Fwd: TED talk
Locked
 
Administrator
|
Not bad TED on the Divided America. Anyone know Jonathan Haidt? I'm going to read his most recent book. He's got other TEDs as well. -- Owen ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> Date: Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 6:19 PM Subject: TED talk To: Wedtech <[hidden email]> This is the TED talk I mentioned at lunch. The speaker, Jonathan Haidt, is fascinating and has several books and prior TED talks. Oddly enough, I stumbled across this via a Brendan Eich tweet! -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
Good tip, Owen. I assigned some Haidt videos in September to my grad students. Lots of good conversation emerged. On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA [hidden email] mobile: (303) 859-5609 skype: merle.lelfkoff2 ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
Administrator
|
Cool! I just listened to an earlier TED of his.
.. which may be more foundational. On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Merle Lefkoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
Administrator
|
Any insights from the student's conversations? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by Owen Densmore
Owen writes:
"Not bad TED on the Divided America."
Let us pretend it is easier to
build social capital in groups where there is low variance of various individual attributes amongst members of the group, e.g. they are white, or share some particular history.
What is the quantitative economic benefit of the social capital?
Ok, let's look at 2015 GDPs by state, and the also estimated GDPs for 2017. Data is from U.S. Census Bureau State and Local Government Finance. (I added an election result flag from CNN, treating Michigan as a NA where "1" means the state was called for Hillary Clinton.)
States called for Clinton had higher mean and median growth rates
Clinton meanGrowth
0 2.346667
1 2.495000
Clinton medianGrowth
0 2.40
1 2.45
Further, the total GDP by State was higher in total for Clinton states (2015 and est. 2017, respectively).
2015 Gross State Product:
Clinton Billions$
0 8571.3
1 8792.1
Estimated 2017 Gross State Product:
Clinton Billions$
0 9143.2
1 9554.6
If the hypothesis is that social capital (of the sort that Trump states value), leads to economic benefits, then this does not support that hypothesis. Parochialism loses.
I posit parochialism is preferred by individuals that fail to imagine anything bigger -- the
ideas that we all can share, even if we don't know one another.
Marcus
From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Owen Densmore <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 8:37:42 PM To: Complexity Coffee Group Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: TED talk
Not bad TED on the Divided America.
Anyone know Jonathan Haidt? I'm going to read his most recent book. He's got other TEDs as well.
-- Owen
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> Date: Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 6:19 PM Subject: TED talk To: Wedtech <[hidden email]>
This is the TED talk I mentioned at lunch.
The speaker, Jonathan Haidt, is fascinating and has several books and prior TED talks.
Oddly enough, I stumbled across this via a Brendan Eich tweet!
-- Owen
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
Administrator
|
WAT! No Nick? Here it is that I'm fascinated by a Social Psychologist and his lovely set of concepts and solutions .. and No Nick?l : ) I'm planning on getting one of his books and plow thru it. Any suggestions on which on would be best? Probably "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion". What grabbed me is his *immediate* dismissal of "reason", almost like it's a dirty word in his field. Instead he's a bit Mike Agar'ish .. meet the people and find out what their culture & daily life is like. Boy did that succeed when he made it possible for Stephen (G) and I to do a project with SFI .. reason was of no avail, so Mike goes in for a bit and bingo, the doors are open and we're working closely with SFI's IT gang. -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
<<What grabbed me is his *immediate* dismissal of "reason", almost like it's a dirty word in his field. Instead he's a bit Mike Agar'ish .. meet the people and find out what their
culture & daily life is like.>> https://twitter.com/hey__nikki/status/798904650384769024 Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
A friend of mine voted for Stein (again). When we discussed my choice to jump ship and vote for Clinton (and his wife's choice to vote for Clinton), his argument was that, fundamentally, Clinton is cut from the same cloth as Clinton1 and Bush2. Sure, there are various overtones. E.g. Clinton2 seems to me like she's a _serious_ public servant. But at the core, she's a neoliberal, a globalist. This ability/preference to look at the horizon and consider what lies beyond is critical to competence in any domain, I think. Your numbers below may provide some justification for a (slightly) increased performance for those who consider a larger space of possibilities. But there are confounding factors that can't all be chalked up to that core ability/preference. For example, we could argue (as Haidt does) that we're all parochial, but some of us (simply) stumble into or are born into different influences. E.g. someone born near a large city with cheap flights overseas will be much more likely to travel widely. So, they're still parochial, just with a different set of impinging influence. The same could be said of people born in a place like Wyoming. We could say that none of us _are_ parochial in any sense; we just seem that way because of our history/ontogeny. On 11/16/2016 09:40 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Let us pretend it is easier to build social capital in groups where there is low variance of various individual attributes amongst members of the group, e.g. they are white, or share some particular history. What is the quantitative economic benefit of the social capital? > > > Ok, let's look at 2015 GDPs by state, and the also estimated GDPs for 2017. > > Data is from U.S. Census Bureau State and Local Government Finance. > > (I added an election result flag from CNN, treating Michigan as a NA where "1" means the state was called for Hillary Clinton.) > > > States called for Clinton had higher mean and median growth rates > > > Clinton meanGrowth > 0 2.346667 > 1 2.495000 > > Clinton medianGrowth > 0 2.40 > 1 2.45 > > Further, the total GDP by State was higher in total for Clinton states (2015 and est. 2017, respectively). > > 2015 Gross State Product: > Clinton Billions$ > 0 8571.3 > 1 8792.1 > > Estimated 2017 Gross State Product: > Clinton Billions$ > 0 9143.2 > 1 9554.6 > > If the hypothesis is that social capital (of the sort that Trump states value), leads to economic benefits, then this does not support that hypothesis. Parochialism loses. > > I posit parochialism is preferred by individuals that fail to imagine anything bigger -- the *ideas* that we all can share, even if we don't know one another. -- ␦glen? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
|
|
Glen wrote:
> A friend of mine voted for Stein (again). When we discussed my choice to jump ship and vote for Clinton (and his wife's choice to vote for Clinton), his argument was that, fundamentally, Clinton is cut from the same cloth as Clinton1 and Bush2. Sure, there are various overtones. E.g. Clinton2 seems to me like she's a _serious_ public servant. But at the core, she's a neoliberal, a globalist. This ability/preference to look at the horizon and consider what lies beyond is critical to competence in any domain, I think. I never doubted Clinton2's credentials or preparation for the office. Who has EVER had more preparation than her? And I would have preferred her over Trump1 by an indescribable factor. Mainly because of HIS failings, not just his LACK of preparation for the role, but much of his anti-preparation as a uber-businessman... and of course the racist/misogynist/bigotry on top of all of that. I voted for Jill as a vote for the third party concept. I gave her my "put a woman in the whitehouse" vote that Hillary could have had. I gave her the "put someone who wasn't self-selected and trained as a lawyer" vote too. I gave her PARTY my "save the planet soon" vote, and I gave them my "humanist" vote as well. I don't think there is much if any evidence that Greens/Jill pulled a spoiler, and if anything it seems as if Gary/Libs came closer to gumming up Trump's gears. Like many Trump voters, I'm ready to break our pattern of "business as usual"... but definitely not ready to let a loose cannon like him into the White House. I'm pretty sure we are about to be in for a wild ride. I don't know for sure what either your nor Marcus' working definition of "Parochial" might be in this case.... it seems (to me) to cover a LOT of territory. I tend to use it in as literal (narrow/limited view) as possible without the attachments to conservatism or judgements about intolerant/etc. I personally came from very parochial environments, up to and including my decades at LANL. For as educated and worldly as many folks there can be, there was a certain parochialism that comes, perhaps, with the chosen education/professions of hard science and engineering. Similarly, I often feel that Santa Fe is guilty of multi-parochialism... an ensemble of fairly limited, narrow views of the world. The trust fund babies, the spiritual-noveau crowd, the native community(ies), the Sons/Daughters of Onate/DeVargas, and surely *our* crowd as well. There are MYRIAD exceptions to this seemingly dismissive judgement and I revel in the range of people and perspectives that I encounter here. Perhaps THIS is of which Glen speaks... maybe this is as "good as it gets"? I DO have lots of experiences that tell me that VERY FEW people's parochialism actually matches my preconceived stereotypes of them. I don't know if there is much percentage in looking for (anti)correlations between presumed parochialism and economic vigor. Perhaps I just don't value economic vigor enough to want to validate it as a measure of intellectual/spiritual breadth/vigor? > > Your numbers below may provide some justification for a (slightly) increased performance for those who consider a larger space of possibilities. But there are confounding factors that can't all be chalked up to that core ability/preference. For example, we could argue (as Haidt does) that we're all parochial, but some of us (simply) stumble into or are born into different influences. E.g. someone born near a large city with cheap flights overseas will be much more likely to travel widely. So, they're still parochial, just with a different set of impinging influence. The same could be said of people born in a place like Wyoming. We could say that none of us _are_ parochial in any sense; we just seem that way because of our history/ontogeny. > > > > On 11/16/2016 09:40 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >> Let us pretend it is easier to build social capital in groups where there is low variance of various individual attributes amongst members of the group, e.g. they are white, or share some particular history. What is the quantitative economic benefit of the social capital? >> >> >> Ok, let's look at 2015 GDPs by state, and the also estimated GDPs for 2017. >> >> Data is from U.S. Census Bureau State and Local Government Finance. >> >> (I added an election result flag from CNN, treating Michigan as a NA where "1" means the state was called for Hillary Clinton.) >> >> >> States called for Clinton had higher mean and median growth rates >> >> >> Clinton meanGrowth >> 0 2.346667 >> 1 2.495000 >> >> Clinton medianGrowth >> 0 2.40 >> 1 2.45 >> >> Further, the total GDP by State was higher in total for Clinton states (2015 and est. 2017, respectively). >> >> 2015 Gross State Product: >> Clinton Billions$ >> 0 8571.3 >> 1 8792.1 >> >> Estimated 2017 Gross State Product: >> Clinton Billions$ >> 0 9143.2 >> 1 9554.6 >> >> If the hypothesis is that social capital (of the sort that Trump states value), leads to economic benefits, then this does not support that hypothesis. Parochialism loses. >> >> I posit parochialism is preferred by individuals that fail to imagine anything bigger -- the *ideas* that we all can share, even if we don't know one another. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by gepr
"Your numbers below may provide some justification for a (slightly) increased performance for those who consider a larger space of possibilities."
You might think the effect would be less, adjusting for population by respective state, but actually the reverse is true: Clinton meanPerCapita2015 0 50.08945 1 65.10534 (units: billions of dollars / millions of people) "But there are confounding factors that can't all be chalked up to that core ability/preference. For example, we could argue (as Haidt does) that we're all parochial, but some of us (simply) stumble into or are born into different influences. E.g. someone born near a large city with cheap flights overseas will be much more likely to travel widely. So, they're still parochial, just with a different set of impinging influence. The same could be said of people born in a place like Wyoming. We could say that none of us _are_ parochial in any sense; we just seem that way because of our history/ontogeny." I am not convinced for two reasons: 1) I grew up in the country and only traveled because my parents felt it was important. I saw the major eastern cities of the United States and some in Europe before I was an adult. Most of my childhood friends did not have had this experience. 2) If people have the ability to follow @realDonaldTrump (i.e. they have access to the Internet), they have the means to follow other things too, and geographic isolation is less relevant than it once was. I selected the word `parochial' because Haidt did, and to play along with that point of view. I would have chosen a word like `reactionary'. Even Bannon seems to know that his ilk can't use economics to justify their BS. (Note how he pivots to terms like "Civic Society".) http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/steve-bannon-racist-comments-silicon-valley-inaccurate I understand that social scientists need to step back, even to biochemistry sometimes, to model things. I'm not coming at this from that perspective. I'm coming at this as a member of the accused set of `elites' that the mighty whitelash mob complains about. So, to deal directly and fairly, mind-to-mind, what basis do we have to negotiate? Money and productivity, for starters.. Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
On 11/18/2016 07:38 AM, Steven A Smith wrote: > Like many Trump voters, I'm ready to break our pattern of "business as usual"... but definitely not ready to let a loose cannon like him into the White House. I'm pretty sure we are about to be in for a wild ride. If we take Haidt seriously, party identification is a form of parochialism. Haidt is basically justifying "identity politics", even that touted by racists like this guy: http://www.npr.org/2016/11/17/502476139/were-not-going-away-alt-right-leader-on-voice-in-trump-administration When I listen to Haidt, that's what I hear, no doubt biased by my own prejudices. Marcus admitted to a bit of his own parochialism in a slight preference to buy a locally made car. But (as you and I've talked offline and as Marcus mentioned re: twitter), our afferent and efferent graph edges change as technology changes. Brand loyalty (Coke vs. Pepsi, Ford vs. Chevy) is just as tribal as anything else. And, as far as it goes, Haidt is right that in order to break one entrenched graph, you have to build another one (complimenting your racist uncle Bob before discussing the things you disagree about). But that sort of thing still runs the risks of _essentialism_. How deep do you go in finding similarities with your "other"? Do we all end up starving and atrophying because we've empathized too much with every plant and animal in the world? That "network limit", whatever it is, is parochialism of one form or the other. Personally, I think Haidt is wrong. I am opinionated and feel no need to empathized with racists like Spencer. They are rotten, sick, damaged. And the ammunition provided to them by people like Haidt is killing us. It's not a matter of polite disagreement in a theater full of elites at a TED talk or over pints at the pub. It's a matter of life or death. -- ␦glen? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen
|
Re: [ SPAM ] Re: Fwd: TED talk
|
|
"And the ammunition provided to them by people like Haidt is killing us."
Haidt used the example of couples that are headed for divorce, and that disgust is a predictor for him of it actually happening. Well, sometimes divorce is appropriate. Like your spouse repeatedly betrays you, or physical hurts you or your children. This is not to advocate for Calexit or left coast nation, etc. but simply to point out sometimes you have to stand for something or else you'll fall for nothing. Protectionism for short term job gains in one part of the country is falling for nothing. Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |