Science Forums: iNow - Viewing Profile - Science Forums

Jump to content

Welcome to ScienceForums.Net!

Welcome to ScienceForums.Net! We welcome science discussion at all levels — from beginners to researchers, covering topics from biology to computer science, and much more. Registration is fast and free, and allows you to post on the forums, so register now and join the discussions!
  
After you've registered, come in and introduce yourself, or visit the forum index. If you need any help  registering, posting, or if you just have some questions about our site, please feel free to contact us at staff at scienceforums dot net.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Create a ScienceForums.Net Blog!
Guest Message © 2012 DevFuse

iNow's Profile User Rating: ***--

iNow's Photo
Reputation: 1798 Glorious Leader
Group:
Senior Members
Active Posts:
12,562 (7.14 per day)
Most Active In:
Politics (4038 posts)
Joined:
02-August 07
Profile Views:
14,593
Last Active:
User is offline Today, 05:17 PM
Currently:
Offline

My Information

Member Title:
SuperNerd
Age:
Age Unknown
Birthday:
Birthday Unknown
Gender:
Not Telling Not Telling
Location:
Austin, Texas
Interests:
http://obs.nineplanets.org/psc/pbd.html
Occupation:
Program & Project Management

Contact Information

E-mail:
Click here to e-mail me
  1. Recent Status Updates
  2. About Me
  3. Topics
  4. Posts

Topics I've Started

  1. Polarized: No new information, no desire to understand

    6 May 2012 - 04:02 PM

    I read a post this morning via Brad DeLong then through an article shared by Andrew Sullivan that sent me to a post by Julian Sanchez that struck a chord with me. They are discussing the state of online interactions with people.

    In short, it's not very frequently anymore that people seem to come into discussion threads or comments sections to bring any new information, nor do they seem too often to arrive with a desire to understand the position of the "other side" or explore whether or not it's worth changing their mind based on the information available.

    Nowadays, folks are so busy (whether consciously or unconsciously) reinforcing their personal echo chamber that they begin to lose sight of the fact that there is another way to view the world... to lose sight of the fact that the person reading their post on the other end of that computer is a real human being with real feelings.


    Here are some relevant bits from the Sanchez piece. This is how it begins:

    Quote

    There’s a widespread sense—of debatable historical accuracy, but widespread all the same—that we’re living in an era of especially pronounced political polarization, with a correspondingly poor ratio of tribal slogan slinging to meaningful democratic deliberation. One possible explanation for this is that the massive explosion of our media ecosystem makes it increasingly possible for us to construct ideologically congenial “filter bubbles” that provide us a rich enough stream of information to occupy all our available media consumption time. There are so many blogs, publications, podcasts, radio programs, Twitter feeds, and radio broadcasts that we can have a superficial impression of great variety, while only ever encountering information tailored to reinforce our preexisting worldview—conditions under which we know the median member of the group tends to adopt more extreme views over time. Our filter algorithms, as Eli Pariser argues at the link above, are increasingly doing this for us automatically, so that we may not even be aware of the echo chambers we’re constructing around ourselves.



    Sanchez continues by sharing how the vitriol is magnified in some important ways, ways not previously seen by anyone other than the most famous or prominent public voices, and that the tone and tenor get especially vulgar if you happen to be female:

    Quote

    Any commenter on politics or public affairs whose audience reaches a certain size gets a level of feedback—via email, Twitter, blog posts and comments—that would have been unthinkable for any but the few most prominent public intellectuals a generation ago. Much of it is insightful and constructive. A whole lot spans the gamut from rude and ill-informed to semi-literate and vulgar. If the pundit is a woman, multiply that latter category by 10 and add a heaping spoonful of unsolicited sexual fantasies.


    I think he's right. I've seen it myself in multiple arenas, whether it be more science based blogs, theistic or atheistic sites, or the usual politics or climate change discussions.

    Sanchez concludes:

    Quote

    If the type and volume of criticism we find online were experienced in person, we’d probably think we were witnessing some kind of est/Maoist reeducation session designed to break down the psyche so it could be rebuilt from scratch. The only way not to find this overwhelming and demoralized over any protracted period of time is to adopt a reflexive attitude that these are not real people whose opinions matter in any way. Which, indeed, seems to be a pretty widespread attitude. Scan the comments at one of the more partisan political blogs and you get a clear sense that the “other side” consists not so much of people with different ideas, but an inscrutable alien species. I think it’s self-evident that this is an unhealthy development in a democracy, but it may be a coping strategy that our media ecosystem is forcing on us—at least until we find a better one.


    In Brads words, "Most of the trolls who show up in my comments section aren't trying to bring information to the party or to understand what I am saying. They are engaged in a different task--a troop-rallying anti-discursive project. Most of time, if you want to (and have the time), you can shock them back into reality by asking the Hilzoy question: "I am a person. Why are you saying this to me?" But time is limited."

    It just seems so sad and unnecessary. Tribalism writ large and us/them as the status quo.


    What do you think? Are things worse than ever before?
    Is this just another version of something that has always occurred?
    Is this just the way things are going to be given the hyperconnected world where we exist and can self-select our sources of information?

    Is there a way to make things better? Should we bother trying?

  2. People who deny climate change are broken

    1 May 2012 - 09:47 PM

    Agree? Disagree? Discuss.

  3. Analytic Thinking Decreases Religious Beliefs

    26 April 2012 - 10:15 PM

    This came my way this morning and I found it interesting, so thought I'd share.


    http://neurosciencen...sychology-study

    Quote

    The study, which will appear in tomorrow’s issue of Science, finds that thinking analytically increases disbelief among believers and skeptics alike, shedding important new light on the psychology of religious belief.

    “Our goal was to explore the fundamental question of why people believe in a God to different degrees,” says lead author Will Gervais, a PhD student in UBC’s Dept. of Psychology. “A combination of complex factors influence matters of personal spirituality, and these new findings suggest that the cognitive system related to analytic thoughts is one factor that can influence disbelief.”

    <...>

    The findings, Gervais says, are based on a longstanding human psychology model of two distinct, but related cognitive systems to process information: an “intuitive” system that relies on mental shortcuts to yield fast and efficient responses, and a more “analytic” system that yields more deliberate, reasoned responses.

    “Our study builds on previous research that links religious beliefs to ‘intuitive’ thinking,” says study co-author and Associate Prof. Ara Norenzayan, UBC Dept. of Psychology. “Our findings suggest that activating the ‘analytic’ cognitive system in the brain can undermine the ‘intuitive’ support for religious belief"


    This outcome strikes me as somewhat obvious, but perhaps a bit damning now that it's been supported with empiricism and neuroscience.

    Aren't they saying that you must avoid reflection and analysis to maintain religious belief? Isn't it a consequence of this work that being unquestioning and willing to follow others uncritically are required for religious belief?

    It's the intuitive shortcut piece that I think speaks to the specious nature of most religious mindsets.

  4. People who believe in god are broken

    10 April 2012 - 01:44 PM

    Agree? Disagree?
    Discuss.

  5. Hypocrisy and Inconsistency: Republicans in the US

    2 April 2012 - 11:42 PM

    Sad, but true. Join the party? Sorry... I value my integrity and reason too much for that.

Comments

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  1. Photo

    Moontanman 

    06 Apr 2012 - 10:20
    Yup, I could do that, it would be a pain but nothing more than logistical problems, growing coral on the outside of a shot glass would be much easier
  2. Photo

    iNow 

    03 Apr 2012 - 23:52
    You can if it's a lunar eclipse...
  3. Photo

    ydoaPs 

    03 Apr 2012 - 23:14
    It actually is a trick question. You can't have an eclipse during a full moon.
  4. Photo

    Appolinaria 

    29 Feb 2012 - 05:47
    iNow, glad you're back. Was a little quiet 'round here.
  5. Photo

    Moontanman 

    27 Jan 2012 - 23:33
    Wow!I have been nasty today, channeling AronRa, lol
  6. Photo

    superball 

    20 Nov 2011 - 23:01
    I offered a trues, evolution first, then we can chat.cheers.
  7. Photo

    DJBruce 

    11 Jul 2011 - 21:41
    Saw you posting again, nice to have you back!
  8. Photo

    mississippichem 

    25 Jun 2011 - 14:14
    Glad to see you posting again, been a while. What's up?
  9. Photo

    Peron 

    28 Mar 2011 - 16:12
    if i guess your gender do i get a prize?
  10. Photo

    cabinintheforest 

    04 Nov 2010 - 03:43
    u are gay
  11. Photo

    tar 

    07 Jan 2010 - 04:16
    iNow, Sorry. I was very surprised to see the thread closed as I visited tonight. I feel responsible, but don't know how to reverse the closure. Seems the captain does not quite understand what you were saying. And if it makes any difference to you, I think you did a good job keeping the emotions and the God arguments out of the inquiry. And I appreciated and learned from every post and link. Nice job. I sincerely apologize for my contribution to the closure. Regards, TAR
  12. Photo

    zule 

    24 Dec 2009 - 20:35
    Thank you :-). Well, I only can contribute a little and almost only about one subject. It is you who amazes me, you seem to know about everything.
  13. Photo

    Baby Astronaut 

    15 Dec 2009 - 04:42
    Hey thanks, a Reason's Greetings to you too iNow :D
  14. Photo

    A Tripolation 

    09 Dec 2009 - 01:31
    Thank you.
  15. Photo

    Pangloss 

    22 Nov 2009 - 08:53
    Wave wave!
  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3