Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘consequences’

Ok, let’s review…

Car crash outside the front window every Friday night… what happens?

Keith Olbermann goes nuclear on an unsuspecting dolt…what happens?

Car crash on 3 corner of Darlington raceway… what happens?

Rush Limbaugh says he hopes the President ‘fails’ in efforts to steer the country… what happens?

The latest, but not the last unfortunately, is Dr. Phil… Dr. Phil has a two-day interview to skewer his “what’s her name” patient and what happens?

(I really hate myself for writing this but there are contingencies everywhere.)

Highly probable that no one will read this any way ‘cause it is not as entertaining as Dr. Phil turning into Dr. Jekyll, the absolutist psycho-blimp – not his physical state necessarily but his approach to working through challenges that float around pop media based on the ratings…

Oh, yeah, the ratings… Up 20%. Gee, that’s a lot… must be a relationship there between getting in front of the best parade in town once you know is being watched on TV and trying to look like the band director.

When combined with his psycho-shock-jock approach about an 11 year-old murder suspect, he is in full stride. His mother is so proud! But, then she is getting a stipend no doubt so that is hardly the criteria to “oh and ah” over. This makes Dr. Phil what???, the “Dr. of talking heads?” Is that different than a “talking heads Dr.”? Somebody else figure that out, please!

Or, it could be a contract year for him at his network and, like any self-focused pro athlete, he is playing for a new contract rather than the integrated best interests of his headline sucking patient.

We are watching the consequences of media at work here. Everyone needing to stay in the limelight has an opinion on those things that they don’t understand or affect. It is hard to tell the opinion of a taxi cab driver in Denver from the pundits these days. Biggest difference is that the taxi cab drivers have no media contracts to pump. Yup, there were 8 or 9 celebs eating their $250 a plate dinners at one of the awards celebrations that had their opinions as well but no solutions.

No, I refuse to weigh in on this nationally pop-news dot. Every time another dot is added, look around. What you see is self-puffery from everyone involved…everyone! Everyone has something to gain from doing what they are doing. Not so you say; prove me wrong.

Oh, …returning to the review above, contingency management is operating there too in each and every example.

In each case there is a greater likelihood…

… you’ll watch out the window on Friday night; you’ll watch Keith parley his tirades to bigger dolts in the future; people will want tickets near the 3rd corner of Darlington next year; and the Rush-ter will get larger columns in the press and media reports than he otherwise wouldn’t received.

And of course, if you attend to Dr. Phil and what’s her name, you are part of Dr. Phil’s contract extension because you were part of that 20% spike. He is just responding to the consequences he’s experienced in the past… just like you and I do.

Move on.

Read Full Post »

Please run this blog through the Baloney Detection Kit that was published here in the last 90 days. I recommend you do it for every media byte but, a guy off the streets writing about our global financial crisis may need it more than others for obvious reasons.

There is a postulate that states, “People will fight harder to keep just what they have than they will to double it.”

The financial crisis we are now experiencing – much like the one in the 1930s – is the collection of consequences for not attending to or understanding the dynamic relationships between 50 or so markers with thousands of events, also dynamic, that occur in the marketplace.

At the same time, those with access and responsibility for our economic homeostasis were postulating and positioning the use of recycled and flawed approaches as having ‘mitigating’ circumstances surrounding their failures, again and again and…… again.Each time our institutions fell further behind at tortuous attempts of adjusting the dials to prove or show these fanciful approaches were correct but not executed correctly. No one flinched.

Each time the fanciful approaches were linked to current fears – mostly social, that were then maintained lest a change in ‘the’ approach make things worse, as in the postulate above.

Fear and shallow rhetoric prevented our economic behavior from being empirically subjected to an experimental analysis of the behavior of markets. Now we have another chance. The consequences for greater pain are more probable than any temporary gains from standing pat or biding our time. Our trillions of lost dollars and savings and confidence has occasioned a search for another method, to find a different method, a variation, to bring confidence as well as some level of empiricism to financial institutions that only pretend to be empirical.

Our strengths as a country and culture are science. It is time to try what we know works to get us to the moon and extend the average life spans in less than one hundred years from 37 to 74 years. It is also fitting that an empirical variation will help us understand what Darwin saw (whose 200 birthday we celebrate this Thursday) as the dominate feature in all species over 150 years ago.

For nay-sayers and those that have a vested interest (no pun intended) in that status quo of this pig in a poke economic approach, one can only suggest that the time for something else is upon us. That ‘something’ isn’t witchcraft, tea leaves, prayer or a link to LinkedIn.com. It is science in excess. I hope that idea gets more traction faster than Darwin’s ideas have fared.

You better hope so too.

Read Full Post »

In yet another confounding of the same sitatuion we see played out over and over in thousands of published studies, Seed gives us a report on how moral decisions are contextual.

“No, the results did not surprise us,” says Lindenberg. “What surprised us was the size of the effect.”

This is not unlike the findings from last week’s feature on social conformity we found on CNN.  What’s different is the more sound conclusions from these researchers.

It’s not that good people turned bad, either. One goal simply surpassed another in importance. In the case of the mailbox, the desire for cash superceded the desire to behave appropriately, because others already hadn’t. “People are not bad. People are just subject to social influence,” Lindenberg says. An effective tip for crime prevention is to be aware of norm violations on all fronts. After all, says Lindenberg, “Even old grandmothers would do this.”

Values are contingent and contextual.  Ain’t no good and evil, bad and good.  Only situations and consequences.

Read Full Post »

Below is a Washingtonpost.com article from 1-15-09 that encapsulates the events on the Hudson River in NYC that allowed 155 people to walk away for a ditched water landing in extremely chilly conditions.

(If you don’t like this particular description of events, pick another from the 1032 that were on the web by that evening. Any assessment will work for the questions I am raising under the sub titled heading that precedes the article.)

Determined but unpredictable

A Water Landing

An unlikely event plays out on the Hudson River


Friday, January 16, 2009; Page A18

THE NEXT TIME you’re tempted to ignore a flight attendant’s plea to direct your attention to the front of the cabin for safety instructions, remember yesterday’s dramatic Hudson River landing of U.S. Airways Flight 1549. The aircraft had just taken off from New York’s La Guardia Airport en route to Charlotte when both engines were reportedly knocked out after being hit by birds following takeoff. Remarkably, the 150 passengers, two pilots and three flight attendants were rescued.

This crash could have been so much worse. That it wasn’t is a testament to a number of actors in the drama, particularly the pilots, that unfolded above the river’s frigid waters. By all accounts, the pilots brought the Airbus 320 down in a controlled manner, and the crew prepared passengers during what little time they had. A passenger interviewed on television said, “We hit hard!” But because of the pilots’ actions, the plane neither broke apart on impact nor sank quickly. One can only imagine the fear inside the cabin, especially after water started to fill it. That everyone got off the plane without life-threatening injury, despite the bone-chilling air and water temperatures, speaks of their pulling together in a time of crisis. The stretch of the Hudson where Flight 1549 went down is served by a constant flow of ferries between Manhattan and New Jersey. Within minutes of the plane’s entering the water, eyewitnesses said, boats were on scene to help pull passengers to safety until New York law enforcement could get there to lead the rescue.

Federal investigators will examine the plane to find out what exactly happened. But the lesson for everyone in all this is to pay attention to those preflight instructions. “In the unlikely event of a water landing” now has special resonance.

The events of the day were just as you heard or read about in the media. 81 tons of metal with millions of interconnected parts and environment physics malfunctioned after take off. No one has paused long enough to pose and extend answers to any of three questions…

Do you believe this was a set of miracles or a consequence of the 437 hours of training of the pilot and crew?” Pick one…

After a problem was detected by the pilot and co-pilot, did their behavior or intervention of Allah, Buddha, God, chance or karma etc., result in the plane landing as it did in the river?” Select the interventionist you favor…

Did the pilot and crew depend on any other agency, including the tower, to do what they did? Select a contributor to their set of results…

Can you explain why the consequences of this aviation event were what they were and other aviation events ended had less desirable consequences?” Please respond and share your views, beliefs and theories…

Read Full Post »

The CNN article “Charting the psychology of evil, decades after ‘shock’ experiment” ought to be retitled “Charting the psychology of web reading on a Dull Friday

Stanley Milgram’s research was remarkable and valuable. It has been replicated. It has been quoted and interpreted to ad nausium. Now in an effort to sell copy during the hiatus between presidents some genius has resurrected it and given it a fancy name with “evil” in the title. Now it has a zillion hits and is replete with “coulds” shoulds” oughts, may, and other conditional phrases that allow the reader to be led down a path to a possible chance-finding of a new version of a car crash.

Words are powerful. It is a sign of Dumbness when people hoping to land on an island of absoluteness grasp on to anything that is presented as binary:

Good vs. evil

right vs. wrong

Chevy vs. Ford

normal vs. abnormal

Democrat vs. Republican

Worker vs. management

Muslim vs. Christian                                                           

etc. vs. etc

It’s here again. We use the research rather than this sadly disturbed illiterate interpretation to keep authority figures off alter boys, teachers off cheerleaders, bosses off new-hires and rent-a-dicks away from ‘civilian combatants’ in detainment.

But, because we have the 1890 concept of behavior as being based on religion, traditions, and good and evil, all these perverts continue to exist aided by the writers who need to finish off the month with a dippy article in order to look like they know how to read.

All this has to do with implied and explicit rules and a false sense of personal and divine responsibility that has been part of the teachings in schools and churches and synagogues for 400 years at least.

Pay attention to the consequences to understand behavior. Pay attention to the rules that the “other” person is working under to understand behavior. Pay attention to the knowledge that you have millions of rules you don’t know about and those rules are not likely the same as anyone else’s rules – at the moment they are your rules. Pay attention that the different rules you attend to on Monday don’t exist on Sunday.

When reading about “What the heck is going on out in the world? – consider that some grad students or volunteers got paid to be in an experiment 29 years ago. They wanted to do it right in front of all the PhDs and they wanted the money and they wanted to show they were smart and on and on.    Hundreds of rules were working including doing what you were told that our parents locked down early on.

When you define things arbitrarily – the things like evil, good, honest, hero, sinner, saint, patriot, freedom fighter, and all the other meta-terms keep their fuzziness so that you read what you bring to the article. (By the way, that is another experiment to read up on….) While having specific and empirical definitions is not going to happen, using your noggin for something more than a baseball cap rack can’t be beat.

As they say on ESPN’s NFL Countdown… “C-mon Man!

This site and this author will contribute by provided one of the many versions of “BALONEY DETECTION COLLECTION”… stay tuned…it’s coming to you and, as always, it is FREE…

Read Full Post »

By engaging in bailout after bailout, government bureaucrats in both parties perpetuate the system that is not working: special interest groups getting special treatment.

Follow the consequences! By subsidizing failed but well-connected losers with a bailout we collectively are confiscating the necessary resources from productive and successful companies and tax paying members of the economy. Effectively, that means the successful work for the unsuccessful.  We are considering giving billions to those executives that brought their companies to the brink of irrelevancy.

Such bailouts are a bad idea because the failed company management doesn’t feel the pain as they feel the bonuses when they do what they are supposed to do. The selection by consequences that operate everywhere in life are again short-circuited for these companies and the communities that feed off their inefficiencies. The consequences for bad behavior never come to rest on those that were instrumental in the problem so they don’t learn. Why should we allow the natural consequences of bad behavior in a free market to be aborted in favor of special favors resulting in our representatives selecting who will owe them favors? We shouldn’t !

Do something about it or shut up!

Read Full Post »

Like a flu virus in a preschool lunch room, the question comes up every 6 months or so as to “Why do children lie?” and “What does it mean?” and “What do you do about it?” The latest incarnation was on CNN/health in a Parenting.com article.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/family/11/12/why.kids.lie/index.html

There is huge divergence out there on the answers to the above questions. Even when the conclusions are correct, like Michael Brody, M.D. who correctly says “There’s nothing wrong with telling it [a lie]” he’s grossly mistaken when he says that, “Very young kids don’t know the difference between truth and fiction.”

And again later in the CNN article, when it states “It doesn’t make sense to punish toddlers for truth bending, since they don’t get that what they’re doing is wrong.” Right conclusion for the wrong reasons, again.

Alix Finkelstein in her book, Baby Name Tool Data Set and her article “Baffling Kid Behavior – Explained” subtitled “Why they say one thing and then do another — and how to know what they really want” concludes with the assessment that is chilling: “Kids are a bundle of contradictory impulses.”

So, what do the above proclamations tell us? Can these authorities with all these published works and fancy letters after their name be mistaken?

It is very clear; children can tell what contingencies are operating in different contexts as well as when those contingencies change. They understand counter-control before the parents are driven to pap in doctor office magazine racks for clues on what “counter-control” means.

Parents are the one’s that have been deceived and have not been told the truth. For instance, parents are told that the ‘Terrible twos’ is just a phase that the children go through, etc. That period boils down to the children learning rules – everyone’s rules, faster than the parents learning the children’s rules. They and teachers and ‘authorities’ see no inconsistencies with encouraging their children they can be President of the United States some day [or a princess or baseball player] with that same child also needing different strategies of how to navigate the politics of third grade.

The enveloping scheme here though is the different rule sets the parents have that conflict with the rule sets the child have.

Ask the 3 year olds living on the streets of Rio de Janeiro without parents if they know the difference between truth and fiction. Ask the four year olds working in the factories around the world if they can tell the difference between right and wrong, good and bad or about ‘truth’. Ask the five year olds in Bagdad, Darfur, Mexico City, NYC, Moscow and Rome if they understand the rules (contingencies) for telling the truth, lying and what is fiction. Consequences control behavior. Get over it and on with life.

We all live in a world of fantasy and reality. Telling the difference is not easy for children and it is not easy for adults who have been given license to be uncritical of what controls behavior. It is not made easier with superstition and traditions that foster fantasy masked as reality – Christmas – the Easter Bunny – grandpa is now sleeping in heaven – mommy is busy – when the child senses what is going on and it is not what is reported to be going on.

For a child to NOT pick up the differences on what is going on and what he or she is told defines a level of what all parents dread more than anything…the child is a dolt! For parents to NOT manage these relationships with communication supports the contention that parents don’t understand behavior –theirs or their children’s – any better than Finkelstein does above with her assessment that “Kids are a bundle of contradictory impulses.”

Here is a list of scenarios that lead to lying. Can you tell which are for children and which are for adults?

  • Boredom – lack of stimulation and social attention
  • Anger over some broken rules by others

o Betrayal

o Frustration

o Their own rules conflict

  • Seeking material gain
  • Mimicry
  • Story telling to connect things that seem unconnected
  • They want the lie to be the truth
  • Escape / avoidance from aversive stimulation

I can’t tell either.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »