How to get respect
Lots of good information here, provided by "Barking Up the Wrong Tree." Much interplay with competence, power and money.
Lots of good information here, provided by "Barking Up the Wrong Tree." Much interplay with competence, power and money.
There are some interesting facts, statistics and advice offered by this Time Magazine article: "How to Be a Good Kisser." Here are two examples:
The first kiss is a necessary risk in every budding sexual relationship; a recent psychology study found that 59 percent of men and 66 percent of women reported breaking things off with a prospective partner because of it. People remember their first kiss more vividly than the first time they had sex.One more:
Men who kiss their wives before work live 5 years longer, make 20-30% more money and are far less likely to get in a car accident.For those of you who are trying to identify the right person to marry, there is a mathematical solution to this problem proposed by Martin Gardner.
This morning, I found myself reveling in the representational capacity of brains. Here's an illustration: Sometimes I misplace an item such as my keys and I can't find them while physically walking around my house. Sometimes, frustrated, I pause my physical search. I sit down and close my eyes. Using only images, sounds and memories embedded in neural pathways in my head, I "see" that I had my keys when I last walked into my house. I "play" a series of short "videos" and "images" in my head reminding myself where I walked and what I touched. I run through the logic that I could NOT have left them in certain places, because I didn't go to those parts of the house, seeing images of them as I run through this logic? Then, perhaps, I "see" myself closing my car trunk while holding my briefcase. I'm now wondering--did I put the keys on top of the car for a second while closing the trunk? I go outside and there are the keys on top of the car. My mind contained detailed representations of my home and car, as well as episodic memories that, while imperfect, is often good enough. My neural pathways contain a virtual, somewhat explorable, world inside of my head. Although it is not perfect in all of its details, it is quite functional. It's a capability we use every day, drawing on the brain's extraordinary power to represent the world around us, allowing us to perform virtual manipulations of objects, "searching" our house while sitting down with our eyes closed. What type of magic is this that a 3 pound living organ can do this and so much more? How is it even possible that a system like this can spout up and train itself over a lifetime without a "person in the brain" to guide the process? And how is it possible that we experience consciousness on top of this amazing process? This is but one reason for my love of cognitive science. It's not my profession, but it is one of my passions to better understand this process that we so often take for granted.
I’ve been trying to come to terms with Ferguson since it began. The shooting of Michael Browne sparked a response that surprised many people and the counter responses have been equally surprising among certain people, not so much among certain others. Every time I start to write something I find what I intended to say had already been said better elsewhere. [More . . . ]
This article at VOX points out numerous problems with the test. Erika Price, a friend of mine who has a Ph.D in psychology (and who has written articles for this website), summed up the criticisms as follows:
-Myers-Briggs is based on an old, fringe, untested hypothesis -The categories do not naturally occur in any sample data -The test itself was formulated by people with no psychometric training or experience - It divides people into categories when really every trait is a spectrum - People are divided into binary categories even though most people are near the middle of the spectrum. -Individuals do not consistently get the same type. (i.e. it is unreliable) - It does not predict behavior -It is not used in mainstream psychological researchThe article itself concludes:
It's 2014. Thousands of professional psychologists have evaluated the century-old Myers-Briggs, found it to be inaccurate and arbitrary, and devised better systems for evaluating personality. Let's stop using this outdated measure — which has about as much scientific validity as your astrological sign — and move on to something else.