk to each other, people have a natural instinct to learn from one another. And that can go a long way toward lessening partisan conflict.”
Vital scientific communications are frequently misinterpreted by the lay public as a result of motivated reasoning, where people misconstrue data to fit their political and psychological biases. In the case of climate change, some people have been found to systematically misinterpret climate data in ways that conflict with the intended message of climate scientists. While prior studies have attempted to reduce motivated reasoning through bipartisan communication networks, these networks have also been found to exacerbate bias. Popular theories hold that bipartisan networks amplify bias by exposing people to opposing beliefs. These theories are in tension with collective intelligence research, which shows that exchanging beliefs in social networks can facilitate social learning, thereby improving individual and group judgments. However, prior experiments in collective intelligence have relied almost exclusively on neutral questions that do not engage motivated reasoning. Using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, we conducted an online experiment to test how bipartisan social networks can influence subjects’ interpretation of climate communications from NASA. Here, we show that exposure to opposing beliefs in structured bipartisan social networks substantially improved the accuracy of judgments among both conservatives and liberals, eliminating belief polarization. However, we also find that social learning can be reduced, and belief polarization maintained, as a result of partisan priming. We find that increasing the salience of partisanship during communication, both through exposure to the logos of political parties and through exposure to the political identities of network peers, can significantly reduce social learning.
false beliefs and confabulation can lead to lasting changes in political attitudes
thomas strandberg et al. 2018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000489
The results showed that when participants initially accepted the manipulated responses as their own, their attitudes later on shifted significantly in the direction of the manipulation. However, responses to questions that had not been manipulated kept the same position throughout all the questionnaires.
“This is of particular interest given that it’s the first time lasting attitude change from choice blindness has been shown. Importantly, it shows how false beliefs, and feedback about those beliefs, can powerfully shape the interpretation and memories about one’s political opinions.” Philip Pärnamets, researcher at Karolinska Institutet, points out.
“It seems that part of what it might mean to hold a political attitude is to be able to draw on memories of having stated that attitude. In a sense, me being against tax cuts might result from me remembering having expressed that attitude previously. Using our manipulation, we are able to alter the participants beliefs about themselves, and we find that this leads them to change their attitudes,” he explains.
When comparing those participants that only verified their answers with those who also gave supporting arguments, the researchers found that both groups exhibited lasting opinion changes, but that the effect was much larger for the participants who provided arguments.
“When people argue for a manipulated answer, we know that regardless of what they say, it cannot possibly be the reason for their original choice. This type of confabulation has hardly been studied outside the clinical context, but perhaps it is something we constantly do in our ordinary lives,” main author Thomas Strandberg says.
“We also found that people who started to argue for a manipulated answer, but then suddenly stopped to correct it, still modified their opinions somewhat. These smaller shifts need to be further investigated, but it suggests that even seemingly innocuous amounts of confabulation can impact our attitudes,” he continues.
“On a more positive note, in the current political climate of increasing polarization and ideological hostility, our study shows that people truly have the potential to be flexible in their political views. All that is needed is a way, like choice blindness does, to invite people to reason openly, and unleash their own powers of argumentation,” Thomas Strandberg concludes.
In times of increasing polarization and political acrimony, fueled by distrust of government and media disinformation, it is ever more important to understand the cognitive mechanisms behind political attitude change. In two experiments, we present evidence that false beliefs about one’s own prior attitudes and confabulatory reasoning can lead to lasting changes in political attitudes. In Experiment 1 (N = 140), participants stated their opinions about salient political issues, and using the Choice Blindness Paradigm we covertly altered some of their responses to indicate an opposite position. In the first condition, we asked the participants to immediately verify the manipulated responses, and in the second, we also asked them to provide underlying arguments behind their attitudes. Only half of the manipulations were corrected by the participants. To measure lasting attitude change, we asked the participants to rate the same issues again later in the experiment, as well as one week after the first session. Participants in both conditions exhibited lasting shifts in attitudes, but the effect was considerably larger in the group that confabulated supporting arguments. We fully replicated these findings in Experiment 2 (N = 232). In addition, we found that participants’ analytical skill correlated with their correction of the manipulation, whereas political involvement did not. This study contributes to the understanding of how confabulatory reasoning and self-perceptive processes can interact in lasting attitude change. It also highlights how political expressions can be both stable in the context of everyday life, yet flexible when argumentative processes are engaged.
over drive
oyasumi
Link: youtube.com/watch
cues to lying may be deceptive: speaker and listener behaviour in an interactive game of deception
jia e. loy et al. 2018
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.46
a test of the micro‐expressions training tool: does it improve lie detection?
sarah jordan et al. 2019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jip.1532
answer: no. so whose interests does it serve for this false belief is promoted?
Developed by an influential U.S. psychologist, the Micro-Expressions Training Tool, or METT, inspired the hit TV show Lie to Me, which revolved around the uncanny ability of its lead character to tell truth from falsehood by analysing minute facial tics. And in the real world, METT is being used to train airport personnel to spot people who pose potential security risks.
But a research project involving a University of Huddersfield lecturer has concluded that METT training fails to improve lie detection rates beyond levels that can be achieved by guesswork.
The verdict is reported in a new article which concludes that the failure of METT is highly problematic "given that training in the recognition of micro-expressions composes a large part of a screening system that has become ever more pervasive in our aviation security."
METT is now an element of the Screening Passengers by Observation Technique (SPOT) used in airport security in the USA. This meant that research into its effectiveness was critical, state the article's authors.
One of them is the University of Huddersfield's Reader in Cognitive Psychology Dr Chris Street, who has made a speciality out of lie detection. He formed a collaboration with colleagues at two universities in the USA who had decided to carry out the first known full test of METT as a lie detection tool.
The findings are revealed in an article that appears in the Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling.
METT-trained individuals performed no better
METT was developed by the psychologist Dr Paul Ekman, whose research group was the inspiration for TV series Lie to Me, starring Tim Roth. It is a form of training that aims to improve the detection of the micro-expressions sadness, anger, fear, disgust, contempt and happiness -- fleeting expressions can last for as little as half a second.
"Recognising micro-expressions may have some utility as an aid for better recognising facial expressions, but it is more prominently promoted as a potential to aid in detecting deception," according to the new article, which then goes on to state that its research "does not paint an optimistic picture for the utility of METT."
The article describes the research process, which involved 90 students at a U.S. university. Some were randomly selected to receive METT training and some received bogus "placebo" training or none at all. They were shown stimulus videos containing truths and lies, taken from five different deception detection studies. One them was developed by Dr Street and colleagues.
The success rate of participants in telling truth from lies was then compiled. One of the findings was that METT-trained individuals performed no better than those who received bogus or no training and indeed performed worse than chance -- "guessing would have produced marginally better results."
Commenting on the research project, Dr Street said: "METT is something that most people in the field felt didn't really hold up. The Ekman group argue that these micro-expressions help you to detect lies. But there really hasn't been any evidence to that effect. The problem now is that it has been brought into government usage in the U.S."
abstract The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of the micro‐expressions training tool (METT) in identifying and using micro‐expressions to improve lie detection. Participants (n = 90) were randomly assigned to receive training in micro‐expressions recognition, a bogus control training, or no training. All participants made veracity judgements of five randomly selected videos of targets providing deceptive or truthful statements. With the use of the Bayesian analyses, we found that the METT group did not outperform those in the bogus training and no training groups. Further, overall accuracy was slightly below chance. Implications of these results are discussed.
ピンヒールサーファー
pinheel surfer
party
片平里菜 x scandal
a distinct inferential mechanism for delusions in schizophrenia
seth c baker et al. 2019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/awz051
An estimated 80-90 percent of individuals with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders experience delusions -- false, but strongly held, beliefs that can be distressing and debilitating. Researchers have long suspected that delusions are caused by alterations in the ability to make inferences, which relies on observable evidence to shape beliefs. However, previous experiments have suggested that other cognitive processes may be involved.
"The experiments typically used to understand the link between inference and delusions have focused on cognitive and decision-making skills, but they haven't conclusively shown a link between inference-making and delusion severity," says Guillermo Horga, MD, PhD, the Florence Irving Assistant Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and lead author of the paper. "We developed a novel experiment to determine whether delusions stem from abnormalities in inference."
In the experiment, Horga and his team asked 26 adults with schizophrenia, including 12 who were being treated with antipsychotic medications, and 25 healthy individuals to draw beads from one of two hidden jars. Participants were given money, which could be used to bet on the identity of the hidden jar. They were told that drawing additional beads would help them bet correctly, though it would diminish their winnings. Throughout the experiment, they were asked to rate the odds of their bet on the identity of the jar.
"We found that patients who experienced more severe delusions tended to seek more information in the task before making a guess than their less-delusional counterparts. This is a truly novel finding, and it helps confirm the fact that rigidity is an important part of delusional beliefs," says Horga.
Using computational modeling, the researchers developed a quantitative framework casting delusions as "sticky" beliefs that evolve in an unusually slow way. This may explain why delusional patients seek more information than non-delusional individuals. It could also help to identify new treatment approaches, such as neurostimulation of the prefrontal brain areas involved in updating beliefs, or cognitive training to shape inference-making.
"Previous work suggested that psychotic patients 'jump to conclusions,' but in our study we saw that individuals with more delusional beliefs took more beads from the jar before they made up their minds," Horga continues. "While participants with schizophrenia jumped to conclusions more than healthy individuals, delusions specifically were associated with slower change in individuals' beliefs."
Jeffrey Lieberman, MD, Lawrence C. Kolb Professor and Chairman of Psychiatry at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, commented that "delusions are among the most common and intractable symptoms of psychotic disorders. This innovative research casts delusions in a new context which allows for novel cognitive therapeutic approaches aimed at preventing and disrupting delusional thoughts."
abstract Delusions, a core symptom of psychosis, are false beliefs that are rigidly held with strong conviction despite contradictory evidence. Alterations in inferential processes have long been proposed to underlie delusional pathology, but previous attempts to show this have failed to yield compelling evidence for a specific relationship between inferential abnormalities and delusional severity in schizophrenia. Using a novel, incentivized information-sampling task (a modified version of the beads task), alongside well-characterized decision-making tasks, we sought a mechanistic understanding of delusions in a sample of medicated and unmedicated patients with schizophrenia who exhibited a wide range of delusion severity. In this novel task, participants chose whether to draw beads from one of two hidden jars or to guess the identity of the hidden jar, in order to minimize financial loss from a monetary endowment, and concurrently reported their probability estimates for the hidden jar. We found that patients with higher delusion severity exhibited increased information seeking (i.e. increased draws-to-decision behaviour). This increase was highly specific to delusion severity as compared to the severity of other psychotic symptoms, working-memory capacity, and other clinical and socio-demographic characteristics. Delusion-related increases in information seeking were present in unmedicated patients, indicating that they were unlikely due to antipsychotic medication. In addition, after adjusting for delusion severity, patients as a whole exhibited decreased information seeking relative to healthy individuals, a decrease that correlated with lower socioeconomic status. Computational analyses of reported probability estimates further showed that more delusional patients exhibited abnormal belief updating characterized by stronger reliance on prior beliefs formed early in the inferential process, a feature that correlated with increased information seeking in patients. Other decision-making parameters that could have theoretically explained the delusion effects, such as those related to subjective valuation, were uncorrelated with both delusional severity and information seeking among the patients. In turn, we found some preliminary evidence that subjective valuation (rather than belief updating) may explain group differences in information seeking unrelated to delusions. Together, these results suggest that abnormalities in belief updating, characterized by stronger reliance on prior beliefs formed by incorporating information presented earlier in the inferential process, may be a core computational mechanism of delusional ideation in psychosis. Our results thus provide direct empirical support for an inferential mechanism that naturally captures the characteristic rigidity associated with delusional beliefs.
pride
live
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
mv
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
new conspiracy theory convinces anti-vaxxer mom to vaccinate her child
https://www.boredpanda.com/pediatrician-anti-vaccination-parent-conspiracy-theory/
place of life
scandal ft. tetsuya komuro
how one of the internet’s biggest history forums deals with holocaust deniers
johannes breit et al. 2019
https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/the-askhistorians-subreddit-banned-holocaust-deniers-and-facebook-should-too.html
プレイボーイ part II
playboy part II
understanding and countering the motivated roots of climate change denial
gabrielle wong-parodi, irina feygina 2020
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.11.008
Denying the effects of climate change serves as a barrier to taking the actions needed to mitigate the worst effects, including rising seas, more intense hurricanes and increased droughts and heatwaves. However, the researchers found that those who deny human causes for climate change can be swayed through conversations that appeal to their different identities, reframe solutions — or even embrace their climate views.
“I think in the climate change sphere there’s this thinking of, ‘there’s the deniers over there, let’s just not even engage with them — it’s not worth it,’” said behavioral scientist Gabrielle Wong-Parodi, lead author of the paper published in Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability Jan. 8. “A lot of the tactics and strategies start from the point that something is wrong with the climate deniers, rather than trying to acknowledge that they have a belief and opinion and it matters. But I think there is an opportunity to keep trying to understand one another, especially now.”
The researchers focused on what is referred to as “motivated denial” — knowing or having access to the facts, but nevertheless denying them. For some people, accepting that humans cause climate change questions self-worth, threatens financial institutions and is accompanied by an overwhelming sense of responsibility.
Although efforts to sway climate deniers may seem futile, the researchers found four approaches in peer-reviewed studies from the past two years that could be most effective:
• 1. Reframing solutions to climate change as ways to uphold the social system and work toward its stability and longevity 2. Reducing the ideological divide by incorporating the purity of the Earth, rather than how we harm or care for it
abstract Action on climate change is currently minimal, and woefully inadequate for steering away from its worst trajectories and impacts. Psychological science offers insights into the causes of climate change denial and reluctance to engage with solutions, and identifies avenues for enhancing climate acceptance and engagement. We review psychological processes that underlie denial, and survey promising directions for fostering support for solutions. We draw largely on studies conducted in the United States, whose population is exceptionally high on climate denial and disengagement, and where the majority of research has focused. However, these approaches provide insight into underlying psychological dynamics that can inform broader efforts to engage audiences with climate change.
queens are trumps
the terfs are going mainstream; inside my local terf group
kelly lawrence 2020
transiness.com/post/the-terfs-are-going-mainstream-inside-my-local-terf-group
The TERFS are Going Mainstream; Inside My Local TERF Group
I’ve been hesitating about this post for a while, and for a variety of reasons. However, watching the reactions of TERF and SWERF groups to the recent #BlackLivesMatter protests, and attempts by the trans and sex worker movements to bring attention to the discrimination and police brutality suffered by black and trans sex workers, I knew now was the time to post. The fact that local ‘gender-critical’ feminist groups are now popping up everywhere and organising over social media (including, of course, Mumsnet) is something that I believe needs drawing attention to if we are to fully combat the insidious reach of this ideological cult.
I have written previously about my experience with abolitionist feminists as a survivor of abuse within the sex industry and a former sex worker, and how I was initially sucked in by their claims to want to liberate women from abuse. I have mentioned how these ‘feminists’ were always the same women who described themselves as ‘gender critical’ and against Self-ID, and how this always descended into abject mockery of trans women. Perhaps out of shame at my own complicity in this for a time, I have resisted writing in great detail about this aspect. But as the movement continues to grow and transphobia to rise, I cannot stay silent.
No doubt, another reason I have resisted writing is because I counted some of these women as my friends. I feel a sense of ‘being a traitor’ in writing this - something the trolls have already accused me of simply for turning my back on the Nordic Model. But it is my hope that at least some of those women, if they see this, will take some time to reflect on their damaging and harmful beliefs.


I was invited to join a local feminist group by a woman I knew quite well, which she had organised over Facebook. The main thrust of the group was that it was radical feminist, and the consensus was that trans women were not allowed (yet they still insisted that the incredibly apt acronym ‘TERF’ was a slur). My friend had herself come to this conclusion by going to radfem conferences, reading their writings and joining groups on social media. She sent me a lot of information on how TRAs (trans rights activists) were forming cults and seeking to take over women’s spaces and even get rid of the word ‘woman.’ But all of the trans women I had known and loved were nothing like this, I protested. I was told this was different, that there was an insidious and well funded lobby that were seeking to roll back women’s rights and were none other than ‘mens rights activists in dresses.’ Quite why I gave this any consideration, looking back, I don’t truly understand. I was in the grip of the abolos at this point and going through some severe trauma processing, but this is really no excuse for being so gullible.
The group was named ‘FWOC’ for ‘Feminist Women of Coventry’ and consisted of all white and predominantly upper-middle-class women. A university professor. A doctor. A tribunal judge. There was also a women’s services manager, a counsellor at a women’s service and an IDVA (independent domestic violence survivor). As a working-class, former sex worker and drug addict, I immediately felt out of place. However, as someone who was doing the survivor speaker circuit, I was constantly told how brave and inspiring I was. On reflection, I wanted these women’s approval.
Because these were relatively powerful women. Women who wield a great deal of privilege in their local communities, and this is where it all becomes quite sinister, because policy-makers and officials listen to these women, undoubtedly a great deal more than they do transwomen or sex workers. While these women bleated on about having their rights taken away and being persecuted, they were living privileged lives, never having to worry about where their next meal was coming from, or being hassled by cops or social services. The cops and social services were their friends.
While these women bleated on about having their rights taken away and being persecuted, they were living privileged lives, never having to worry about where their next meal was coming from, or being hassled by cops or social services. The cops and social services were their friends.
I tried on occasion to talk about class, and was ignored. I tried to point out that most trans people are simply trying to survive, and was told ‘oh, but we don’t hate trans women, we just want them to stop pretending to be women.’ When I gathered up enough courage to tell them that I had had a relationship with a trans woman and had never seen her as anything but a woman - because indeed, that is what she was - I was stared at as though I had suddenly sprouted two heads. For the first time in my life I felt ashamed of that relationship, as though I had done something wrong and my sexuality (bi/pan) was now something to be ashamed of.
It’s probably worth pointing out here that few of the women in this particular group were lesbians or actually in any way radical in their ‘feminism’. At least half were married to wealthy white men. If there is anything I particularly want to expose in this article it is that TERFs are not simply a fringe group. They are mainstream.
‘Resisting the trans cult’ was on the agenda at every single meeting. Often meetings descended into nothing more than mocking prominent trans women. Munroe Bergdorf, a trans woman of colour, seemed to come in for particular vitriol, and this seemed to be based on little more than the fact that she is highly attractive. It was this point I realised that the object of their hatred wasn’t the supposed ‘TRA cult’ but just trans women, period. Trans men were viewed with pity and condescension. Trans women were the enemy, because they were ‘men’ (the levels of misandry, even amongst the married women, were also shocking).
And trans women couldn’t win. If they ‘passed’ they were appropriating. If they didn’t ‘pass’ they were ‘fake.’ Books by Janice Raymond, Germaine Greer and Sheila Jeffreys were handed around as though they were sacred texts. Posie Parker videos were watched as though they were broadcasts from the Queen (who I don’t approve of either). The final straw for me, at which point I knew I could no longer sit in silence and swallow the rhetoric being pushed, was when Posie Parker stickers saying ‘Woman = Adult Human Female’ were ordered in bulk and a sticker campaign started. Unisex toilets were the target. When I protested that this was bullying and could seriously distress a trans person who came across these I was told ‘well they shouldn’t be there in the first place.’ There was no discussion of where they should then go if even unisex toilets were out of bounds.
I left, giving my awful experiences with the abolos as my reason, still not brave enough to voice exactly what I thought about their transphobia. I am angry with myself about this, but I also know that sitting in my guilt serves no-one. Instead, I will speak up about what I saw, and commit to being a better trans ally from now on, and that starts with exposing this nonsense, because it is dangerous nonsense. While a bunch of privileged white cis women having clandestine meetings to talk about their transphobia may seem laughable and risible, the fact is that these attitudes are growing and spreading. Women are being radicalised on Mumsnet (this is a common story that I was told by the women themselves) convinced that their reproductive and parenting rights are being challenged. TERFs, just like SWERFs, use peoples biggest fears to convince them of their views. Tell mothers that TRAs are after their children, tell rape survivors that trans women are rapists, and you have easy targets for radicalisation.
We - by which I mean allies, as trans folk and sex workers have no choice to ignore them - need to start taking TERFs and SWERFs seriously as hate groups, and reaching those who are vulnerable to their ideological brainwashing. Allies need to do better (yes, I am pointing those fingers back at myself) to protect trans folk and sex workers and amplify their voices. Particularly, at this time, the voices of those who are of colour and live under police brutality.
right here
the willful blindness of reactionary liberalism; the critics of progressive identity politics have got it all wrong: they’re the illiberal ones
osita nwanevu et al. 2020
newrepublic.com/article/158346/willful-blindness-reactionary-liberalism
ロックンロール・ウィドウ
rock n roll widow
scandal
ロックンロール・ウィドウ
scandal x miwa x yasuha
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
ロックンロール・ウィドウ in キャバレー
scandal x 杏子
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
ルージュの伝言
rougenoDENGON
scandal
SAKURAグッバイ
sakuragubbai
cherry blossom goodbye
さよならmy friend
sayonara my friend
サティスファクション
satisfaction
pv
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
live
scandal baby
eng sub
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
2015 live
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
scandal in the house
scandal nanka buttobase
shining sun
少女M
SHOUJO m
minority girl
スペースレンジャー
space ranger
太陽スキャンダラス
TAIYOUscandalous
scandalous sun
live
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
mv
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
short
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
東京スカイスクレイパー
tokyo skyscraper
touch
scandal
lyrics
Link: animelyrics.com/anime/touch/touchop.htm
we are freedom fighters
welcome home
夜明けの流星群
YOAkenoRYUUSEIGUN
dawn meteor shower
夢見るつばさ
yumemiru tsubasa
dreaming of wings
denial: self-deception, false beliefs, and the origins of the human mind
ajit varki, danny brower 2013
negative selection
here speculates fear of death as barrier to evolution of humans. optimism as reality–denial.
if so, does our strong ability to resist existential angst (fear of our own mortality), while contemplating disaster (as opposed to denying or ignoring danger), make us super–optimists, a particular subset in the diverse array of human possibility? is this related to our ability to make things work by strengthening possible–weak points, and developing diverse skills to do so in different situations?
“Danny suggested that we humans were the only species to finally get past this long-standing barrier. And he posited that we did this by simultaneously evolving mechanisms to deny our mortality.”
“He wrote that the human penchant to deny our mortality is but one manifestation of our overall ability to deny many other things—a propensity that has many ramifications, positive and negative.”
“An unconscious defense mechanism used to reduce anxiety by denying thoughts, feelings, or facts that are consciously intolerable”
“this human ability extends all the way from denial of personal health issues to our denial of the “mortality” of our planet’s biosphere and climate in its present form. Even those of us who realize that the earth’s climate and environment are being degraded by human activities tend to deny the urgency of the problem in our daily actions.”
“contrary to the popular misconception, Darwin did not use the phrase “survival of the fittest” until later editions of his famous book On the Origin of Species. This catchy expression was actually coined by the economist and philosopher Herbert Spencer in his 1864 book, The Principles of Biology, because he mistakenly saw parallels between his economic theories and Darwin’s biological theory of natural selection. And we now know from the insights of Motoo Kimura and others that natural selection is happening against a backdrop of neutral evolution (random changes that are not detrimental to survival and reproduction and that are able to persist for this reason). In addition, depending on the circumstances, there can be “survival of the luckiest.”
“Wallace challenged his own basic theory, saying that he did not understand how natural selection could have “preselected” for such human abilities well ahead of the time when they might be useful. He asked, “How could ‘natural selection,’ or survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence, at all favor the development of mental powers so entirely removed from the material necessities of savage men?” And he concluded that the human mind was “an instrument…developed in advance of the needs of its predecessor.” (Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection, 1870)”
but what if what was being selected for was not “fitness” but rather “possible–diversity”? this would seem to “fit” the conditions and result.
“Baldwin effect: a very simplified version is as follows. Within a species capable of learning, an individual may have genetic abilities that increase the possibility of learning something new and useful. If that something happens to be beneficial for the whole species, others within the population can pick up the behavior because of their own abilities to learn. Initially they may not be as successful because they do not have the intrinsic genetic ability. But if the behavior creates a niche that is beneficial for the whole group, there will eventually be environmental selection for individuals who are best capable of carrying out the useful behavior. And if this improves the reproductive fitness of those individuals, the genetic ability would spread more rapidly than it would have by conventional natural selection. In this manner postnatal learning might bootstrap, or accelerate, the rate at which new behaviors can become part and parcel of the genetically endowed abilities of a species. But it is important to note that the second stage of the Baldwin effect involves genetic “fixation” of the behavior in the species, so that it eventually becomes instinctive.
“Critics correctly point out that the Baldwin effect has never been formally proved or demonstrated. And a much more refined and modern concept is Marcus Feldman’s concept of niche construction, which applies not only to culture but also to nonlearned behaviors.18 Anyway, given its relevance to postnatal learning, the Baldwin effect has been suggested more than once as a mechanism to explain the evolution of some of our unique human behaviors and abilities. Indeed, we humans could have experienced a Baldwin effect “on steroids,” because of our much superior ability to learn, imitate, and pass on ideas, even beyond the immediate group that observes the original behavior. But, as we said, the first stage of the Baldwin effect is intrinsically unstable because it depends mostly on postnatal learning, a risky thing to rely on for all future environmental circumstances. Thus the second stage of the Baldwin effect, in which the behavior in question eventually becomes genetically hardwired as an instinctive feature of the species, is critical. However, we humans have apparently evolved to not bother with the second stage of the Baldwin effect. While we have invented a great many unusual behaviors (many of them beneficial to our species), essentially all of them continue to require learning by observation and teaching from the previous generation. In other words, we have simply off-loaded the second phase of the Baldwinian mechanism to culture and learning alone, using our many increasingly sophisticated ways of communicating across barriers of time and space. While this would be a risky proposition for other species, we can get away with it, as long as we have a sufficient population size, or a sufficient number of individuals who can remember ideas and pass them on. And with the advent of writing, computers, and the Internet, we are now largely assured that our accumulated knowledge will be passed on to posterity.”
“The exception may be the experiment done by the Mogul emperor Akbar the Great (1542–1605), which was recorded in his biography, the Akbarnāma.27 Beyond the fact that it is relatively recent, this story is more plausible, because the Akbarnāma is a rare instance in which an intellectually honest monarch apparently asked his biographer to accurately record all information, whether it reflected negatively or positively on him. During an argument about language origins, Akbar is said to have postulated that babies raised without hearing human speech would be unable to speak. To gain experimental proof, the Akbarnāma states, he “had a serai built in a place which civilized sounds did not reach. The newly born were put into that place of experience, and honest and active guards were put over them. For a time tongue-tied wet-nurses were admitted there. As they had closed the door of speech, the place was commonly called the Gung Mahal (the dumb-house).” Some time later Akbar was apparently in the vicinity and “he went with a few special attendants to the house of experiment. No cry came from that house of silence, nor was any speech heard there. In spite of their four years they had no part of the talisman of speech, and nothing came out except the noise of the dumb.” The likelihood that this experiment did take place is reinforced by other contemporary accounts, such as a letter by Father Jerome Xavier,28 written in 1598 from Akbar’s court: “He [Akbar] told me that nearly twenty years ago he had thirty children shut up before they could speak, and put guards over them so that the nurses might not teach them their language. His object was to see what language they would talk when they grew older, and he resolved to follow the laws and customs of the country whose language was that spoken by the children. But his endeavours were a failure, for none of the children came to speak distinctly.” This “palace of silence” experiment is also described in another contemporary account:29 “An order was issued that several suckling infants should be kept in a secluded place far from habitations, where they should not hear a word spoken. Well-disciplined nurses were to be placed over them, who were to refrain from giving them any instruction in speaking….To carry out this order, about twenty sucklings were taken from their mothers for a consideration in money, and were placed in an empty house, which got the name of Dumb-house. After three or four years the children all came out dumb, excepting some who died there.” So it appears that the human mind, like a computer, may be a “nothing in, nothing out” type of mechanism. The basic “operating system” is available, but it needs input and programming. And where does the human mind get most of its input? From other human minds!”
“Whatever the mechanism, we are living in an unusually stable period called the Holocene epoch. It is only because of this stable climate that we have so successfully populated the world while optimizing our homes, facilities, and agriculture to suit a relatively predictable local climate in each location.”
“It is particularly ironic, then, that Sandy is a diminutive for Cassandra, the mythical and tragic daughter of the king of Troy.”
“it is probably essential for our long-term success that we embrace the idea that reality denial is a fundamental part of human nature. For only by knowing this enemy can we consciously change our innate, destructive behavioral tendencies. Ironically, many readers of this statement are likely to deny the important point we are making. In other words, we are in a state of denial about our denial of reality, and this is not an easy problem to overcome on a daily basis.”
“the first step is recognition of the problem. The next step may require a process that is every bit as unlikely as the convergence of self-awareness and self-deception that allowed us to break through the wall so many years ago. It required millions of years for the latter event to occur. We don’t have that much time to solve our current dilemma.”
“While a few forms of meditation focus on gaining an increased awareness of reality, the common goal of most meditation methods is to deny reality by deliberately eliminating extraneous thoughts and focusing on only a few (in the extreme form, to focus on one single word or sound—or, even better, on nothing at all). In the final analysis, such deep meditation amounts to a deliberate and sustained effort at maximal denial of the reality surrounding an individual, both physical and mental. Perhaps this is why many forms of meditation (or “mindfulness”) are shown to make humans happier and healthier.”
Link: scandal-heaven.com/f8-scandal-lyrics
scandal
osaka jo hall 2013
youtu.be/Av1l3MJ8Jkk
perfect world 2015
youtu.be/vBZZ2dOv5nA
Special Live@代々木公園 2012.09.27
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
バレンタインスペシャルライブ2013
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
scandal - best★x'mas5 ～special selection video
vol.1
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
vol. 2
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
go live ex theatre roppongi 2014
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
the happiness industry: how the government and big business sold us well-being
william davies 2015
on being certain: believing you are right even when you’re not
robert a burton 2009
delusions: understanding the un-understandable
peter mckenna 2018
the lies we tell ourselves how to face the truth, accept yourself, and create a better life
jon frederickson 2018
the upside of irrationality; the unexpected benefits of defying logic at work and at home
dan ariely 2010
high performance habits: how extraordinary people become that way
brendon burchard 2017
the beauty of discomfort: how what we avoid is what we need
amanda lang 2017
becoming supernatural: how common people are doing the uncommon
joe dispenza 2017
bright-sided: how positive thinking is undermining america
barbara ehrenreich 2010
the hour between dog and wolf: how risk taking transforms us, body and mind
coates john 2013
translating happiness: a cross-cultural lexicon of well-being tim lomas 2018
deceit and self-deception: fooling yourself the better to fool others
robert trivers 2011
belief; what it means to believe and why our convictions are so compelling
james e. alcock 2018
a climate for denial: why some people still reject climate change science
arek sinanian 2017
your brain knows more than you think: the new frontiers of neuroplasticity
niels birbaumer 2017
man-made catastrophes and risk information concealment: case studies of major disasters and human fallibility
dmitry chernov & didier sornette 2015
the biased mind: how evolution shaped our psychology including anecdotes and tips for making sound decisions
jérôme boutang & michel de lara 2015
merchants of doubt: how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming
naomi oreskes & erik conway 2010
kidding ourselves: the hidden power of self-deception
joseph hallinan 2014
why we believe what we believe: uncovering our biological need for meaning, spirituality, and truth
andrew newberg, mark waldman 2006
how we know what isn’t so: the fallibility of human reason in everyday life
thomas gilovich 1993
a field guide to lies: critical thinking in the information age
daniel levitin 2016
why we make mistakes: how we look without seeing, forget things in seconds, and are all pretty sure we are way above average
joseph hallinan 2009
mistakes were made (but not by me): why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts
carol tavris, elliot aronson 2007
magic for liars
sarah gailey
hivemind: the new science of tribalism in our divided world
sarah rose cavanagh 2019
heartland: a memoir of working hard and being broke in the richest country on earth
sarah smarsh 2020
denying to the grave: why we ignore the facts that will save us
sara e. gorman, jack m. gorman 2016
なんかブッ飛ばせ ～ ROCK'N'ROLL WIDOW
scandal
涙よ光れ
NAMIDAyoHIKAre
shining tears
涙のリグレット
namidanoregret
tears of regret
live
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
pv
Link: m.youtube.com/watch
メトロノーム
metronome
マボロシナイト
maboroshi night
phantom night
今夜はピザパーティー
konyawa pizza party
pizza party night
恋のゲシュタルト崩壊
koinogestalthoukai
the collapse of love’s gestalt
koisuru universe
恋模様
KOIMOUYO
love pattern
恋の果実
KOInoKAJITSU
声
koe
voice
koibitogasantaclaus
キミと夜と涙
kimitoYORUtoNAMIDA
you, night, and tears
キミと未来と完全同期
kimitoMIRAItoKANZESNDOUKI
fully synchronised with the future
缶ビール
canned beer
限界lovers
寺田恵子 x scandal
kiminishittochu
カゲロウ
kagerou
mayfly
下弦の月
kagennotsuki
waning moon
本を読む
honwoyomu
read a book
放課後1H
houkago 1h
an hour after school
ヘブンな気分
heavennaKIBUN
heavenly feelings
春風
HARUKAZE
spring breeze
tv sub kanji
m.youtube.com/watch
live
m.youtube.com/watch
ハルカ
haruka
八月
HACHIGATSU
august
はじめてのチュウ
hajimetenochuu
freedom fighters
フレンズ 僕らの音楽
NOKKO x 中川翔子 x scandal
girlism
everybody say yeah
live subbed kanji romaji english
emotion
don’t say lazy
scandal + 中川翔子
ちいさなほのお
chiisanahonoo
little flame
ビターチョコレート
bitter chocolate
beauteen
アナタガマワル
anatagamawaru
you are spinning
my point isn’t that X or Y are biased or wrong, it is that we are all biased and wrong most of the time, so what do we do?
taboos are like uncharted reefs in our lives
denial
delusion
会いたい
Aitai
I want to see you