Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-06 Thread Jack Leibowitz
Good..

Jack
  - Original Message - 
  From: Orlando Leibovitz 
  To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
  Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 5:07 PM
  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E


  QUOTES

  Few people think more than two or three times a year; I have made an 
international reputation for myself by thinking once or twice a week.
  George Bernard Shaw

  If all the rich people in the world divided up their money among themselves 
there wouldn't be enough to go around.
  Christina Stead (1903 - 1983), House of All Nations (1938) Credo

  My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
  Errol Flynn (1909 - 1959)

  Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity: and I am not sure 
about the universe. 
  Albert Einstein

  Orlando


  glen e. p. ropella wrote: 
Thus spake Marcus G. Daniels circa 10/05/2008 12:07 PM:
  glen e. p. ropella wrote:
Thus spake Douglas Roberts circa 10/05/2008 11:07 AM:
 
  You want to talk about willful ignorance?  Take a good look around you.

Exactly.  The trick is:  What can we do about it?
  
  Hmm, Chelsea Clinton went to work for a hedge fund instead of going in
to politics.   Drastic measures?

Sorry for being dense; but how does that relate to taking action (or
knowing what actions could be taken) to mitigate against willful ignorance?

  

  -- 

  Orlando Leibovitz

  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  www.orlandoleibovitz.com

  Studio Telephone: 505-820-6183



--


  
  FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
  Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
  lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-06 Thread Phil Henshaw
To add to that, there seems to be a large institutional push for business
and political funded mercenary scientific research to create uncertainty
about legitimate science.   A comment on David Michaels' in book Doubt is
their product is in the 9/27 Science News sums it up.  It's 1100 references
and other resources are on the SKPP website www.defendingscience.org.   I
also got a note from regarding the equally suspicious bloging of 'peer
reviewed' papers reported on in The Economist User-generated science Sep
18th 2008 print edition on Web 2.0 tools for it as a new horizon for of
speedy (and maybe thoughtless) research.

Phil

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
 Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 1:50 PM
 To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
 Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E
 
 Steve Smith wrote:
  The point of my talk of ignorance (willful and otherwise) is that to
  the extent we are complicit in our own problems, we *do* have the
  ability to retrieve some of our power from those we have given it to
  out of our own *willful ignorance*.
 Good rant.  :-)
 
 I''ll only add that power is not claimed by not being snowed by the
 misrepresentations of those having power.   It's also necessary to
 organize resources to influence those in power.  Folks like Sarah Palin
 recognize that information is a weapon (e.g. see her recent incredible
 remarks about Bill Ayers), but don't otherwise need to be limited by
 whether information is true in context.   Similarly corporate lobbyists
 are effective at influencing government, but that too is about action
 first and truth second.
 
 Marcus
 --
 It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight
 in the dog. -- Mark Twain
 
 
 FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
 Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
 lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org




FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-06 Thread Phil Henshaw
Well, where do you put inherited 'willful ignorance'?  That kind is sort
of 'built in'.

 

There are two of these that my work repeatedly runs into and I fail to find
a way around.One is the evident fact that the active parts of nature
develop locally and have their own local reactions to intruding impacts from
other active parts of nature, and that that just does not correspond with
the concept of everything being determined by its environment.  Yet most
scientists still remain focused on the inherited fascination with explaining
what the determinants are. The other is how everyone who has it pointed
out seems to acknowledge that a system for endless multiplication of wealth
is a threat to everything people need and care about, but then say they're
trying to ignore it to try to get along..

 

Phil 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 10:52 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

 

Dale -



 
I think you're being too generous.  I'm afraid that many fall into a
category I'll call Maliciously aware. 

Willful Ignorance, in my vernacular is a dual of Malicious Awareness.
Just as most good physical comedians and rodeo clowns have to be really,
really good, to be that bad, Willful Ignorance is grounded in Malicious
Awareness.





Greenspan *had* to know that he was presiding at a series of dedications of
a house of cards (Willfully pretending ignorance).


 
Here you seem to agree that true ignorance may not be the issue.

Again, I use Willful Ignorance in the same sense (mod subtleties) as you use
Maliciously Aware.   The difference is that it is the *affectation of
ignorance* that makes it work.  



  We
have a system where certain players can reap short-term gains without
being held accountable for long-term losses.  I'm sure there are
individuals on this list with more game-theory or behavioral-incentive
knowledge that could elucidate the mechanisms better than I.
  

Yes, and it is not surprising that we would evolve personality types to
fill this niche.  I think we've had such in our midst at least as long as
we've not been nomadic.   My personal belief is that survival units of
wandering tribe are at least selected for enlightened self interest at
the band level.   At the scale we currently operate, I think it is at least
(very) very hard for us to recognize enlightened self interest, much less be
motivated to act on it.



 
The most frustrating part is that I simply don't know what can be done
about it and how I can help.  I can choose to act in what I believe is
a more moral way, guided by enlightened self-interest, but that
doesn't have much effect on the system as a whole.
  

I (and many here I am sure) share this frustration.  I certainly don't have
any answers but I do have a few caveats:  I believe that much of the power
of the worst offenders in our ruling class (political, economic, religious)
comes directly from an abuse of this very frustration in the rest of us.   I
believe that we have two basic operating modes,  Willfull Ignorance and
Enlightened Awareness.  We ourselves, can be willfully ignorant.   We
willfully seek out leaders who will promise us what we want to hear, what
feeds our greed and salves our fears, even when we know better.

Willful Ignorance, IMHO, is driven by the two great motivators of Greed
and Fear.   We constantly allow ourselves to be stampeded from one
unsustainable/untenable position to another because it suits the interest of
those who can extract profit from the massive movements (bull markets, bear
markets, war, etc.)  This is why our two party system doesn't really work.
They can play good cop/bad cop with us over and over again and we never
notice.   All the while, if something turns out badly they claim how could
we have known? but if it turns out well, they scream See! I told you so!
And until it all falls down on our heads, we lap it up like cream from a
saucer.

I was at a lecture by Noam Chomsky several years ago.  He was speaking on
some topic related to NAFTA and the packed house hung on his every word.  It
was held at UNM and the audience was about 30% students and 70% yuppies.
During the question and answer session, some poor schmuck stood up and
asked.  Can you recommend any 'Socially Responsible' Investments?
Chomsky paused for maybe 5 seconds which was an eternity as the audience all
leaned forward in their seats, held their breath, cocked their ears.  

When he finally spoke, a loud gasp went up.  Socially Responsible
Investment is a contradiction in terms.   I took his point to mean that
wielding and hoarding resources in an abstract form (stocks, bonds,
commodity futures, currencies, etc) is always fundamentally irresponsible.
The point of an investment is to increase in value relative to the market...
to get ahead, and it is quite possible that this type of getting 

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-06 Thread Phil Henshaw
The Matt Taibbi quote is an amazingly clear description of the dilemma of
minds that make sense of things by plugging in stereotypes of the real
world and so creating an imaginary one lacking internal conflicts.  The
error common to all such confusions seems to be discussing things in terms
of pictures in our heads without a reliable way of referring to any
independent reality people might consider. 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Douglas Roberts
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 2:08 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

 

It was a good rant, wasn't it...

Since Steve saw fit to bring up willful ignorance, and Marcus, Sarah
Palin:  what do you want to bet that McCain's
creationist-the-world-is-6,000-years-old
gun-toting-I-can-see-Russia-from-my-window sidekick garners approximately
50% of the vote next month?

As Matt Taibbi said in his 'The Lies of Sarah Palin' interview with Rolling
Stone Magazine earlier this week:

Here's the thing about Americans. You can send their kids off by the
thousands to get their balls blown off in foreign lands for no reason at
all, saddle them with billions in debt year after congressional year while
they spend their winters cheerfully watching game shows and football, pull
the rug out from under their mortgages, and leave them living off their
credit cards and their Wal-Mart salaries while you move their jobs to China
and Bangalore.

And none of it matters, so long as you remember a few months before Election
Day to offer them a two-bit caricature culled from some cutting-room-floor
episode of Roseanne as part of your presidential ticket.

And if she's a good enough likeness of a loudmouthed Middle American
archetype, as Sarah Palin is, John Q. Public will drop his giant sized bag
of Doritos in gratitude, wipe the sizzlin' picante dust from his lips and
rush to the booth to vote for her.



You want to talk about willful ignorance?  Take a good look around you.

-- 
Doug Roberts, RTI International
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
505-455-7333 - Office
505-670-8195 - Cell

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Marcus G. Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

Steve Smith wrote:

The point of my talk of ignorance (willful and otherwise) is that to the
extent we are complicit in our own problems, we *do* have the ability to
retrieve some of our power from those we have given it to out of our own
*willful ignorance*. 

Good rant.  :-)

I''ll only add that power is not claimed by not being snowed by the
misrepresentations of those having power.   It's also necessary to organize
resources to influence those in power.  Folks like Sarah Palin recognize
that information is a weapon (e.g. see her recent incredible remarks about
Bill Ayers), but don't otherwise need to be limited by whether information
is true in context.   Similarly corporate lobbyists are effective at
influencing government, but that too is about action first and truth second.

Marcus
--
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in
the dog. -- Mark Twain




FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org






FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-06 Thread Phil Henshaw
Well Russ, what if a group of scientists were to acknowledge that science
actually just seems to be descriptive after all..., and looking through the
holes one seems able to actually see signs of a physical world after all!
Than sort of 'emperor's new clothes' moment might be enough to turn
everyone's attention to value of self-critical thinking wouldn't it?!;-)

 

Phil

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Russ Abbott
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 10:06 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

 

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 12:39 PM, glen e. p. ropella [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

So the first step is for each individual to accept their responsibility 
to think/speak critically at every opportunity.  The next step is to 
package such critical thinking inside an infectious wrapper so that 
it spreads across all humanity.


Yes, if it worked it would be wonderful. I'm  cynical enough to  doubt that
it would succeed. (1) I doubt that we can find a wrapper infectious enough
and (2) even if we did, I doubt that the population as a whole is capable of
the level of critical thinking that we need. (That's elitism, isn't it.) 

Demagoguery almost always seems to succeed. Can anything be done about that?
More discouraging is that advertising is cleaned up demagoguery. And
advertising will always be with us.

Just to be sure I knew what I was talking about (critical thinking?) I just
looked up demagoguery: impassioned appeals to the prejudices and emotions
of the populace.  

Prejudice and emotion will always be with us -- even the least prejudiced
and least a prisoner of their emotions.  Besides, without emotion, we can't
even make decisions. (That's clearly another discussion, but it's worth
noting.) 

So can we really complain about superficial prejudice and emotion when we
are all subject to it at some level?  

Perhaps the need is for self-awareness -- and even more for having a high
regard for self-awareness -- so that one can learn about one's prejudices
and emotions and stand back from them when appropriate.  Can we teach that?
(It helps to have good role models. Obviously we have had exactly the
opposite in our current president.)

Actually, though, a high regard for self-awareness might be easier to teach
than critical thinking. So perhaps there is hope. But the danger there is to
fall prey to melodrama.  It's not easy. I'll nominate Glen as a good role
model, though.  How can we make your persona more widely visible?

-- Russ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread Marcus G. Daniels

Steve Smith wrote:
Yes, and it is not surprising that we would evolve personality types 
to fill this niche.

[..]
The closest thing I have to an answer (for myself) is to realize that 
anyone in power is by definition a salesman... they will say and do 
what it takes to get us to buy their product (themselves, their 
policies) but we should not mistake this for them truly knowing what 
is best for us, and offering it to us out of the goodness of their 
heart. The myth of the public servant is an empty one, as much as we 
want to believe in it. 


If it is evolution at work, then perhaps the good cops and the bad cops 
are in some sense the good guys, and it is everyone else that is making 
the market (so to speak), inefficient.   All this talk about ignorance 
means so much nothing at the end of the day if it doesn't change who is 
in power.   The world is complex and mysterious and we will be forever 
mostly ignorant of it.  Trying to distinguish the ignorant from the 
informed is in this way a dead end.



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread Marcus G. Daniels

Steve Smith wrote:
The point of my talk of ignorance (willful and otherwise) is that to 
the extent we are complicit in our own problems, we *do* have the 
ability to retrieve some of our power from those we have given it to 
out of our own *willful ignorance*. 

Good rant.  :-)

I''ll only add that power is not claimed by not being snowed by the 
misrepresentations of those having power.   It's also necessary to 
organize resources to influence those in power.  Folks like Sarah Palin 
recognize that information is a weapon (e.g. see her recent incredible 
remarks about Bill Ayers), but don't otherwise need to be limited by 
whether information is true in context.   Similarly corporate lobbyists 
are effective at influencing government, but that too is about action 
first and truth second.


Marcus
--
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight 
in the dog. -- Mark Twain



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread Douglas Roberts
It was a good rant, wasn't it...

Since Steve saw fit to bring up willful ignorance, and Marcus, Sarah
Palin:  what do you want to bet that McCain's
creationist-the-world-is-6,000-years-old
gun-toting-I-can-see-Russia-from-my-window sidekick garners approximately
50% of the vote next month?

As Matt Taibbi said in his 'The Lies of Sarah Palin' interview with Rolling
Stone Magazine earlier this week:

*Here's the thing about Americans. You can send their kids off by the
thousands to get their balls blown off in foreign lands for no reason at
all, saddle them with billions in debt year after congressional year while
they spend their winters cheerfully watching game shows and football, pull
the rug out from under their mortgages, and leave them living off their
credit cards and their Wal-Mart salaries while you move their jobs to China
and Bangalore.*

*And none of it matters, so long as you remember a few months before
Election Day to offer them a two-bit caricature culled from some
cutting-room-floor episode of Roseanne as part of your presidential ticket.*

*And if she's a good enough likeness of a loudmouthed Middle American
archetype, as Sarah Palin is, John Q. Public will drop his giant sized bag
of Doritos in gratitude, wipe the sizzlin' picante dust from his lips and
rush to the booth to vote for her.*


You want to talk about willful ignorance?  Take a good look around you.

-- 
Doug Roberts, RTI International
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
505-455-7333 - Office
505-670-8195 - Cell

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Marcus G. Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

 Steve Smith wrote:

 The point of my talk of ignorance (willful and otherwise) is that to the
 extent we are complicit in our own problems, we *do* have the ability to
 retrieve some of our power from those we have given it to out of our own
 *willful ignorance*.

 Good rant.  :-)

 I''ll only add that power is not claimed by not being snowed by the
 misrepresentations of those having power.   It's also necessary to organize
 resources to influence those in power.  Folks like Sarah Palin recognize
 that information is a weapon (e.g. see her recent incredible remarks about
 Bill Ayers), but don't otherwise need to be limited by whether information
 is true in context.   Similarly corporate lobbyists are effective at
 influencing government, but that too is about action first and truth second.

 Marcus
 --
 It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in
 the dog. -- Mark Twain


 
 FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
 Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
 lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread glen e. p. ropella
Thus spake Marcus G. Daniels circa 10/05/2008 12:07 PM:
 glen e. p. ropella wrote:
 Thus spake Douglas Roberts circa 10/05/2008 11:07 AM:
  
 You want to talk about willful ignorance?  Take a good look around you.
 

 Exactly.  The trick is:  What can we do about it?
   
 Hmm, Chelsea Clinton went to work for a hedge fund instead of going in
 to politics.   Drastic measures?

Sorry for being dense; but how does that relate to taking action (or
knowing what actions could be taken) to mitigate against willful ignorance?

-- 
glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread Douglas Roberts
Excuse me?  Mitigate willful ignorance?  You must be new around here.

;-}

I'm afraid, as Pogo once said, We have met the enemy, and he is us.

I suspect  couple of hundred million years is what it's going to take to
begin to mitigate willful ignorance on this particular ball of dirt.

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 1:13 PM, glen e. p. ropella [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:




 Sorry for being dense; but how does that relate to taking action (or
 knowing what actions could be taken) to mitigate against willful ignorance?

 --
 glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com


 
 FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
 Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
 lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread Douglas Roberts
Hope you took a laptop with you, Glen.  This would make great pub fare:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/04/tina-fey-as-sarah-palin-i_n_131964.html

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 1:39 PM, glen e. p. ropella [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:


   I'm off for a pint at the pub.

 --
 glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com


 
 FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
 Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
 lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Re: [FRIAM] Willfull Ignorance - Satisfies NickCriteria E

2008-10-05 Thread Russ Abbott
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 12:39 PM, glen e. p. ropella
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

 So the first step is for each individual to accept their responsibility
 to think/speak critically at every opportunity.  The next step is to
 package such critical thinking inside an infectious wrapper so that
 it spreads across all humanity.


Yes, if it worked it would be wonderful. I'm  cynical enough to  doubt that
it would succeed. (1) I doubt that we can find a wrapper infectious enough
and (2) even if we did, I doubt that the population as a whole is capable of
the level of critical thinking that we need. (That's elitism, isn't it.)

Demagoguery almost always seems to succeed. Can anything be done about that?
More discouraging is that advertising is cleaned up demagoguery. And
advertising will always be with us.

Just to be sure I knew what I was talking about (critical thinking?) I just
looked up demagoguery: impassioned appeals to the prejudices and emotions
of the populace.

Prejudice and emotion will always be with us -- even the least prejudiced
and least a prisoner of their emotions.  Besides, without emotion, we can't
even make decisions. (That's clearly another discussion, but it's worth
noting.)

So can we really complain about superficial prejudice and emotion when we
are all subject to it at some level?

Perhaps the need is for self-awareness -- and even more for having a high
regard for self-awareness -- so that one can learn about one's prejudices
and emotions and stand back from them when appropriate.  Can we teach that?
(It helps to have good role models. Obviously we have had exactly the
opposite in our current president.)

Actually, though, a high regard for self-awareness might be easier to teach
than critical thinking. So perhaps there is hope. But the danger there is to
fall prey to melodrama.  It's not easy. I'll nominate Glen as a good role
model, though.  How can we make your persona more widely visible?

-- Russ

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org