Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Alain de Botton, "The News: A User's Manual" | Talks at Google

Alain de Botton's new book is The News: A User's Manual (2014) and was at Google recently to talk about the new book and about how we can more judiciously consume "news" media.

I used to be an avid news consumer, and back in the day I had a blog called Raven's View in which I was actively involved in local and state politics and was deeply tied to the 24-news cycle. It made me angry, bitter, and depressed, so I stopped, and it made a huge difference in my life.

Alain de Botton, "The News: A User's Manual" | Talks at Google

Published on Mar 13, 2014


The news is everywhere. We can't stop constantly checking it on our computer screens, but what is this doing to our minds?

We are never really taught how to make sense of the torrent of news we face every day, writes Alain de Botton (author of the best-selling The Architecture of Happiness), but this has a huge impact on our sense of what matters and of how we should lead our lives. In his dazzling new book, de Botton takes twenty-five archetypal news stories--including an airplane crash, a murder, a celebrity interview and a political scandal--and submits them to unusually intense analysis with a view to helping us navigate our news-soaked age. He raises such questions as Why are disaster stories often so uplifting? What makes the love lives of celebrities so interesting? Why do we enjoy watching politicians being brought down? Why are upheavals in far-off lands often so boring?

In "The News: A User's Manual", de Botton has written the ultimate guide for our frenzied era, certain to bring calm, understanding and a measure of sanity to our daily (perhaps even hourly) interactions with the news machine.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Matter, Makers, Microbiomes, and Generation M (via the P2P Foundation)

 

From Michel Bauwens at the P2P Foundation blog, this is an interesting "manifesto" for a Generation M (the first generation of the 21st Century), as in Matter, Makers, and Microbiomes. As is true of all manifesto's, it comes off as pretty damn idealistic - but considering the world we live in right now, a little idealism can't be a bad thing.

Matter, Makers, Microbiomes, and Generation M

Michel Bauwens
14th February 2014

Interesting manifesto for the (bio) maker generation:

* Article / Manifesto: Generation M. Matter, Makers, Microbiomes::Compost for Gaia. By Dimitris Papadopoulos.

“1. Language, information and the virtual space were distinctive features of the previous generation. Craft, matter and the fusion of the digital and the material are defining generation M, the first generation of the 21st century.

2. Generation M makes stuff. Not through mass production but by tweaking and expanding the capabilities of existing things and processes. The maker’s craft: tinkering, stretching, knitting, inventing, weaving, recombining.

3. Making starts from what is there. Intensive recycling. Immediate caring. Generation M lives in a terraformed earth: climate change, toxic environments, the 6th extinction, soil degradation, energy crises, increasing enclosures of the naturecultural commons. It encounters these harmful life thresholds with responsibility to the limits of productionism. Production does not characterise generation M’s mode of life — co-existence does. Response-able terraformation. We make as we co-exist in ecological spaces.

4. Generation M is all about collaborations that create the very material conditions we live in. But these are neither collaborations between individuals or minds, nor social cooperation. These are collaborations between diverse material forces of living matter and abiotic matter. Beyond the masculine and able-bodied logic of expansive productionism making is, literally, about creating and maintaining relations and exchanges in proximity (not necessarily spatial or temporal promixity).

5. It is about making life with other beings and material formations. The organisational principle of this mode of existence is neither the singular subject nor the network nor the pack but the communities of species and things. The microbiome is a manifestation of this principle: to be invaded and to let oneself be invaded by bacterial communities, to become a host and a recipient simultaneously—co-exist, exchange, change—in order to form a sustainable life. From the sterile environments of network society, cognitive capitalism and the knowledge economy that characterised the previous generation to the wet, contagious involutions of interspecies and multi-material communities.

6. Making is uncomfortable with both the mass production of the Fordist era and the lean production of the post-Fordist period. We move from industrialism through immaterial labour to embodied manufacturing; from the factory through the social factory to communal production.

7. Generation M’s work is self-organised and community managed. Post- Fordism is characterised by the flexibilisation and precarisation of work. Precarity is institutionalized in the public and private sectors and presented as unavoidable for society and economy. Responses that oppose precarity (as trade unions occasionally do) or fantasize zero work (70s-80s social movements and their revivals) become irrelevant as work in the M age becomes inextricable from our very ontological make-up.

8. The digital and the material fuse. The digital alone is no longer the drive of social life and innovation. There is no opposition between matter and code. Everyday objects are digitalized and interlinked within the web of things.

9. Technoscience is more than a source of knowledge and innovation. It is the immediate and vital environment which the first generation of the 21st century inhabits. The participation in and the appropriation of technoscience is essential for Generation M’s self-organised and community managed work.

10. Financialisation, algorithmic valuation and the virtualisation of money served as the engines for strengthening the trembling economies of the Global North in the previous decades. Together with the creative, digital and service industries their role is decreasing as the main drivers of the economy. Deep social transformation unfolds as all these sectors are gradually diffused into micro-manufacturing.

11. Various social movements prepared the ascendance of generation M by defending social rights, expanding the commons, creating open software/open science/open hardware, by fighting for a real democratic, equal and just access to material and symbolic resources against racist, sexual, gender and geo-political exclusions.

12. Social movements in the M age make a step further. They will not only act politically and institutionally to defend the commons but immerse in immediate, real, material practices for commoning life and the environment. A new cycle of social antagonism is emerging, one that unfolds through molecules, tissues, composite materials, energy flows, cross-species love, mundane caring for others we live with.

13. This is ecological transversality—the transfer of substances, processes and practices across disparate material registers and communities of life. Today, we are stuck in the process of translation. As much as translation is necessary it captures only a small part of the communication between disparate communities. Rather than through translation, communication happens through involuntary infections and contingent permutations between organisms or substances that attract each other.

14. Making is always located in mundane interactions and encounters across divergent ecologies. This is the unintentional gift economy of matter and cross-species action. The maker’s worlds always contaminate each other laterally. Drifting matter. Stuck in translation, we believe in the one universal world of communication and value. This is the underlying trope of the anthropocene narrative—the ultimate popular story of ecological guilt and redemption—: We terraformed Earth! We have created this mess! Another world is possible. Another world is here: one that challenges the oppressive universalism of the maker-of-one-world. Generation M inverts terraformation: neither the making of one single ontology nor the making of multiple ontologies, but grounded making: the non-anthropocentric making of alter-ontologies.

15. Making : composting. Everyday life as something that can be composted, as something that has the capacity in the right conditions to change its ontological constitution in ways that avoid erosion, toxicity, and acidity. To compost is to sustain an environment that allows mixtures of organic residues to decompose and transform into new organic compounds for nurturing the soil and growing plants; to compost everyday life means to contribute to the emergence of new mixtures of social, biotic and inorganic materials that nurture liveable worlds.

16. Surveillance and control of the virtual space (think NSA) is destructive and oppressing, but a similar type of surveillance on the material level would be truly terrifying. The direct surveillance of bodies and ecologies on a chemical-molecular level will cause unbelievable pain and install totalitarian control. Generation M is, consciously or subconsciously, aware of this danger. The hope is in acting autonomously to protect our own bodies and the eco-bodies from the malignant growth of material policing.

17. Some of the infrastructures of generation M’s autonomy are already under construction. Justice engrained into the material constitution of our lives. Striving for institutional justice is not enough. Justice needs to be fought for on the level of matter and through close alliances between engaged groups of animals and plants, committed groups of humans and accessible material objects.

18. The hype of human-nonhuman mixtures cannot sustain the commitment to material justice. Posthumanism and actor networks are not good enough for this. An autonomous political posthumanism emerges in the infrastructures of the M era: calculating interdependences, knowing and naming one’s allies, building communities of justice, that is action groups of committed humans and engaged non-human others.

19. Generation M is not a ‘post’ generation. Generation M is in the making. Compost. Generation M does not announce something definite and new; it is the first generation that makes itself — literally. Anything is possible within the situated constraints of our material interdependences.

20. M for matter, M for manufacture, M for material, M for making, M for makers, M for microbiomes.

21. M for Gaia.”

Bio
Dimitris Papadopoulos is a Reader in Sociology and Organisation and Director of the PhD Programme in the School of Management, University of Leicester.

His work in cultural studies of science and technology, politics and social theory, labour and transnational migration has been published in various journals and in several monographs, including Escape Routes, Control and Subversion in the 21st Century (Pluto Press 2008), Analysing Everyday Experience: Social Research and Political Change (Palgrave 2006), and Lev Vygotsky: Work and Reception (Campus 1999/Lehmanns 2010). He is currently completing Crafting Politics.

Technoscience, Organization and Material Culture (forthcoming with Duke University Press), a study of alternative interventions in technoscientific culture.

Website.

Contact details
Dr Dimitris Papadopoulos, University of Leicester, School of Management, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK. Email: d.papadopoulos@leicester.ac.uk

Sunday, December 08, 2013

Project Censored - Top 25 Censored Stories from 2012-2013


Here is the list of censored and under-reported news stories from the last year from Project Censored - an effort that began in 1976 at Sonoma State College. Among the low-lights, Monsanto's GMO conspiracy, the impact of fracking on the food supply, 10 years of the Creative Commons, the "culture of cruelty" along the U.S.-Mexico border, the increasing wealth gap, the rise in hate groups, and Obama's war on whistle-blowers.

Top 25 Censored Stories from 2012-2013


The presentation of this year’s Top 25 stories extends the tradition originated by Professor Carl Jensen and his Sonoma State students in 1976, while reflecting how the expansion of the Project to include affiliate faculty and students from campuses across the country and around the world—initiated several years ago as outgoing director Peter Phillips passed the reins to current director Mickey Huff—has made the Project even more diverse and robust. During this year’s cycle, Project Censored reviewed 233 Validated Independent News stories (VINs) representing the collective efforts of 219 college students and 56 professors from 18 college and university campuses that participate in our affiliate program and 13 additional community evaluators.

25. Israel Gave Birth Control to Ethiopian Immigrants Without Their Consent


In January 2013, Israel acknowledged that medical authorities have been giving Ethiopian immigrants long-term birth-control injections, often without their knowledge or consent. Continue Reading…


24. Widespread GMO Contamination: Did Monsanto Plant GMOs Before USDA Approval?


Monsanto introduced genetically modified alfalfa in 2003—a full two years before it was deregulated, according to recently released evidence... Continue Reading…


23. Transaction Tax Helps Civilize Wall Street and Lower the National Debt


In February 2013, United States senators Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon) introduced a bill to implement a new tax of three basis points (that is, three pennies for every hundred dollars) on most nonconsumer stock trades. Continue Reading…


22. Pennsylvania Law Gags Doctors to Protect Big Oil’s “Proprietary Secrets”


In communities affected by hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” people understand that this process of drilling for natural gases puts the environment and their health at risk Continue Reading…


21. Monsanto and India’s “Suicide Economy”


Monsanto has a long history of contamination and cover-up and in India another Monsanto cover-up is ongoing Continue Reading…


20. Israel Counted Minimum Calorie Needs in Gaza Blockade


Declassified documents reveal that the Israeli military calculated how many calories a typical Gazan would need to survive, in order to determine how much food to supply the Gaza Strip during the 2007–2010 blockade. Continue Reading…


19. The Power of Peaceful Revolution in Iceland


After privatization of the national banking sector, private bankers borrowed billions of dollars or (ten times the size of Iceland’s economy), creating a huge economic bubble that doubled housing prices and made a small percentage of the population exceedingly wealthy Continue Reading…


18. Fracking Our Food Supply


The effects of hydraulic fracturing (or “fracking”) on food supply and the environment are slowly emerging Continue Reading…


17. The Creative Commons Celebrates Ten Years of Sharing and Cultural Creation


Creative Commons (CC) is celebrating ten years of helping writers, artists, technologists, and other creators share their knowledge and creativity with the world Continue Reading…


16. Journalism Under Attack Around the Globe


Journalists are increasingly at risk of being killed or imprisoned for doing their jobs, a situation that imperils press freedom. Continue Reading…


15. Food Riots: The New Normal?


Reduced land productivity, combined with elevated oil costs and population growth, threaten a systemic, global food crisis Continue Reading…


14. Wireless Technology a Looming Health Crisis


As a multitude of hazardous wireless technologies are deployed in homes, schools, and workplaces, government officials and industry representatives continue to insist on their safety despite growing evidence to the contrary. Continue Reading…


13. A Fifth of Americans Go Hungry


An August 2012 Gallup poll showed that 18.2 percent of Americans lacked sufficient money for needed food at least once over the previous year. Continue Reading…


12. The US Has Left Iraq with an Epidemic of Cancers and Birth Defects


High levels of lead, mercury, and depleted uranium are believed to be causing birth defects, miscarriages, and cancer for people living in the Iraqi cities of Basra and Fallujah. Continue Reading…


11. Bush Blocked Iran Nuclear Deal


According to a former top Iranian negotiator, Seyed Hossein Mousavian, in 2005 Iran offered a deal to the United States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom that would have made it impossible for Iran to build nuclear weapons. Continue Reading…


10. A “Culture of Cruelty” along Mexico–US Border


Migrants crossing the Mexico–US border not only face dangers posed by an unforgiving desert but also abuse at the hands of the US Border Patrol Continue Reading…


9. Icelanders Vote to Include Commons in Their Constitution


In October 2012, Icelanders voted in an advisory referendum regarding six proposed policy changes to the 1944 Constitution Continue Reading…


8. Bank Interests Inflate Global Prices by 35 to 40 Percent


A stunning thirty-five to forty percent of everything we buy goes to interest. Continue Reading…


7. Merchants of Death and Nuclear Weapons


The Physicians for Social Responsibility released a study estimating that one billion people—one-seventh of the human race—could starve over the decade following a single nuclear detonation Continue Reading…


6. Billionaires’ Rising Wealth Intensifies Poverty and Inequality


As a direct result of existing financial policies, the world’s one hundred richest people grew to be $241 billion richer in 2012. Continue Reading…


5. Hate Groups and Antigovernment Groups on Rise across US


The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which monitors hate groups and antigovernment groups, released a report showing that 1,360 radical, antigovernment “patriot” groups and 321 militias actively operate within the United States Continue Reading…


4. Obama’s War on Whistleblowers


Obama signed both the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act, expanding whistleblower protections, in November 2012, and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) furthering these protections in January 2013 Continue Reading…



3. Trans-Pacific Partnership Threatens a Regime of Corporate Global Governance


The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), branded as a trade agreement and negotiated in unprecedented secrecy, is actually an enforceable transfer of sovereignty from nations and their people to foreign corporations. Continue Reading…




2. Richest Global 1 Percent Hide Trillions in Tax Havens


The global 1 percent hold twenty-one to thirty-two trillion dollars in offshore havens in order to evade taxes, according to James S. Henry, the former chief economist at the global management consulting firm, McKinsey & Company. Continue Reading…
 

1. Bradley Manning and the Failure of Corporate Media


In February 2013, United States military intelligence analyst Bradley Manning confessed in court to providing vast archives of military and diplomatic files to the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks, saying he wanted the information to become public “to make the world a better place” and that he hoped to “spark a domestic debate on the role of the military in (US) foreign policy. Continue Reading…

Friday, July 19, 2013

Bethany Brookshire - Dopamine Is _________ Is it Love? Gambling? Reward? Addiction?

This article by Bethany Brookshire, which appeared recently at Slate, takes a look at all of the proclamations being made in the press about what dopamine (one of the primary neurotransmitters) does in the brain and how it affects our personalities.

As the article points out at the front:
Dopamine is loveDopamine is lustDopamine is adulteryDopamine is motivationDopamine is attentionDopamine is feminismDopamine is addiction.
WOW. Who knew dopamine was so central to all of these functions or behaviors? Well, actually, it's not - but the media discussion of neuroscience research is often ignorant at best and flat wrong at worst.

The reality, as Brookshire points out, is that dopamine has to do with addiction, lust and love, movement, motivation, attention, and psychosis. Dopamine does play a role in each of these brain functions, BUT it is not any of them. We cannot reduce any of these qualities or functions to a single brain chemical - and we shouldn't allow the media to misrepresent the science.

Dopamine Is _________

Is it love? Gambling? Reward? Addiction?


By Bethany Brookshire | Posted Wednesday, July 3, 2013 

An MRI scan of the human brain - Photo by Katie Nesling/Thinkstock

In a brain that people love to describe as “awash with chemicals,” one chemical always seems to stand out. Dopamine: the molecule behind all our most sinful behaviors and secret cravings. Dopamine is love. Dopamine is lust. Dopamine is adultery. Dopamine is motivation. Dopamine is attention. Dopamine is feminism. Dopamine is addiction.

My, dopamine’s been busy.

Dopamine is the one neurotransmitter that everyone seems to know about. Vaughn Bell once called it the Kim Kardashian of molecules, but I don’t think that’s fair to dopamine. Suffice it to say, dopamine’s big. And every week or so, you’ll see a new article come out all about dopamine.

So is dopamine your cupcake addiction? Your gambling? Your alcoholism? Your sex life? The reality is dopamine has something to do with all of these. But it is none of them. Dopamine is a chemical in your body. That’s all. But that doesn’t make it simple.

What is dopamine? Dopamine is one of the chemical signals that pass information from one neuron to the next in the tiny spaces between them. When it is released from the first neuron, it floats into the space (the synapse) between the two neurons, and it bumps against receptors for it on the other side that then send a signal down the receiving neuron. That sounds very simple, but when you scale it up from a single pair of neurons to the vast networks in your brain, it quickly becomes complex. The effects of dopamine release depend on where it’s coming from, where the receiving neurons are going and what type of neurons they are, what receptors are binding the dopamine (there are five known types), and what role both the releasing and receiving neurons are playing.

And dopamine is busy! It’s involved in many different important pathways. But when most people talk about dopamine, particularly when they talk about motivation, addiction, attention, or lust, they are talking about the dopamine pathway known as the mesolimbic pathway, which starts with cells in the ventral tegmental area, buried deep in the middle of the brain, which send their projections out to places like the nucleus accumbens and the cortex. Increases in dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens occur in response to sex, drugs, and rock and roll. And dopamine signaling in this area is changed during the course of drug addiction. All abused drugs, from alcohol to cocaine to heroin, increase dopamine in this area in one way or another, and many people like to describe a spike in dopamine as “motivation” or “pleasure.” But that’s not quite it. Really, dopamine is signaling feedback for predicted rewards. If you, say, have learned to associate a cue (like a crack pipe) with a hit of crack, you will start getting increases in dopamine in the nucleus accumbens in response to the sight of the pipe, as your brain predicts the reward. But if you then don’t get your hit, well, then dopamine can decrease, and that’s not a good feeling. So you’d think that maybe dopamine predicts reward. But again, it gets more complex. For example, dopamine can increase in the nucleus accumbens in people with post-traumatic stress disorder when they are experiencing heightened vigilance and paranoia. So you might say, in this brain area at least, dopamine isn’t addiction or reward or fear. Instead, it’s what we call salience. Salience is more than attention: It’s a sign of something that needs to be paid attention to, something that stands out. This may be part of the mesolimbic role in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and also a part of its role in addiction.

But dopamine itself? It’s not salience. It has far more roles in the brain to play. For example, dopamine plays a big role in starting movement, and the destruction of dopamine neurons in an area of the brain called the substantia nigra is what produces the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease. Dopamine also plays an important role as a hormone, inhibiting prolactin to stop the release of breast milk. Back in the mesolimbic pathway, dopamine can play a role in psychosis, and many antipsychotics for treatment of schizophrenia target dopamine. Dopamine is involved in the frontal cortex in executive functions like attention. In the rest of the body, dopamine is involved in nausea, in kidney function, and in heart function.

With all of these wonderful, interesting things that dopamine does, it gets my goat to see dopamine simplified to things like “attention” or “addiction.” After all, it’s so easy to say “dopamine is X” and call it a day. It’s comforting. You feel like you know the truth at some fundamental biological level, and that’s that. And there are always enough studies out there showing the role of dopamine in X to leave you convinced. But simplifying dopamine, or any chemical in the brain, down to a single action or result gives people a false picture of what it is and what it does. If you think that dopamine is motivation, then more must be better, right? Not necessarily! Because if dopamine is also “pleasure” or “high,” then too much is far too much of a good thing. If you think of dopamine as only being about pleasure or only being about attention, you’ll end up with a false idea of some of the problems involving dopamine, like drug addiction or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and you’ll end up with false ideas of how to fix them.

The other reason I don’t like the “dopamine is” craze is because the simplification takes away the wonder of dopamine. If you believe “dopamine is,” then you’d think that we’ve got it all figured out. You begin to wonder why we haven’t solved this addiction problem yet. Complexity means that the diseases associated with dopamine (or with any other chemical or part of the brain, for that matter) are often difficult to understand and even more difficult to treat.

By emphasizing dopamine’s complexity, it might feel like I’m taking away some of the glamour, the sexiness, of dopamine. But I don’t think so. The complexity of how a neurotransmitter behaves is what makes it wonderful. The simplicity of a single molecule and its receptors is what makes dopamine so flexible and what allows the resulting systems to be so complex. And it’s not just dopamine. While dopamine has just five receptor type, another neurotransmitter, serotonin, has 14 currently known and even more that are thought to exist. Other neurotransmitters have receptors with different subtypes, all expressed in different places, and where each combination can produce a different result. There are many types of neurons, and they make billions and billions of connections. And all of this so you can walk, talk, eat, fall in love, get married, get divorced, get addicted to cocaine, and come out on top of your addiction some day. When you think of the sheer number of connections required simply for you to read and understand this sentence—from eyes to brain, to processing, to understanding, to movement as your fingers scroll down the page—you begin to feel a sense of awe. Our brain does all this, even while it makes us think about pepperoni pizza and what that text your crush sent really means. Complexity makes the brain the fascinating and mind-boggling thing that it is.

So dopamine has to do with addiction, whether to cupcakes or cocaine. It has to do with lust and love. It has to do with milk. It has to do with movement, motivation, attention, psychosis. Dopamine plays a role in all of these. But it is none of them, and we shouldn’t want it to be. Its complexity is what makes it great. It shows us what, with a single molecule, the brain can do.

Saturday, June 01, 2013

Inner Life at Work: Tami Simon on Business, Meditation, and Technology


From NPR's On Being with Krista Tippett, this is a nice interview with Sounds True founder and CEO, Tami Simon. Sounds True is the single best resource we have for audio teachings (as well as books and some video sessions) by the world's leading spiritual teachers from a variety of backgrounds and disciplines.

Tami Simon produced the Kosmic Consciousness course with Ken Wilber many years ago, which was my introduction to her as an interviewer and Sounds True as a company. More recent offerings include Robert Augustus Masters's Knowing Your Shadow and Pema Chodron's How to Meditate, among many other excellent offerings.

Not only do I love Sounds True and what it offers, but having Spoken to Tami a couple of times, she is someone whose vision and integrity I respect enormously.

INNER LIFE AT WORK: TAMI SIMON ON BUSINESS, MEDITATION, AND TECHNOLOGY

This Week's Conversation with Krista Tippett


May 30, 2013

You might call Tami Simon a spiritual entrepreneur. She's built a successful multimedia publishing company with a mission to disseminate "spiritual wisdom" by diverse teachers and thinkers like Pema Chödrön and Eckhart Tolle, Daniel Goleman and Brené Brown. She offers compelling lessons on joining inner life with life in the workplace — and advice on spiritual practice with a mobile device.

Listen

Learn


Voices on the Radio


Tami Simon is the publisher and CEO of the multimedia publishing company Sounds True and hosts a weekly podcast series called Insights at the Edge.

Pertinent Posts from the On Being Blog



The Work We Value, The Intelligence We Ignore: Is the Work that Made America Great Valued Any Longer?  "The skills gap is a reflection of what we value. To close the gap, we need to change the way the country feels about work." ~Mike Rowe


What Would You Be Willing to Sacrifice?  A video that's so heartbreakingly gorgeous and unswerving in its emotional sway, it'll have you pondering your own station in life.


A Little Bit of Mindfulness Meditation Can Reduce a Lot of Pain  Even novice meditators are able to curb their pain after a few training sessions in mindfulness meditation.

Thursday, May 02, 2013

Gary Marcus - THE CRISIS IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY THAT ISN’T

This article appeared in The New Yorker, written by neuroscientist Gary Marcus, author of Kluge: The Haphazard Evolution of the Human Mind (2008), one of the best books in recent years for an explanation of why our brains function - and dysfunction - as they do. He is also author of The Birth of the Mind: How a Tiny Number of Genes Creates The Complexities of Human Thought (2004) and The Algebraic Mind: Integrating Connectionism and Cognitive Science (Learning, Development, and Conceptual Change) (2003).

Social psychology has had a rough week or two in the media, with articles in Nature and The New York Times Magazine profiling either fraud or statistically weak findings taken as fact. Marcus wants to make sure we know that the field is much stronger than these articles might have us believe.

THE CRISIS IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY THAT ISN’T

POSTED BY GARY MARCUS
MAY 1, 2013


According to the headlines, social psychology has had a terrible year—and, at any rate, a bad week. The New York Times Magazine devoted nearly seven thousand words to Diederik Stapel, the Dutch researcher who committed fraud in at least fifty-four scientific papers, while Nature just published a report about another controversy, questioning whether some well-known “social-priming” results from the social psychologist Ap Dijksterhuis are replicable. Dijksterhuis famously found that thinking about a professor before taking an exam improves your performance, while thinking about a soccer ruffian makes you do worse. Although nobody doubts that Dijksterhuis ran the experiment that he says he did, it may be that his finding is either weak, or simply wrong—perhaps the peril of a field that relies too heavily on the notion that if something is statistically likely, it can be counted on.

Things aren’t quite as bad as they seem, though. Although Nature’s report was headlined “Disputed results a fresh blow for social psychology,” it scarcely noted that there have been some replications of experiments modelled on Dijksterhuis’s phenomenon. His finding could still out turn to be right, if weaker than first thought. More broadly, social priming is just one thread in the very rich fabric of social psychology. The field will survive, even if social priming turns out to have been overrated or an unfortunate detour.

Even if this one particular line of work is under a shroud, it is important not to lose sight of the fact many of the old standbys from social psychology have been endlessly replicated, like the Milgram effect—the old study of obedience in which subjects turned up electrical shocks (or what they thought were electrical shocks) all the way to four hundred and fifty volts, apparently causing great pain to their subjects, simply because they’d been asked to do it. Milgram himself replicated the experiment numerous times, in many different populations, with groups of differing backgrounds. It is still robust (in hands of other researchers) nearly fifty years later. And even today, people are still extending that result; just last week I read about a study in which intrepid experimenters asked whether people might administer electric shocks to robots, under similar circumstances. (Answer: yes.)

More importantly, there is something positive that has come out of the crisis of replicability—something vitally important for all experimental sciences. For years, it was extremely difficult to publish a direct replication, or a failure to replicate an experiment, in a good journal. Throughout my career, and long before it, journals emphasized that new papers have to publish original results; I completely failed to replicate a particular study a few years ago, but at the time didn’t bother to submit it to a journal because I knew few people would be interested. Now, happily, the scientific culture has changed. Since I first mentioned these issues in late December, several leading researchers in psychology have announced major efforts to replicate previous work, and to change the incentives so that scientists can do the right thing without feeling like they are spending time doing something that might not be valued by tenure committees.

The Reproducibility Project, from the Center for Open Science is now underway, with its first white paper on the psychology and sociology of replication itself. Thanks to Daniel Simons and Bobbie Spellman, the journal Perspectives in Psychological Science is now accepting submissions for a new section of each issue devoted to replicability. The journal Social Psychology is planning a special issue on replications for important results in social psychology, and has already received forty proposals. Other journals in neuroscience and medicine are engaged in similar efforts: my N.Y.U. colleague Todd Gureckis just used Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to replicate a wide range of basic results in cognitive psychology. And just last week, Uri Simonsohn released a paper on coping with the famous file-drawer problem, in which failed studies have historically been underreported.

It’s worth remembering, too, that social psychology isn’t the only field affected by these problems—medicine, for example, has been coping with the same concerns. But as Brian Nosek, of the Center for Open Science, wrote to me in an e-mail, psychologists are specially equipped to deal with these issues. “Psychology is at the forefront of wrestling with reproducibility by turning its research expertise on itself,” he said.

Whether or not social priming does prove real, and whether or not it turns out to be a large contributor to our mental lives—or only a trivial one that is easily overrun by other factors—all of psychology, and all of science, will be better off for the increased effort on replication. If, in the worst case, a decade’s studies turn out to be less important than we initially believed, it won’t be the end of the world. And if it accidentally leads to a culture of more careful science, on balance we all will have come out ahead.

Illustration by Nishant Choksi.

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Douglas Rushkoff - In A World That's Always On, We Are Trapped In The 'Present'

From Yesterday's All Things Considered, this segment is an interview with author and wired-culture expert Douglas Rushkoff, who is promoting his new book, Present Shock: When Everything Happens NowRushkoff believes that "it's time for people to stop chasing every ping and start using technology in a way that makes us feel more free."

He has also coined a new word to name the experience of having multiple social networking profiles.
"'Digiphrenia' is really the experience of trying to exist in more than one incarnation of yourself at the same time. There's your Twitter profile, there's your Facebook profile, there's your email inbox. And all of these sort of multiple instances of you are operating simultaneously and in parallel. And that's not a really comfortable position for most human beings."
Enjoy.

In A World That's Always On, We Are Trapped In The 'Present'


by NPR STAFF
March 25, 2013 3:30 PM

Listen to the Story


All Things Considered
5 min 46 sec
Download
Transcript

By now, you've probably heard people call themselves "slaves" to their phones or their computers. We all know what that means — but why are we allowing ourselves to be slaves to the very instruments of technology we've created?

Douglas Rushkoff, who spends his days thinking, writing and teaching about media culture, says it's time for people to stop chasing every ping and start using technology in a way that makes us feel more free. Rushkoff's latest work is called Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now. He joined NPR's Audie Cornish to talk about the book.

Interview highlights


On the definition of "present shock"

"Most simply, 'present shock' is the human response to living in a world that's always on real time and simultaneous. You know, in some ways it's the impact of living in a digital environment, and in other ways it's just really what happens when you stop leaning so forward to the millennium and you finally arrive there.

"In my life, it's sort of the experience of being on Facebook and seeing everyone from my past suddenly back in my present. And the inability to distinguish between who may have been friends of mine in second grade, and people who I've met just yesterday, and people who are actually significant relationships. That collapse of my whole life into one moment, where every ping, every vibration of my phone might just pull me out of whatever it is I'm doing, into something else that seems somehow more pressing on the moment."


On "digiphrenia"

Douglas Rushkoff founded the Narrative Lab at NYU's Interactive Telecommunications Program, and lectures about media, art, society and change at conferences and universities around the world. He lives in Brooklyn with his wife and daughter.Johannes Kroemer/Current Hardcover

" 'Digiphrenia' is really the experience of trying to exist in more than one incarnation of yourself at the same time. There's your Twitter profile, there's your Facebook profile, there's your email inbox. And all of these sort of multiple instances of you are operating simultaneously and in parallel. And that's not a really comfortable position for most human beings."

On how the digital age has abstracted our conception of time

"It's interesting — I was at Disney World and I saw this little girl who was looking at one of those signs that said, like, 'Forty minutes until you get on this ride,' and she looked up to her dad, and she said, 'What's a minute?' And I thought that, you know, in the industrial age, and in analog clocks, a minute is some portion of an hour, which is some portion of a day. In the digital age, a minute is just a number. It's just 3:23. It's almost this absolute duration that doesn't have a connection to where the sun is or where our day is. It's this very abstracted way of experiencing time. And what I'm arguing in Present Shock is that that timelessness is very characteristic of living in the digital age, in the age that we're in. And it's very hard for us to orient ourselves, to look forward to things, to join movements with goals, to invest in the future, to think about our long-term careers. We're just kind of in this moment of pause."

On the challenge of unplugging

"It's definitely hard. Your email inbox is a bit like a Las Vegas roulette machine. You know, you just check it and check it, and every once in a while there's some juicy little tidbit of reward, like the three quarters that pop down on a one-armed bandit. And that keeps you coming back for more. But I think what happens is as we get more and more obsessed with those pings, we lose touch with sort of the continuity of life. We forget what it means to really just be there, looking in someone else's eyes rather than down at our phone while we're at a meal. And I guess a lot of what I'm trying to do with this book is to give people permission to take back their time."

On understanding our new temporal fabric

"In one sense, the most radical thing about my book is that it's a book at all. I'm asking that people say, 'Rather than getting a bullet-point list of things I should do, what value is there in spending six, eight hours with one person in one book?' I'm asking people to kind of take back their time in that way. And what I'm trying to offer is that people can come to understand presentism. They can come to understand the now as a quality of our new culture, rather than the simultaneous onslaught of pings from everywhere else. That we can understand it as kind of the temporal fabric of a new world rather than just an assault."

Read an excerpt of Present

Monday, February 25, 2013

5 Simple Things The Media Gets Wrong About The “Neuroscience Of Love”

From BuzzFeed. This was posted for Valentine's Day, but it's still an interesting selection of valid concerns about the ways in which the media misinterprets the science.

5 Simple Things The Media Gets Wrong About The “Neuroscience Of Love”


Scientists study love and emotion to better-understand how our brain works. But despite what the media tells you in annual “Neuroscience of Love” trend stories, we still don't get it. Happy Valentine's Day!


Posted on February 14, 2013


noahWG
Community Contributor

1. There is a region of the brain responsible for love.


No. The caudate nucleus (above) is one of several brain areas that have been found to be active when a subject looks at a picture of a loved one, but then again, the caudate is also active during voluntary movement, learning and memory and in feedback processing. No single region of the brain is responsible for a complex emotion such as love.
Source: Wikipedia

2. Love is a unique state of mind.


The truth of the matter here is: We don't know. Several studies have found reward circuits, motivational drive and other goal-oriented states as converging to give us what we call love. So a sum total of other circuits. In fact, as one study describes it, love may be best characterized as a motivational state that triggers or modulatesother emotional states (giddiness, anxiety, anger.) But again, let's play it safe: we don't know.

3. Dopamine is a pleasure chemical!!!!


Stop. Dopamine does a lot of things in the brain, but because of its connection to reward and addiction, the "feel-good" label persists. it's more accurate to place dopamine in context with motivation, prediction errors, attention and even movement. So enough with the "squirt of dopamine to make you feel goooood" commentary.
Source: 3DChem / via: @scicurious

4. Oxytocin is the "hug hormone."


As Ed Yong so elegantly put it in this piece, the hype about oxytocin is dumb and dangerous. Science and biology are neither neat nor tidy. Although bonding behaviors have been shown to involve oxytocin, this molecule also plays significant roles in boosting the very non-huggy states of envy, schadenfreude and group favoritism. Can't we all just agree that oxytocin biology is more complicated thanTED talks tell us??

5. We <3 our iPhones!!


Ok fine, this is only kind of about the neuroscience of love but I had to bring it up. We may like our iPhones, but we don't love our iPhones. Making such a statement based simply on brain activity observations isn't even a decent example of the "correlation does not equal causation" problem. It's actually a reverse inference fallacy. So despite what you feel, we still lack concrete scientific evidence that you prefer devices to people.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

TED - Spotting neuro-fiction: A guide to dissecting overblown neuroscience headlines


This is a cool TED Talk on the nonsense that the media makes out of neuroscience research, which Molly Cockett terms "neuro-bunk." Interesting . . . and necessary.


Spotting neuro-fiction: A guide to dissecting overblown neuroscience headlines



Neuroscientist Molly Crockett has a secret to share: if you want to make better decisions, eat a grilled cheese sandwich.

In today’s talk, filmed at the TEDSalon in London, Crockett shares how she accidentally had a part in circulating this message. Several years ago, Crockett and her fellow researchers set out to study how serotonin would effect reactions when a person felt that they were treated unfairly. They manipulated serotonin in a study by giving participants a beverage designed to deplete the brain of the amino acid tryptophan, which gets converted into serotonin. The study found that, when tryptophan was low, people were more likely to seek revenge when they felt mistreated.

“That’s the study we did. And here are some of the headlines that came out afterwards,” says Crockett, revealing these doozies:
“At this point you might be wondering, ‘Did I miss something? Cheese? Chocolate? Where did that come from?’” says Crockett. “I thought the same thing when these things came out, because our study had nothing to do with cheese or chocolate — we gave people a horrible-tasting drink. But it turns out that tryptophan also happens to be found in cheese and chocolate. And when science says that cheese and chocolate help you make better decisions, well that’s sure to grab people’s attention.”

This kind elision happens all the time as the press reports on neuroscience. From there, manufacturers latch on to overblown claims as they develop new products.

“Neuroscience is turning up more and more in marketing,” says Crockett. “Do you want to sell it? Put a brain on it.”

Crockett stresses that neuroscience is advancing quickly and leading to some truly amazing discoveries.

“I am more excited than most people for the potential of neuroscience to treat mental illness and even maybe make us better and smarter,” says Crockett. “But we’re not there yet … We have to be careful that we don’t let overblown claims detract the resources and attention away from the real science that’s playing a much longer game.”

For a primer on how to spot what Crockett calls “neuro-bunk,” “neuro-bullocks,” or “neuro-flapdoodle,” watch her engaging talk. And after the jump, a selection of headlines that readers should be wary of. Note: Inclusion here doesn’t mean that the science behind a study is bad, or that a news source intentionally overstated a claim. It’s simply that these pieces give conclusive answers to concepts that scientists are only beginning to understand. As Crockett says, “The answers shouldn’t be simple because the brain isn’t simple.”

You Love Your iPhone. Literally,” The New York Times (Sept. 30, 2011)

In her talk, Crockett debunks this op-ed, about a study in which 16 subjects were shown audio and video of a ringing iPhone while functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to map their brain activity. The article notes a “flurry of activation in the insular cortex of the brain, which is associated with feelings of love and compassion.” Crockett says to be very skeptical of claims that a brain scan can show emotions or thoughts. Yes, there might be activity in the insular cortex — but this region is also associated with memory, language, attention, anger, disgust and pain. Says Crockett, “By the same logic, I could equally conclude, ‘You hate your iPhone.’ When you see activation in the insula, you can’t just pick and choose your favorite explanation off the list.”

Study: ‘Love hormone’ roused by social media,” Fox News (July 12, 2012)

Oxytocin is often referred to as the “love molecule” or “moral molecule,” because it’s associated with trust, cooperation and bonding. But any articles that refer to it as such should be taken with a grain of salt, says Crockett. According to Crockett, studies on oxytocin “are scientifically valid and they have been replicated, but they’re not the full story.” She explains, “Other studies have shown that boosting oxytocin increases envy, it increases gloating. Oxytocin can bias people to favor their own group at the expense of other groups.”

Hormone Oxytocin May Keep Men Faithful,” ABC News (Nov. 14, 2012)

Last month, a flurry of articles appeared based on a study in which male participants were given “a sniff” of oxytocin before being introduced to an “attractive” experimenter. The study found that men in monogamous relationships who received said sniff kept their distance from the researcher. The hormone didn’t appear to have an effect on single men. So what’s the problem with this study circulating in the press? That it is a very big leap to say that oxytocin might “keep men faithful.” Keeping physical distance from an attractive woman in a single situation is hardly a measure of fidelity.

Neuro boosts minds, moods and more — A drink review,” Lifenut.com (Sept. 26, 2011)

Neuro is a brand of beverages that makes bold claims on its bottles. “Using the power of science, each Neuro enhances the body’s reaction to all the ways you live your life in color,” reads their website, “from providing the spark that ignites your passions and stimulates your mind, to the fuel for your dreams and inner peace.” Naturally, Crockett is skeptical about this brand and, with it, any positive reviews. “When this came up in my local shop, naturally I was curious about some of the research backing these claims. I went to the company’s website looking to find some controlled trials of their products — but I didn’t find any,” says Crockett. “Trial or no trial, these claims are front and center on their products.”

Brain scans can detect lying,” PreventDisease.com (undated)

This article quotes research that could “put the lie detector machine out of business.” It shares the results of a study in which fMRI was used to scan students’ brains as they were asked to lie and tell the truth in a lab setting. And when they were lying, subjects showed increased brain activity. While this study is interesting, much more research needs to be done before this headline could be considered true. Jumping to this conclusion is dangerous, as the issue of whether to use brain scans as evidence courtrooms is currently being debated.

Red wine and chocolate can boost your brain power,” The Telegraph (May 6, 2011)

As Crockett notes in her talk, the media flocks to science that says decadent food and beverages have benefits for the brain. The claims are usually overstated — or made through tangential facts — as happened with Crockett’s study that morphed pro-chocolate in the press. In general, headlines like these should always set off warning bells.

Below, a few other recent headlines which have us wary of neuro-bunk:
And some more great reading on the bounds of extrapolating from neuroscience research:

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Examining the Role of Media in the Human Experience | The New School


As media - in all of its forms - shapes more and more of our experience of the world (if we let it, and most people do, knowingly or unknowingly), this talk is highly relevant. How much of our experience do want to have shaped by forces and values far removed from our lived reality?

Unfortunately, not enough people are asking these questions.

Examining the Role of Media in the Human Experience | The New School


On Thursday, October 18th 2012, Our Humanity Matters (OHM) held its first panel discussion at The New School titled, "Examining the Role of Media in the Human Experience." The goal of this talk was to build the framework for a continuing debate around one of the most important subjects facing humanity today -- media. "Mass media has become part of our nervous system," says Tanja A. W., director of OHM. "Therefore, if we hope to build a sustainable future and culture of wholeness where interconnectedness with all would be seen as an intelligent and enlightened way of being, then we must address this very fundamental issue."

OHM is a non-profit organization designed to further the understanding of humanity and its spiritual and existential challenges in mass media culture. The panel included leading cultural and media theorist, Douglas Kellner, George Kneller Chair in the Philosophy of Education at UCLA; Politics and Aesthetics, Ecology and Technology expert Verena Conley, Long-Term Visiting Professor of Comparative Literature and of Romance Languages and Literatures at Harvard University; and The New School's own, award winning composer, Barry Salmon, Associate Professor at the New School for Public Engagement; and moderator Tanja A.W., director of Our Humanity Matters.

THE NEW SCHOOL

Location: Theresa Lang Community and Student Center, Arnhold Hall
10/18/2012 2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m.

Friday, October 05, 2012

Talking Back: A New Theory of Individuality - Dr. Sarah Joan Moran at TEDxBern


Interesting TEDx talk. The introduction is in Swiss German (I think), but the talk itself is in English. Dr. Moran examines the way the media (print, visual, and so on), especially the perpetuation of stereotypes, shape our identities and inhibit social justice through their assertion of "power over."
The images, objects, and buildings crafted by human hands create ‘truth’, assert authority, and mediate our understandings of past and present, self and other, and even right and wrong.  Although most of the time we consider the stories we tell about ourselves in terms of words - words written in a book, typed on a screen, or spoken on the news - images and buildings play crucial roles in shaping our worldviews and, often, in both perpetuating and challenging inequality within dominant power structures. 


Talking Back: A New Theory of Individuality - Dr. Sarah Joan Moran
TEDxBern - Interactive news media is changing the global conversation. During this talk, Dr. Sarah Joan Moran (personal site) presents the potential of these platforms for breaking down stereotypes and fostering a sense of global social justice.

Dr. Moran is a historian of early modern visual culture at the University of Bern's Institute for Art History, She researches how power structures have worked to create and perpetuate inequality, and of the roles played by visual and textual communication within those beliefs and structures.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Buddhist Geeks 264: McLuhan and Buddhism | How is the Medium Changing the Message?

This cool Buddhist Geeks talk with Ken McLeod is from the 2012 Buddhist Geeks Conference. You can stream the podcast directly at the Buddhist Geeks site, just follow the title link below.

Buddhist Geeks 264: McLuhan and Buddhism | How is the Medium Changing the Message?

BG 264: McLuhan and Buddhism | How is the Medium Changing the Message?
by Ken McLeod

Download

 

Episode Description:

What is the message of Buddhism today?
Self-improvement? A fulfilling life? An understanding of the mysteries of the human condition? How does McLuhan’s famous dictum “the medium is the message” apply now that people are connecting with Buddhism in radically different ways?

In this episode, taken from the Buddhist Geeks Conference in 2012, Ken McLeod explores how McLuhan’s famous dictum “the medium is the message” might apply to Buddhism.

Episode Links:

Transcript:

Transcript coming soon…