- It would be hard to rate this book, since it's the first one I've read regarding sales. It seems solid to me, though. -
-- Just a note: the graphs in this book don't demonstrate causation well. It's impossible to objectively classify the effectiveness of any particular method when no two sales situations are equivalent.
-- in Appendix A, this is actually addressed
Low-value cycle (old model):
1. Generic sell
2. Investigate needs
3. List benefits
4. Overcome objections
5. Close sale
What works in one-time sales is different than what works in sales that require numerous interactions.
A good product pitch can have a temporary effect on a customer, but a few days later it's largely gone.
People are more willing to take mistakes when theirs is the only pair of eyes that will scrutinize these mistakes.
Preliminaries - research and preparation, especially in regards to the customer
Investigation - asking questions
Demonstrating capability - proving your solution
Obtaining commitment - getting the customer to commit to something
SPIN cycle:
Situation Questions: data gathering
Problem Questions: explore problems, difficulties, and dissatisfactions
Implication Questions: questions that get the customer thinking about the urgency and seriousness of these problems
Need-payoff Questions: questions that get the customer interested in pursuing your solutions
Closing -- inviting or implying a commitment, and making the buyer's next statement accept or deny commitment.
Closing techniques have reduced effectiveness when the commitment required is larger.
The bigger the decision, the more negatively people react to pressure.
"It's not closing itself I object to," a senior buyer at BP said, "it's the arrogant assumption that I'm stupid enough to be manipulated into buying through the use of tricks."
If a professional buyer recognizes your technique as such, he won't like it - an incentive to avoid the more manipulative closes.
Orders: The customer makes a firm commitment to buy.
Advances: The customer advances the sale forward towards a decision.
Continuations: No action is agreed upon by the customer.
No-sales: The customer actively refuses a commitment.
A continuation is not an advance. Make sure you're getting somewhere definite with the customer.
When planning, always include objectives that result in specific action from the customer.
Keep the commitments you're trying to extract reasonable.
"Some writers have made great play of the distinction between a need and a want. A need, they say, is an objective requirement. A want is something with personal emotional appeal. We found this distinction unhelpful. . ."
-- hahaha, I bet.
Categories of needs: implied and explicit
The more implied needs you can uncover, the greater your chances of success.
Implied needs should be converted into explicit needs in larger sales.
Uncovering needs doesn't make a sale. The customer that's aware of their needs may buy from someone else, which is why closing is so important.
The quicker you can uncover needs, the better. Move from situation questions to problem questions as soon as possible.
Problem questions are most effective on small sales.
The larger the sale, the more implication questions are required before you offer solutions.
Implication questions work particularly well on decision makers, who are accustomed to considering the implications of their actions.
-- presumably, problem questions would work better on followers
Keep an upbeat tone when asking implication questions, because they tend to depress people.
Need-payoff question: How do you think you could be helped by me?
-- From No Logo: The question is not "Where do you want to go today?", but "How can I best steer you into my synergized maze of choices?"
The buyer knows his needs best. Once he's focused on finding solutions to his problems with your tools, you are golden.
Need-payoff questions assist the buyer in selling his decision to others around him.
The real selling of a product in a large sale goes on behind your back.
Implication questions are sad, need-payoff questions are happy.
-- I caught that one before I read it
Write down at least three potential problems the buyer may have which your products or services can solve.
Write down examples of actual Problem questions you could ask to uncover each of the problems you've identified.
Avoid early need-payoff questions.
Avoid need-payoff questions where you don't have answers: don't strengthen needs you can't meet.
Features: The basic features of a product. More features increase price sensitivity - which is good for low-cost items.
Advantages: How your product can help the customer
Benefits: How your product can meet the customer's explicit needs
As excited as you may be about a feature, the customer's motivations are infinitely more important.
"The students all had that unnatural attentive cleanliness that goes with being new to sales."
-- I definitely, definitely had this at Walker Group. I think it helped.
The best way to handle objections is to prevent them.
-- presumably through directing conversations towards the positive and always allowing the customer to speak freely
Objections early in the call means you're offering too many solutions and not asking enough questions.
Objections about value means you haven't done a good enough job developing needs.
How often have you been introduced to someone and, 10 seconds later, forgotten his or her name? Why should you forget something as important as a name? Your mind is full of other things, such as what you're going to say next.
-- the main reason I forget names is because I don't see the person as important. Either way is totally disrespectful.
On the wall of his office, one of the buyers had a picture of a racing yacht. "I keep it there because it improves my efficency."
"Why?"
"New sales reps visit me for the first time and say 'What a beautiful picture. You must really enjoy sailing.' I reply, 'I hate sailing. That picture's there to remind me how much time it wastes. Now what did you want to talk to me about?'"
The more busy someone is, the less time they have to waste with you. Get to the point when dealing with productive people.
Buyers asking questions messes up sellers' games. Don't let this happen to you.
Establish:
Who you are
Why you're there (but not by giving details)
Your right to ask questions
Entelechy: the actualization of something that was just potential
Why do people find it so difficult to learn skills? They don't go out and practice them.
"If you had to put forward just one principle for successfully learning a skill, what would it be?"
"Work on one thing at a time and get it right."
Never judge something's effectiveness until you've tried it at least three times.
Quantity before quality.
-- this one surprised me for a second, but when I realized what noobs people are when I first start things, I can see why that would work
Practice in safe situations.
The Hawthorne effect: People do better when you give them attention.
"If you cannot measure your knowledge or express it in quantitative terms, your knowledge is of a meagre and insignificant kind."
-- I was feeling that the sort of speed-learning approach I'd taken to a lot of these books, going for subconscious integration over memorization and retention of principles, wasn't good enough.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Snap judgements (not a book)
I ran across a forum post containing a list of ways to make snap judgements people make about others based on their behavior. It was interesting, so I decided to remember, write down, and comment on the more poignant ones.
Cheap tippers = entitlement complex / never held a real job
My reaction: I don't always tip, and both of those things apply to me
My reaction: I should tip
Rude to people in subordinate roles = not a nice person or leader
My reaction: Nice people exercise courtesy and patience with subordinates.
Rude to the elderly = bad person
My reaction: Yep. I'll offer to help old people from time to time. I think it's cool that they're still out there doing things.
Talks too much about something = lying, exaggerating, making it up
My reaction: I would add "inflating its importance" in there. Something's up with people who do this, balanced people move on to different topics.
Talks a lot about money or materialistic things = will forsake you for them
My reaction: True, but it's to be expected
How people drive = a glimpse at who they are
My reaction: Balanced people will drive competently and quickly forget others' stupidity. I put a little too much emphasis on caution when I drive, and I also do that in life.
People who cut other people off when they're talking = self-centered and egotistical
My reaction: Definitely.
People who cheat = cheaters at life
My reaction: Agreed, they don't want to face challenges squarely or submit to them
"I'm going to be completely honest with you" = "Everything I said before this was a half-truth or meant to placate you"
My reaction: Hah!
Doesn't make simple decisions without asking excessive questions = tiny, fearful person who can't think for themselves
My reaction: Yeah, I've seen myself doing that and been conscious that I've given off that impression. No more.
No handshake from a guy = insecure or socially retarded
My reaction: I'd never see this because I always offer a handshake. I respect people who beat me to it.
Bonecrushing handshake = douchebag or insecure hypermasculine pricks
Too many pumps = needy and overly friendly
My reaction: The proper handshake is firm, with one or two pumps.
People who only buy the best = overly concerned with what others think
My reaction: Yes, the world is not set up so that people can buy the best of everything.
Women who won't bowl or complain about it constantly = high maintenance
My reaction: Anyone who complains about anything constantly is high maintenance. Anyone who thinks they're too good to bowl probably can't enjoy the simple things.
"I'm not, but" = "I am"
My reaction: This one's been around since Ben Franklin's days.
More complicated drinks = more neuroses
My reaction: ???
People who broadly proclaim they're right = uncertain or bullshitting
My reaction: Classic overcompensation. Also, their egos demand respect for their knowledge.
People who don't like dogs and weren't attacked as a child = flawed character
My reaction: It's hard to ignore dogs' loyalty and love.
People who aren't liked by dogs = flawed character
My reaction: Maybe, but I would hate to judge someone based on a dog wigging out at them.
People without a small circle of close friends = not trustworthy
My reaction: How can you not have a small circle of close friends?
People with nothing good to say about exes = bitter
My reaction: I would say vindictive and small. Unless someone's conduct towards you has been thoroughly reprehensible, you should always have kind words for them. I like to focus on the good, not the bad.
The social mask that people present to you = how they cover up their inner insecurities
My reaction: This sounds about right. If people can't competently discuss or field questions related to the things they bring up about themselves, that's a sure sign of insecurity.
People who refer to their parents as mom or dad without using "my" = immature and spoiled
My reaction: Whoa, hope I never meet any of those in my adult life.
People who don't drink or swear = not trustworthy, unless they're recovering alcoholics
My reaction: Or they're religious. The reason not to trust these people, I think, is because they aren't attuned to the world.
People who never have an opinion = people pleasers
My reaction: Then there are also the passive-aggressive people pleasers. These people hold definite opinions, but want all the politeness points earned by letting others speak first. A sure sign is that they don't like putting their preferences on the table when the question's first asked, but they like to quickly "trump" the first people to speak by saying, "No, let's do it my way instead..."
How someone looks at you when you're not looking at them = a good measure of how they feel about you
My reaction: This is bona fide brilliant.
How someone's behavior changes around people of the opposite sex, outside the presence of their significant other = giant character indicator
My reaction: That's an easy way to discover a mismatch.
A girl who hasn't offered to pay for anything by the third date = dump
A girl who hasn't allowed you to pay for anything for her by the third date = insecure
My reaction: Sounds about right.
Smokes = fucks
More than five piercings = fucks
My reaction: Probably. I'm sure there's a better chance than there would be otherwise.
Fat people = lack discipline
Slightly fat people = lazy
My reaction: That's too broad of a generalization. Questions would need to be asked to support that hypothesis.
Can't hold a job = unreliable
My reaction: Whether or not they can get places on time or do the things they've said they'd do is a better indicator of reliability, but that wouldn't come up in your first few conversations with them.
No life goals = waste of space
My reaction: Yep. Count dumb life goals ("breed") or goals they're not working towards the same way.
No continuing education = stagnant in life
My reaction: I would be surprised if I could find someone like this.
Bad table manners = no class
My reaction: As arbitrary as table manners are, they're an important indicator of cultural awareness.
Good reaction to compliments = good person who's comfortable with themselves
My reaction: Yeah. Also, the ability to give compliments is a good indicator. I'm guessing that in today's egocentric world, more people can give than receive compliments.
People who read = worth getting to know
My reaction: I agree, but I have to point out that reading's not some magic intellectual talisman of coolness. What you take away from a book or magazine can be less than what you take away from a documentary or a movie. That said, I do enjoy conversations with people who read far more than conversations with people who don't. Readers are more likely to be intellectually well-rounded and less validation-oriented than people who lack the patience to stare at blocks of black text for hours on end.
People who treat children like people of value = good human beings
My reaction: For the most part, I do this. My patience with bratty kids has probably increased as I've grown older.
Attributions = typically projections
My reaction: This one's especially important.
Posture = identifier
My reaction: This falls under body language, which I should learn more about.
People who complain about others behind their backs = not likely to ever confront them
My reaction: I need to watch for this. If I'm talking to one guy about another person, I'm not talking to the right guy.
People who change the subject because they know nothing about it = dodgy characters
People who admit they don't know enough to have the conversation you're trying to have = secure people
My reaction: Nice. Lately I've been abandoning discussions the second I realize my knowledge is insufficient to continue them.
People who know what they're talking about but aren't willing to see the merit in your points = tools
My reaction: Pretty much.
Cheap tippers = entitlement complex / never held a real job
My reaction: I don't always tip, and both of those things apply to me
My reaction: I should tip
Rude to people in subordinate roles = not a nice person or leader
My reaction: Nice people exercise courtesy and patience with subordinates.
Rude to the elderly = bad person
My reaction: Yep. I'll offer to help old people from time to time. I think it's cool that they're still out there doing things.
Talks too much about something = lying, exaggerating, making it up
My reaction: I would add "inflating its importance" in there. Something's up with people who do this, balanced people move on to different topics.
Talks a lot about money or materialistic things = will forsake you for them
My reaction: True, but it's to be expected
How people drive = a glimpse at who they are
My reaction: Balanced people will drive competently and quickly forget others' stupidity. I put a little too much emphasis on caution when I drive, and I also do that in life.
People who cut other people off when they're talking = self-centered and egotistical
My reaction: Definitely.
People who cheat = cheaters at life
My reaction: Agreed, they don't want to face challenges squarely or submit to them
"I'm going to be completely honest with you" = "Everything I said before this was a half-truth or meant to placate you"
My reaction: Hah!
Doesn't make simple decisions without asking excessive questions = tiny, fearful person who can't think for themselves
My reaction: Yeah, I've seen myself doing that and been conscious that I've given off that impression. No more.
No handshake from a guy = insecure or socially retarded
My reaction: I'd never see this because I always offer a handshake. I respect people who beat me to it.
Bonecrushing handshake = douchebag or insecure hypermasculine pricks
Too many pumps = needy and overly friendly
My reaction: The proper handshake is firm, with one or two pumps.
People who only buy the best = overly concerned with what others think
My reaction: Yes, the world is not set up so that people can buy the best of everything.
Women who won't bowl or complain about it constantly = high maintenance
My reaction: Anyone who complains about anything constantly is high maintenance. Anyone who thinks they're too good to bowl probably can't enjoy the simple things.
"I'm not, but" = "I am"
My reaction: This one's been around since Ben Franklin's days.
More complicated drinks = more neuroses
My reaction: ???
People who broadly proclaim they're right = uncertain or bullshitting
My reaction: Classic overcompensation. Also, their egos demand respect for their knowledge.
People who don't like dogs and weren't attacked as a child = flawed character
My reaction: It's hard to ignore dogs' loyalty and love.
People who aren't liked by dogs = flawed character
My reaction: Maybe, but I would hate to judge someone based on a dog wigging out at them.
People without a small circle of close friends = not trustworthy
My reaction: How can you not have a small circle of close friends?
People with nothing good to say about exes = bitter
My reaction: I would say vindictive and small. Unless someone's conduct towards you has been thoroughly reprehensible, you should always have kind words for them. I like to focus on the good, not the bad.
The social mask that people present to you = how they cover up their inner insecurities
My reaction: This sounds about right. If people can't competently discuss or field questions related to the things they bring up about themselves, that's a sure sign of insecurity.
People who refer to their parents as mom or dad without using "my" = immature and spoiled
My reaction: Whoa, hope I never meet any of those in my adult life.
People who don't drink or swear = not trustworthy, unless they're recovering alcoholics
My reaction: Or they're religious. The reason not to trust these people, I think, is because they aren't attuned to the world.
People who never have an opinion = people pleasers
My reaction: Then there are also the passive-aggressive people pleasers. These people hold definite opinions, but want all the politeness points earned by letting others speak first. A sure sign is that they don't like putting their preferences on the table when the question's first asked, but they like to quickly "trump" the first people to speak by saying, "No, let's do it my way instead..."
How someone looks at you when you're not looking at them = a good measure of how they feel about you
My reaction: This is bona fide brilliant.
How someone's behavior changes around people of the opposite sex, outside the presence of their significant other = giant character indicator
My reaction: That's an easy way to discover a mismatch.
A girl who hasn't offered to pay for anything by the third date = dump
A girl who hasn't allowed you to pay for anything for her by the third date = insecure
My reaction: Sounds about right.
Smokes = fucks
More than five piercings = fucks
My reaction: Probably. I'm sure there's a better chance than there would be otherwise.
Fat people = lack discipline
Slightly fat people = lazy
My reaction: That's too broad of a generalization. Questions would need to be asked to support that hypothesis.
Can't hold a job = unreliable
My reaction: Whether or not they can get places on time or do the things they've said they'd do is a better indicator of reliability, but that wouldn't come up in your first few conversations with them.
No life goals = waste of space
My reaction: Yep. Count dumb life goals ("breed") or goals they're not working towards the same way.
No continuing education = stagnant in life
My reaction: I would be surprised if I could find someone like this.
Bad table manners = no class
My reaction: As arbitrary as table manners are, they're an important indicator of cultural awareness.
Good reaction to compliments = good person who's comfortable with themselves
My reaction: Yeah. Also, the ability to give compliments is a good indicator. I'm guessing that in today's egocentric world, more people can give than receive compliments.
People who read = worth getting to know
My reaction: I agree, but I have to point out that reading's not some magic intellectual talisman of coolness. What you take away from a book or magazine can be less than what you take away from a documentary or a movie. That said, I do enjoy conversations with people who read far more than conversations with people who don't. Readers are more likely to be intellectually well-rounded and less validation-oriented than people who lack the patience to stare at blocks of black text for hours on end.
People who treat children like people of value = good human beings
My reaction: For the most part, I do this. My patience with bratty kids has probably increased as I've grown older.
Attributions = typically projections
My reaction: This one's especially important.
Posture = identifier
My reaction: This falls under body language, which I should learn more about.
People who complain about others behind their backs = not likely to ever confront them
My reaction: I need to watch for this. If I'm talking to one guy about another person, I'm not talking to the right guy.
People who change the subject because they know nothing about it = dodgy characters
People who admit they don't know enough to have the conversation you're trying to have = secure people
My reaction: Nice. Lately I've been abandoning discussions the second I realize my knowledge is insufficient to continue them.
People who know what they're talking about but aren't willing to see the merit in your points = tools
My reaction: Pretty much.
No Logo - Naomi Klein - ***
I would've given this book four stars if I was into this kind of thing, but as you can probably tell from my sparse notes, I'm not.
No Logo - Naomi Klein
In the early 90's, generic products started increasing in market share - to counter this, ad agencies turned to branding
Parents may have gone bargain basement, but kids, it turned out, were still willing to pay up to fit in. "They run in packs. If you sell to one, you sell to everyone in their class and everyone in their school."
Branding replaces value-added content.
MTV's genius was that consumers didn't watch shows: they watched MTV.
Designers refused to crack down on the pirating of their logos for T-shirts and baseball hats in the inner cities and several of them have clearly backed away from serious attempts to curb rampant shoplifting.
Adidas executives were skeptical about being associated with rap music until Russell Simmons took them to a Run-DMC show where the rap group was performing the song My Adidas. One of the members yelled out, "Okay, everybody in the house, rock your Adidas!", and three thousand pairs of sneakers shot in the air. The Adidas executives couldn't reach for their checkbooks fast enough.
Bro-ing: a Nike marketing practice where a person wears an item to the inner city and says "Hey, bro, check this out..."
The mantra of retro entertainment seems to be "Once more with synergy!"
-- Advertising in schools makes me angry. The only way to avoid exposure is not to frequent the institution, which is not a choice children are legally allowed to make. I don't relish the upcoming clash between the morality I'll attempt to teach my children and the insidious branding of the future's White Clowns, because if I lose, I will feel that I have failed as a parent.
According to Rocking the Ages, Diversity was the defining idea for Gen-Xers, as opposed to Individuality for baby boomers and Duty for their parents.
The real question is not "Where do you want to go today?" but "How can I best steer you into my synergized maze of choices?"
Starbucks saturates areas with Starbucks stores until the sales begin to fall and poaches leases from existing coffee shops.
-- These guys are geniuses. They're also referencing the concept of a "brand canopy" - one you can live your whole life under.
-- Disney is the true expert in the brand canopy field. They have Disney for children, Pixar for young adults, and hey - more Disney for adults.
Celebration, Disney's town, is almost Disney-free. Its calm, understated aesthetics are the antithesis of the cartoon world for sale down the freeway at Disney World.
Mergers between companies serving different functions allow one hand to wash the other.
The underlying message that intellectual property laws send is that culture is something that happens to you. It is not something you participate in or have the right to respond to. You can be branded, but you are not allowed to scuff the brand.
Mattel suing Aqua over their Barbie Girl song: "This is a business issue, not a freedom of speech issue. This is a two billion dollar company, and we don't want it messed with, and situations like these gradually lead to brand erosion."
-- Asking the courts to subvert freedom of speech to protect against a possible drop in a $2 billion company's profits? Nice.
Production is now viewed as unimportant, something easily outsourced.
Developing countries create EPZs and compete with each other for investors' favor, which the corporations take full advantage of through tricks like closing and reopening factories under new names.
Making yesterday's casualties tomorrow's wardens is genius.
The "temporary job" mindset employers encourage, allowing them to pay employees less than a living wage, is a product of cost-cutting and wishful thinking.
The fear that the poor will storm the barricades is as old as the castle moat.
The smart jargon now talks of guaranteeing "employability", not "employment", which basically translates into "don't count on us, but we'll help you if we can."
"I get weary and worn down from it all. I'm forced to face the fact that I make my money from poor people. The kid wants a hundred-twenty-buck pair of shoes and that stupid mother buys them for him. I can feel that kid's inner need - the desire to own these things and have the feelings that go with them - but it hurts me that this is the way things are."
For Nike, its $150 Air Jordans are not a shoe but a kind of talisman with which poor kids can run out of the ghetto and better their lives. One can't help thinking that one of the main reasons black urban youth can get only get out of the ghetto by rapping or shooting hoops is that Nike and other multinationals are reinforcing stereotypical images of black youth and simultaneously taking all the jobs away.
A firebomb exploded at a Shell station in Hamburg. "Don't sink the Brent Spar Oil Platform" was the message left behind.
-- bahaha
David Green, senior vice president of marketing at McDonalds, expressed his opinion that Coca-Cola is nutritious because it is "providing water, and I think that is part of a balanced diet."
Ed Oakley, another McDonalds executive, explained that McDonalds garbage stuffed into landfills is "a benefit, otherwise you will end up with lots of vast empty gravel pits all over the country."
You can label clothing "Made in the U.S.A." if it comes from any of the U.S.' territories, not just the 50 states.
There's been historical precedent of organizations, cities, and even states leveraging pressure on corporations to behave ethically through blanket boycotting of those companies' services.
The corporations fight these, however. Shell successfully sued for discrimination based on its not being awarded a gas contract in Vancouver based on its actions in South Africa. The judges' ruling stated that the procurement officials only had the jurisdiction to make procurements based on the concerns of Vancouver residents - not the concerns of people in South Africa.
Resource corporations have no brand associated with their products and are therefore nearly unaffected by detractions from their public image.
No Logo - Naomi Klein
In the early 90's, generic products started increasing in market share - to counter this, ad agencies turned to branding
Parents may have gone bargain basement, but kids, it turned out, were still willing to pay up to fit in. "They run in packs. If you sell to one, you sell to everyone in their class and everyone in their school."
Branding replaces value-added content.
MTV's genius was that consumers didn't watch shows: they watched MTV.
Designers refused to crack down on the pirating of their logos for T-shirts and baseball hats in the inner cities and several of them have clearly backed away from serious attempts to curb rampant shoplifting.
Adidas executives were skeptical about being associated with rap music until Russell Simmons took them to a Run-DMC show where the rap group was performing the song My Adidas. One of the members yelled out, "Okay, everybody in the house, rock your Adidas!", and three thousand pairs of sneakers shot in the air. The Adidas executives couldn't reach for their checkbooks fast enough.
Bro-ing: a Nike marketing practice where a person wears an item to the inner city and says "Hey, bro, check this out..."
The mantra of retro entertainment seems to be "Once more with synergy!"
-- Advertising in schools makes me angry. The only way to avoid exposure is not to frequent the institution, which is not a choice children are legally allowed to make. I don't relish the upcoming clash between the morality I'll attempt to teach my children and the insidious branding of the future's White Clowns, because if I lose, I will feel that I have failed as a parent.
According to Rocking the Ages, Diversity was the defining idea for Gen-Xers, as opposed to Individuality for baby boomers and Duty for their parents.
The real question is not "Where do you want to go today?" but "How can I best steer you into my synergized maze of choices?"
Starbucks saturates areas with Starbucks stores until the sales begin to fall and poaches leases from existing coffee shops.
-- These guys are geniuses. They're also referencing the concept of a "brand canopy" - one you can live your whole life under.
-- Disney is the true expert in the brand canopy field. They have Disney for children, Pixar for young adults, and hey - more Disney for adults.
Celebration, Disney's town, is almost Disney-free. Its calm, understated aesthetics are the antithesis of the cartoon world for sale down the freeway at Disney World.
Mergers between companies serving different functions allow one hand to wash the other.
The underlying message that intellectual property laws send is that culture is something that happens to you. It is not something you participate in or have the right to respond to. You can be branded, but you are not allowed to scuff the brand.
Mattel suing Aqua over their Barbie Girl song: "This is a business issue, not a freedom of speech issue. This is a two billion dollar company, and we don't want it messed with, and situations like these gradually lead to brand erosion."
-- Asking the courts to subvert freedom of speech to protect against a possible drop in a $2 billion company's profits? Nice.
Production is now viewed as unimportant, something easily outsourced.
Developing countries create EPZs and compete with each other for investors' favor, which the corporations take full advantage of through tricks like closing and reopening factories under new names.
Making yesterday's casualties tomorrow's wardens is genius.
The "temporary job" mindset employers encourage, allowing them to pay employees less than a living wage, is a product of cost-cutting and wishful thinking.
The fear that the poor will storm the barricades is as old as the castle moat.
The smart jargon now talks of guaranteeing "employability", not "employment", which basically translates into "don't count on us, but we'll help you if we can."
"I get weary and worn down from it all. I'm forced to face the fact that I make my money from poor people. The kid wants a hundred-twenty-buck pair of shoes and that stupid mother buys them for him. I can feel that kid's inner need - the desire to own these things and have the feelings that go with them - but it hurts me that this is the way things are."
For Nike, its $150 Air Jordans are not a shoe but a kind of talisman with which poor kids can run out of the ghetto and better their lives. One can't help thinking that one of the main reasons black urban youth can get only get out of the ghetto by rapping or shooting hoops is that Nike and other multinationals are reinforcing stereotypical images of black youth and simultaneously taking all the jobs away.
A firebomb exploded at a Shell station in Hamburg. "Don't sink the Brent Spar Oil Platform" was the message left behind.
-- bahaha
David Green, senior vice president of marketing at McDonalds, expressed his opinion that Coca-Cola is nutritious because it is "providing water, and I think that is part of a balanced diet."
Ed Oakley, another McDonalds executive, explained that McDonalds garbage stuffed into landfills is "a benefit, otherwise you will end up with lots of vast empty gravel pits all over the country."
You can label clothing "Made in the U.S.A." if it comes from any of the U.S.' territories, not just the 50 states.
There's been historical precedent of organizations, cities, and even states leveraging pressure on corporations to behave ethically through blanket boycotting of those companies' services.
The corporations fight these, however. Shell successfully sued for discrimination based on its not being awarded a gas contract in Vancouver based on its actions in South Africa. The judges' ruling stated that the procurement officials only had the jurisdiction to make procurements based on the concerns of Vancouver residents - not the concerns of people in South Africa.
Resource corporations have no brand associated with their products and are therefore nearly unaffected by detractions from their public image.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People - Stephen R. Covey - ****
The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People
Be proactive
Begin with the end in mind
Put first things first
Think win/win
Seek first to understand, then to be understood
Synergize
Sharpen the saw (increase your capacity for productive action)
If you try to use human influence strategies and tactics of how to get other people to do what you want, while your character is fundamentally flawed, in the long run you cannot be successful. Your duplicity will breed distrust, and everything you do will be perceived as manipulative.
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
Production vs. Production Capability - invest in your future, don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and don't neglect the now for the later.
The determinisms: genetic, psychic, or environmental "excuses"
The stimulus-response cycle is different in humans - it's more like stimulus - perception - response
Reactive people are driven by feelings.
The three types of problems: direct control, indirect control, and no control.
Anytime we think the problem is "out there", that thought is the problem.
-- assume nothing is static about the future
-- avoid conversation in which someone won't be helped
Try the thirty-day test of proactivity
-- reminds me of the "If you can do it for a month, you can do it for the rest of your life" idea
It's easy to climb the ladder of success only to discover it's leaning against the wrong wall.
It's possible to be very busy without being very effective.
-- the Ronald McFondle philosophy: "Take more action. Take more effective action."
Plan things before you do them.
Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.
Develop a personal mission statement:
-- my mission statement:
recognize, influence, and exploit patterns and dynamics for profit
-- to fulfil this mission:
pay attention
stay transcendent
be creative
do my best
reexamine situations periodically
plan
-- these roles take priority in achieving my mission:
renaissance man: have a wide body of knowledge to draw from
observer: be aware of things as they unfold
warrior: take action, be disciplined, vanquish fears
friend: get guidance, opportunities, and assistance from other friends
commander: make plans, exercise leadership, provide oversight
-- this book contains much crowing
ingredients of a good affirmation: personal, positive, present, visual, emotional
step back and use visualization from time to time
What one thing could you do that if you did on a regular basis would make a tremendous positive difference in your personal life?
-- constantly seek to improve everything around me
What one thing in your business or professional life would bring similar results?
-- quickly earn and maintain a reputation as an expert
Successful people have the habit of doing things failures don't like to do.
The time management matrix: classify activities as Important/Not Important and Urgent/Not Urgent
Watch out for misclassifications, and spend time doing important things that aren't urgent.
People get frustrated with their schedules when the schedule won't bend around spontaneous occurences. Weekly planning towards goal accomplishment works better than daily planning.
Effectiveness is substantially more important than efficiency when dealing with people. You can't control how long it takes to bring a person to the point where you want them to be.
Delegation is an important part of both leadership and management.
-- whenever the group acquires an objective, delegate its components
You can't talk your way out of problems you behave yourself into.
The emotional bank account - make deposits exceed withdrawals
-- competition builds strength, cooperation gets results
Types of mindsets:
Win/Lose, Lose/Win, Win/Win, Lose/Lose, compromise (lesser win/win), and Win/Win or No Deal
-- the No Deal option is critically important
High on courage, high on consideration: Win/Win
High on courage, low on consideration: Win/Lose
High on consideration, low on courage: Lose/Win
-- High on unresolved issues: Lose/Lose
Dealing with Win/Lose is the real test of Win/Win.
-- you'd have to draw them out of that mentality: transcend the dynamic
"I can't understand my kid. He just won't listen to me at all."
"You don't understand your son because HE won't listen to YOU?"
-- "He looked into his own head and thought he saw the world." - a good phrase
Satisfied needs do not motivate.
Seek first to understand, then be understood.
When rephrasing what someone said, try not to unconsciously put your own spin onto it.
Recognize and value people's differences.
Force Field Analysis:
The current level of performance is determined by the driving forces that encourage upward movement and the restraining forces that discourage it.
-- this is true and I'm going to exploit the shit out of it
He advises people to read a book a week. I can easily read two or more.
Be a magic mirror - show people what's good about themselves.
"The voice of conscience is so delicate that it is easy to stifle it, but it is so clear that it is impossible to mistake it."
The upward spiral: commit, learn, do.
-- see me there.
Be proactive
Begin with the end in mind
Put first things first
Think win/win
Seek first to understand, then to be understood
Synergize
Sharpen the saw (increase your capacity for productive action)
If you try to use human influence strategies and tactics of how to get other people to do what you want, while your character is fundamentally flawed, in the long run you cannot be successful. Your duplicity will breed distrust, and everything you do will be perceived as manipulative.
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
Production vs. Production Capability - invest in your future, don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and don't neglect the now for the later.
The determinisms: genetic, psychic, or environmental "excuses"
The stimulus-response cycle is different in humans - it's more like stimulus - perception - response
Reactive people are driven by feelings.
The three types of problems: direct control, indirect control, and no control.
Anytime we think the problem is "out there", that thought is the problem.
-- assume nothing is static about the future
-- avoid conversation in which someone won't be helped
Try the thirty-day test of proactivity
-- reminds me of the "If you can do it for a month, you can do it for the rest of your life" idea
It's easy to climb the ladder of success only to discover it's leaning against the wrong wall.
It's possible to be very busy without being very effective.
-- the Ronald McFondle philosophy: "Take more action. Take more effective action."
Plan things before you do them.
Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.
Develop a personal mission statement:
-- my mission statement:
recognize, influence, and exploit patterns and dynamics for profit
-- to fulfil this mission:
pay attention
stay transcendent
be creative
do my best
reexamine situations periodically
plan
-- these roles take priority in achieving my mission:
renaissance man: have a wide body of knowledge to draw from
observer: be aware of things as they unfold
warrior: take action, be disciplined, vanquish fears
friend: get guidance, opportunities, and assistance from other friends
commander: make plans, exercise leadership, provide oversight
-- this book contains much crowing
ingredients of a good affirmation: personal, positive, present, visual, emotional
step back and use visualization from time to time
What one thing could you do that if you did on a regular basis would make a tremendous positive difference in your personal life?
-- constantly seek to improve everything around me
What one thing in your business or professional life would bring similar results?
-- quickly earn and maintain a reputation as an expert
Successful people have the habit of doing things failures don't like to do.
The time management matrix: classify activities as Important/Not Important and Urgent/Not Urgent
Watch out for misclassifications, and spend time doing important things that aren't urgent.
People get frustrated with their schedules when the schedule won't bend around spontaneous occurences. Weekly planning towards goal accomplishment works better than daily planning.
Effectiveness is substantially more important than efficiency when dealing with people. You can't control how long it takes to bring a person to the point where you want them to be.
Delegation is an important part of both leadership and management.
-- whenever the group acquires an objective, delegate its components
You can't talk your way out of problems you behave yourself into.
The emotional bank account - make deposits exceed withdrawals
-- competition builds strength, cooperation gets results
Types of mindsets:
Win/Lose, Lose/Win, Win/Win, Lose/Lose, compromise (lesser win/win), and Win/Win or No Deal
-- the No Deal option is critically important
High on courage, high on consideration: Win/Win
High on courage, low on consideration: Win/Lose
High on consideration, low on courage: Lose/Win
-- High on unresolved issues: Lose/Lose
Dealing with Win/Lose is the real test of Win/Win.
-- you'd have to draw them out of that mentality: transcend the dynamic
"I can't understand my kid. He just won't listen to me at all."
"You don't understand your son because HE won't listen to YOU?"
-- "He looked into his own head and thought he saw the world." - a good phrase
Satisfied needs do not motivate.
Seek first to understand, then be understood.
When rephrasing what someone said, try not to unconsciously put your own spin onto it.
Recognize and value people's differences.
Force Field Analysis:
The current level of performance is determined by the driving forces that encourage upward movement and the restraining forces that discourage it.
-- this is true and I'm going to exploit the shit out of it
He advises people to read a book a week. I can easily read two or more.
Be a magic mirror - show people what's good about themselves.
"The voice of conscience is so delicate that it is easy to stifle it, but it is so clear that it is impossible to mistake it."
The upward spiral: commit, learn, do.
-- see me there.
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Freakonomics - Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner - **
Freakonomics - Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner
This book is so accessable, its examples so memorable, that I'm not going to need to write down a lot of notes.
I wound up giving it two stars because the critical thinking aspects of the book are largely covered in this half-page of notes.
Introduction:
Incentives are the cornerstone of modern life. Understanding them or ferreting them out is the key to solving just about any riddle.
The conventional wisdom is often wrong.
Dramatic effects often have distant, even subtle causes.
- When people are initially motivated by something other than money, and money then enters the equation, low sums of money will actually make things worse over time.
Roughly half the white women and 80% of white men declared race didn't matter to them on an online dating site. These white men sent 90% of their emails to white women; the white women sent 97% of their emails to white men.
A little creative lying can draw indignation.
As a leader, you have to have yours first: otherwise, people will start to question your position as a leader.
"A distinction without a difference" -- a nice phrase
Given the rarity with which executions are carried out in this country and the long delays in doing so, no reasonable criminal should be deterred by the threat of execution.
-- contrast this with people walking around with a hand cut off, etc.
The broken window theory: the idea that minor nuisances turn into major nuisances if left unchecked.
To an economist, the background check and waiting period before handguns are purchased makes no sense: regulation of a legal market is bound to fail when a healthy black market exists for the same product. . . A study of imprisoned felons showed that even before the Brady Act, only 1/5 of the criminals bought their guns through a licensed dealer.
"If you own a gun and have a swimming pool in your backyard, the swimming pool is about 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun is."
-- when he explains this it's clear that he failed to take into account the fact that people don't collect swimming pools the way they do guns. A more accurate way to come up with a statistic would have been to divide the number of guns by the average guns per household in the sample size.
The typical parenting expert, like experts in other fields, is prone to sound exceedingly sure of himself. . . an expert whose argument reeks of restraint or nuance often doesn't get much attention.
The risks that scare people and the risks that kill people are often very different.
"Imagine that you are a government official charged with procuring the funds to fight one of two proven killers: terrorist attacks and heart disease. Which cause do you think the members of Congress will open up the coffers for? The likelihood of any given person being killed in a terrorist attack are infinitely smaller than the likelihood that the same person will clog up their arteries with fatty food and die of heart disease..."
Motivation is an indicator of success.
This book is so accessable, its examples so memorable, that I'm not going to need to write down a lot of notes.
I wound up giving it two stars because the critical thinking aspects of the book are largely covered in this half-page of notes.
Introduction:
Incentives are the cornerstone of modern life. Understanding them or ferreting them out is the key to solving just about any riddle.
The conventional wisdom is often wrong.
Dramatic effects often have distant, even subtle causes.
- When people are initially motivated by something other than money, and money then enters the equation, low sums of money will actually make things worse over time.
Roughly half the white women and 80% of white men declared race didn't matter to them on an online dating site. These white men sent 90% of their emails to white women; the white women sent 97% of their emails to white men.
A little creative lying can draw indignation.
As a leader, you have to have yours first: otherwise, people will start to question your position as a leader.
"A distinction without a difference" -- a nice phrase
Given the rarity with which executions are carried out in this country and the long delays in doing so, no reasonable criminal should be deterred by the threat of execution.
-- contrast this with people walking around with a hand cut off, etc.
The broken window theory: the idea that minor nuisances turn into major nuisances if left unchecked.
To an economist, the background check and waiting period before handguns are purchased makes no sense: regulation of a legal market is bound to fail when a healthy black market exists for the same product. . . A study of imprisoned felons showed that even before the Brady Act, only 1/5 of the criminals bought their guns through a licensed dealer.
"If you own a gun and have a swimming pool in your backyard, the swimming pool is about 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun is."
-- when he explains this it's clear that he failed to take into account the fact that people don't collect swimming pools the way they do guns. A more accurate way to come up with a statistic would have been to divide the number of guns by the average guns per household in the sample size.
The typical parenting expert, like experts in other fields, is prone to sound exceedingly sure of himself. . . an expert whose argument reeks of restraint or nuance often doesn't get much attention.
The risks that scare people and the risks that kill people are often very different.
"Imagine that you are a government official charged with procuring the funds to fight one of two proven killers: terrorist attacks and heart disease. Which cause do you think the members of Congress will open up the coffers for? The likelihood of any given person being killed in a terrorist attack are infinitely smaller than the likelihood that the same person will clog up their arteries with fatty food and die of heart disease..."
Motivation is an indicator of success.
The Demon-Haunted World - Carl Sagan - ***
"As I write, Congress is dissolving its own Office of Technology Assessment -- the only organization specifically tasked to provide advice to the House and Senate on science and technology. Its competence and integrity over the years have been exemplary." - 1995
People try verious belief systems on for size, to see if they fit . . . psuedoscience speaks to powerful emotional needs science often leaves unfilfilled. It caters to fantasies about personal powers we lack and long fore. It offers satisfaction of spiritual hungers, cures for disease, promises that death is not the end.
Perhaps the most successful recent global psuedoscience . . . is the Hindu doctrine of transcendental meditation (TM). . . The worldwide TM organization has an estimated valuation of $3 billion. For a fee they promise through meditation to be able to walk you through walls, to make you invisible, to enable you to fly. By thinking in unison they have, they say, diminished the crime rate in Washington, D.C. and caused the collapse of the Soviet Union, among other secular miracles. Not one smattering of real evidence has been offered for any such claims. TM sells folk medicine, runs trading companies, medical clinics and "research" universities, and has unsuccessfully entered politics.
-- the most successful, huh - I thought they were small-time operators on the cult scale for some reason.
In Russia, under Communism, both religion and psuedoscience were systematically suppressed -- except for the superstition of the state ideological religion. It was advertised as scientific, but fell far short of this ideal as the most unselfcritical mystery cult. . . As a result, post-Communism, many Russians view science with suspicion. . . the region is now awash in UFOs, poltergeists, faith healers, and old-time superstition.
- How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life, Thomas Gilovich
Chapter 2
The dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media.
Humans may crave absolute certainty. . . but the history of science teaches us that the most we can hope for is successive improvement in our understanding.
-- some time is spent extolling the virtues of science and its superiority over other disciplines, based on its constant questioning of itself
Chapter 3
Each field of science has its own complement of psuedoscience. . . Astronomy has, as its most prominent psuedoscience, astrology - the discipline out of which it emerged.
-- always ask by what process people come to lay claim to nature's intentions
- he cites articles from the Weekly World News as examples of psuedoscientific foolery: does he know what the Weekly World News is?
Chapter 4:
- the crop circle hoax is mentioned
Chapter 5:
After I give lectures - on almost any subject - I'm often asked, "Do you believe in UFOs?" I'm always struck by how the question is phrased, the suggestion that this is a matter of belief and not of evidence. I'm almost never asked, "How good is the evidence that UFOs are alien spaceships?" . . . I've found that the going-in attitude of many people is highly predetermined.
Some of the black-lining in FOIA requests is due to intercepted communications - though the information needs to be revealed, any details regarding its collection are blanked out.
The book of Deuteronomy, in the Bible, was "found" by King Josiah in the middle of a reformation struggle - it confirmed all his views.
Lorenzo of Valla concluded that the Apostles' Creed could not, on grammatical grounds, have been written by the Twelve Apostles.
-- much like my rejection of the Willie Lynch hoax, which led me to research it further
Chapter 6:
- occasionally, people will claim to be in contact with aliens: when Carl Sagan gives them math questions to answer, he never receives a reply, but when he asks questions regarding morality he receives plenty.
- thorazine (and haloperidol) make hallucinations go away
from another site:
Meditation And/Or Sensory Deprivation
When the brain lacks external stimulation to form perceptions, it may compensate by referencing the memory and form hallucinatory perceptions.
It makes good evolutionary sense for children to have fantasies of scary monsters. . . those who are not afraid of monsters tend not to leave descendents.
- only the three or four actual "canals" on Mars ever showed up on photographs: the rest were imaginary
Chapter 7:
Malleus Maleficarum, the "Hammer of Witches": aptly described as one of the most terrifying documents in human history. . . what the Malleus comes down to, pretty much, is that if you're accused of witchcraft, you're a witch.
Witch-hunting in England was profitable. All costs of investigation, trial, and execution were borne by the accused or her relatives. . . one mid-seventeenth-century man confessed he had been the death of above 220 women in England and Scotland, for the gain of twenty shillings apiece.
William Tyndale translated the Bible into English - in thanks, he was captured, garroted, then burned at the stake for good measure. His copies of the New Testament were hunted down house-to-house by armed posses.
There are almost no reports of flying saucers prior to 1947: instead, it was demons and fairies.
The believers [in alien sightings] take the common elements in their stories as tokens of versimilitude, rather than evidence that they have contrived their stories out of a shared culture and biology.
Chapter 8:
The AMA callls memories surfacing under hypnosis less reliable than those recalled without it.
Subjects under hypnosis can as easily recall FUTURE lives as they can past ones.
Unhypnotized subjects can easily be made to believe they saw something they didn't. In a study, subjects are shown a film of a car accident. When questioned about the video, false information is interjected, such as a reference to a nonexistent stop sign. Many subjects then dutifully remember seeing the sign. When the deception is revealed, some vehemently protest, stressing how vividly they remember the sign. . . the psychologist, Elizabeth Loftus, argues that "memories of an event more closely resemble a story undergoing constant revision than a packet of pristine information."
-- that's awesome
President Ronald Reagan, who spent World War II in Hollywood, vividly described his own role in liberating Nazi concentratoin camp victims. Living in the film world, he apparently confused a movie he'd seen with a reality he hadn't. On many occasions in his presidential campaigns, Mr. Reagan told an epic story of World War II courage and sacrifice, an inspiration for all of us. Only it never happened; it was the plot of the movie A Wing and a Prayer.
Legends influence apparitions and vice versa.
Chapter 9:
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. -- Sherlock Holmes
The power or intensity with which something is felt is no guide regarding its truth.
What a more critical mind might recognize as a hallucination or a dream, a more credulous mind interprets as a glimpse of an elusive but profound reality.
Paul Ingram spent fifteen years in prison because he was gullible enough to believe "expert" suggestions that he was denying memories of satanically abusing his daughter.
Chapter 10:
Magic requires cooperation of the audience with the magician.
-- The absence of suitable counterexplanations doesn't make a proposed explanation correct.
The credibility of science is only a consequence of the method.
Carl Jung, regarding people who accept incredible testimony at face value:
"These people are lacking not only in criticism but in the most elementary knowledge of psychology. At bottom they do not want to be taught any better, but merely to go on believing -- surely the naivest of presumptions in view of our human failings."
Chapter 11: Reader Mail
-- Reader mail always baffles me. People are weird and/or retarded.
Chapter 12:
We tell children about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy for reasons we think emotionally sound, but then disabuse them of these myths before they're grown. Why retract? Because their well-being as adults depends on them knowing the world as it really is. We worry, and for good reason, about adults who still believe in Santa Claus.
-- reminds me of the Forestry official who believed that trees were infinite and that if they all were cut down, God would just make more.
Who cares which breakfast cereal has more vitamins when we can take a vitamin pill with breakfast?
There are no authorities in science. At best, there are experts.
Tools for skeptical thinking:
- Independent confirmation of facts
- Substantive debate by knowledgeable proponents
- Multiple hypotheses: how ELSE could that have happened?
- Compare your hypothesis fairly with the alternatives
- Think of the ways your hypothesis could be rejected
- Quantify
- Make sure every link in an argument chain works
- Use Occam's Razor
- Never entertain untestable propositions
- Use carefully designed and controlled experiments
Logical fallacies:
ad hominem (to the man): attacking the arguer, not the argument
non sequitur (it doesn't follow): reaching a conclusion from facts that one can't logically reach
correlation implying causation (post hoc, ergo propter hoc)
argument from authority
argument from consequences
appeal to ignorance: if it can't be disproved, it must be true, right?
special pleading: any "technical" non-explanation
begging the question (assuming the answer): relying on an unproven premise
observational selection: seeing the roses and not the thistles
statistics of small numbers
misunderstanding statistics
meaningless question
false dichotomy: splitting a situation into two choices, at least one of them a straw man
short-term vs. long-term false dichotomy: the belief that a solution to one renders impossible the solution to another
slippery slope
straw man: caricaturing a position to make it easier to attack
bogus evidence
weasel words
-- I'll add statistical extrapolation to that mix: the idea that the current trends will continue, at the projected, into the future.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
There are many brands of low-tar cigarettes. Why is low-tar a virtue? Because the refractory tars are where polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and some other carcinogens are concentrated. Aren't the low-tar ads a tacit admission by the tobacco companies that cigarettes indeed cause cancer?
Chapter 13:
A man who sees evidence that his ship is unsound and tricks himself into believing that everything's fine is guilty of causing the deaths of the men aboard that ship when it goes down.
-- Don't care whether or not someone believes, care about the evidence on which their belief stands.
In his brief list of psuedoscience and superstition he mentions four things I found interesting:
- that flatworms who know a task can be fed to other flatworms, which can then do the task -- I'd heard of this one
- Facilitated Communications -- this one could easily be scientifically tested, I'd still try it if my child was autistic
- more crimes being committed when the moon is full -- that one made sense to me, but it needs more empirical research I think
- the secret life of plants book, though I learned that was written by a crackpot well before reading this
- you can stop your pulse by holding a ball in your armpit and squeezing
Nearly half of all Americans believe there is such a thing as psychic or spiritual healing.
-- reminds me of George Carlin's line, something to the tune of: "What are you people, stupid?"
When a child's spleen is ruptured, perform a simple surgical operation and the child is completely better. Take that child to a faith healer and she's dead in a day.
"Carlos", a hoax staged by James Randi in Australia, was pretty badass - they said this kid could channel a dead spirit, used completely unverifiable sources, and the media and countryside ate it up. Once it was revealed as a hoax, people felt betrayed, but justified their behavior.
What a medium needs is darkness and gullibilty.
A scientist places an ad in a Paris newspaper offering a free horoscope. He sends 150 people the horoscope of a serial killer, along with a questionnaire regarding accuracy. 94% of the respondents, as well as 90% of their family and friends, reply that they were recognizable in the horoscope.
-- 94% of respondents? I think people who thought it was inaccurate would be more likely to throw the horoscope away than mail in its questionnaire.
- it talks about cold reading, which is cool, and the list of "evidence" for disorders, which is not so cool
Chapter 14:
The rate of change in science is responsible for some of the fire it draws. Just as we've finally understood something the scientists are talking about, they tell us it isn't true.
-- as opposed to other "pathways of knowledge", which reinterpret, realign, and deny erroneous beliefs in efforts to maintain their claim to truth
- scientists have human failings, but to refute their discoveries based on those is an ad hominem attack
Chapter 15:
Societies that teach contentment with one's present station in life, in expectation of post-mortem reward, inoculate themselves against revolution.
-- How can the Human Genome Project call itself complete when they've sequenced 92% of the genes from no more than 10 people?
By making pronouncements that are, even if only in principle, testable, religions however unwillingly enter the arena of science. . . this, in turn, has infuriated the followers of some religions.
- The Roman Catholic Church didn't admit that the Earth revolved around the Sun until 1992?
Chapter 16:
The Spanish Inquisition sought to avoid direct responsibility for the burning of heretics by handing them over to the secular arm; to burn them itself, it piously explained, would be wholly inconsistent with its Christian principles.
"Absolute secrecy corrupts absolutely": CIA Inspector General, 1995
Open and vigorous debate is often the only protection against the most perilous misuse of technology.
What realm of human behavior is not morally ambiguous? Consider aphorisms: Haste makes waste, but a stich in time saves nine. Better safe then sorry, but nothing ventured, nothing gained. Where there's smoke there's fire, but you can't tell a book by its cover. . . there was a time when people planned or justified their actions on the basis of such contradictory platitudes.
-- That time's not over: "No apologies, no regrets"
-- you have to read between the lines on these: the sum of these aphorisms isn't zero.
Chapter 17:
Because its explanatory power is so great, once you get the hang of scientific reasoning you're eager to apply it everywhere.
We cannot have science in bits and pieces, applying it where we feel safe and ignoring it where we feel threatened.
Societies with a supreme god who lives in the sky tend to be the most ferocious, though this is a statistical correlation only.
Many psuedoscientific and New Age belief systems emerge out of dissatisfaction with conventional values and perspectives -- and are therefore themselves a kind of skepticism.
-- the trashing of Western medicine by Ayur-Ved enthusiasts
If you're only skeptical, no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything. You become a crotchety misanthrope convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.)
-- hah
It means nothing to be open to a proposition you don't understand.
Chapter 18:
Factors contributing to the development of the scientific method in Greece:
- The assembly, where men learned to persuade each other through rational debate
- A maritime economy that prevented isolation and parochialism
- A widespread Greek-speaking world around which travelers and scholars could wander
- An independent merchant class that could hire its own teachers.
- The Iliad and the Odyssey
- A literary religion not dominated by priests - ???
- The persistence of these factors for 1,000 years
In cultures lacking unfamiliar challenges, where fundamental change is unneeded, novel ideas need not be encouraged. Indeed, heresies can be declared dangerous.
Thales - the philosopher who, when ridiculed for his poverty, used his climatological skills to form a monopoly on olive presses and make a killing
Eratosthenes - the guy who measured the circumference of the Earth from the shadows cast by the wells
Empedocles: a guy who proved that air isn't just empty space - he also came up with his own version of evolutionary theory
Chapter 19:
When what needs to be learned changes quickly, especially in the course of a single generation, it becomes harder to know what to teach and how to teach it. Students complain about relevance; respect for their elders diminishes.
-- easily solved by teaching the present method while explaining the past methods it was built upon
- he talks about how high schoolers are surly and don't want to ask questions: a phenomenon I observed immediately when I switched to public school
I find many adults are put off when young children pose scientific questions. . . why adults should pretend to be omniscient before 6-year-olds, I can't for the life of me understand. . . is our self-esteem so fragile?
Sixty-three percent of American adults are unaware that the last dinosaur died before the first human arose.
-- 63 as in 63 MILLION YEARS! AGO! - thanks, Bill Nye, for telling me when the dinosaurs died
-- er, wait: 65 MILLION YEARS! AGO! - my mistake, stupid fallible memory
75% don't know that antibiotics kill bacteria but not viruses.
-- I didn't know that, but now that I think about it, I don't really know what a virus is. *research*
-- ...they're basically just wandering gene transmitters that infect and reproduce... very weird
57% don't know that electrons are smaller than atoms.
-- I would have had to think about that for a second, but since I know atoms have electrons, protons, and neutrons, I would've (or should've) gotten that one right.
These are typical questions in "scientific literacy". The results are appalling. But what do they measure? The memorization of authoritative pronouncements. What they SHOULD be asking is HOW WE KNOW these things. . . such questions are a much truer measure of public understanding of science.
-- well thought
Chapter 21:
- There's a good story about Frederick Douglass here.
Chapter 22:
- he talks about the networks claiming The Flintstones has educational value. Also, he mentions The X Files, and suggests, half tongue-in-cheek, that it be replaced by a show in which the paranormal claims turn out to be explainable under skeptical scrutiny
The United States may be the best-entertained nation on Earth, but a steep price is being paid.
Chapter 23:
- the Westminister project: Queen Victoria's idea, in 1860, to fund the invention of television.
- the nature of spin-off scientific discoveries resulting from curiousity preclude an entirely market-driven approach to scientific funding
Chapter 24:
The ink was barely dry on the Bill of Rights before politicians found a way to subvert it -- by cashing in on fear and patriotic hysteria.
-- USA PATRIOT ACT NOW A PERMANENT LAW, NO KNOWN ABUSES FOUND
Exploiting tensions between France and the U.S., and a widespread fear that French and Irish immigrants were somehow intrinsically unfit to be Americans, the Federalists passed a set of laws that have come to be known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. . . the Alien Act gave President John Adams the power to deport any foreigner who aroused his suspicions. . . the Sedition Act made it unlawful to publish "false or malicious" criticism of the government or to inspire opposition to any of its acts.
As soon as Thomas Jefferson was elected - in the first week of his presidency in 1801 - he began pardoning every victim of the Sedition Act because, he said, it was as contrary to the spirit of American freedoms as if Congress had ordered us all to fall down and worship a golden calf. By 1802, none of the Alien and Sedition Acts remained on the books.
-- can such a thing happen in our age?
Whatever the problem, the quick fix is to shave a little freedom off the Bill of Rights. Yes, in 1942, Japanese-Americans were protected by the Bill of Rights, but we locked them up anyway -- after all, there was a war on. Yes, there are Constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable search and seizure, but we have a war on drugs and violent crime is racing out of control. . . the pretexts change from year to year, but the result remains the same.
Chapter 25:
There is no nation on Earth today optimized for the middle of the twenty-first century.
Most of us are for freedom of expression when there's a danger that our own views will be suppressed. We're not all that upset, though, when views we despise encounter a little censorship here and there.
The book mentions the "Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither" quote, but attributes it to J.S. Mill instead of Ben Franklin. Probably a mistake, since Franklin died before J.S. Mill was born.
In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights.
People try verious belief systems on for size, to see if they fit . . . psuedoscience speaks to powerful emotional needs science often leaves unfilfilled. It caters to fantasies about personal powers we lack and long fore. It offers satisfaction of spiritual hungers, cures for disease, promises that death is not the end.
Perhaps the most successful recent global psuedoscience . . . is the Hindu doctrine of transcendental meditation (TM). . . The worldwide TM organization has an estimated valuation of $3 billion. For a fee they promise through meditation to be able to walk you through walls, to make you invisible, to enable you to fly. By thinking in unison they have, they say, diminished the crime rate in Washington, D.C. and caused the collapse of the Soviet Union, among other secular miracles. Not one smattering of real evidence has been offered for any such claims. TM sells folk medicine, runs trading companies, medical clinics and "research" universities, and has unsuccessfully entered politics.
-- the most successful, huh - I thought they were small-time operators on the cult scale for some reason.
In Russia, under Communism, both religion and psuedoscience were systematically suppressed -- except for the superstition of the state ideological religion. It was advertised as scientific, but fell far short of this ideal as the most unselfcritical mystery cult. . . As a result, post-Communism, many Russians view science with suspicion. . . the region is now awash in UFOs, poltergeists, faith healers, and old-time superstition.
- How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life, Thomas Gilovich
Chapter 2
The dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media.
Humans may crave absolute certainty. . . but the history of science teaches us that the most we can hope for is successive improvement in our understanding.
-- some time is spent extolling the virtues of science and its superiority over other disciplines, based on its constant questioning of itself
Chapter 3
Each field of science has its own complement of psuedoscience. . . Astronomy has, as its most prominent psuedoscience, astrology - the discipline out of which it emerged.
-- always ask by what process people come to lay claim to nature's intentions
- he cites articles from the Weekly World News as examples of psuedoscientific foolery: does he know what the Weekly World News is?
Chapter 4:
- the crop circle hoax is mentioned
Chapter 5:
After I give lectures - on almost any subject - I'm often asked, "Do you believe in UFOs?" I'm always struck by how the question is phrased, the suggestion that this is a matter of belief and not of evidence. I'm almost never asked, "How good is the evidence that UFOs are alien spaceships?" . . . I've found that the going-in attitude of many people is highly predetermined.
Some of the black-lining in FOIA requests is due to intercepted communications - though the information needs to be revealed, any details regarding its collection are blanked out.
The book of Deuteronomy, in the Bible, was "found" by King Josiah in the middle of a reformation struggle - it confirmed all his views.
Lorenzo of Valla concluded that the Apostles' Creed could not, on grammatical grounds, have been written by the Twelve Apostles.
-- much like my rejection of the Willie Lynch hoax, which led me to research it further
Chapter 6:
- occasionally, people will claim to be in contact with aliens: when Carl Sagan gives them math questions to answer, he never receives a reply, but when he asks questions regarding morality he receives plenty.
- thorazine (and haloperidol) make hallucinations go away
from another site:
Meditation And/Or Sensory Deprivation
When the brain lacks external stimulation to form perceptions, it may compensate by referencing the memory and form hallucinatory perceptions.
It makes good evolutionary sense for children to have fantasies of scary monsters. . . those who are not afraid of monsters tend not to leave descendents.
- only the three or four actual "canals" on Mars ever showed up on photographs: the rest were imaginary
Chapter 7:
Malleus Maleficarum, the "Hammer of Witches": aptly described as one of the most terrifying documents in human history. . . what the Malleus comes down to, pretty much, is that if you're accused of witchcraft, you're a witch.
Witch-hunting in England was profitable. All costs of investigation, trial, and execution were borne by the accused or her relatives. . . one mid-seventeenth-century man confessed he had been the death of above 220 women in England and Scotland, for the gain of twenty shillings apiece.
William Tyndale translated the Bible into English - in thanks, he was captured, garroted, then burned at the stake for good measure. His copies of the New Testament were hunted down house-to-house by armed posses.
There are almost no reports of flying saucers prior to 1947: instead, it was demons and fairies.
The believers [in alien sightings] take the common elements in their stories as tokens of versimilitude, rather than evidence that they have contrived their stories out of a shared culture and biology.
Chapter 8:
The AMA callls memories surfacing under hypnosis less reliable than those recalled without it.
Subjects under hypnosis can as easily recall FUTURE lives as they can past ones.
Unhypnotized subjects can easily be made to believe they saw something they didn't. In a study, subjects are shown a film of a car accident. When questioned about the video, false information is interjected, such as a reference to a nonexistent stop sign. Many subjects then dutifully remember seeing the sign. When the deception is revealed, some vehemently protest, stressing how vividly they remember the sign. . . the psychologist, Elizabeth Loftus, argues that "memories of an event more closely resemble a story undergoing constant revision than a packet of pristine information."
-- that's awesome
President Ronald Reagan, who spent World War II in Hollywood, vividly described his own role in liberating Nazi concentratoin camp victims. Living in the film world, he apparently confused a movie he'd seen with a reality he hadn't. On many occasions in his presidential campaigns, Mr. Reagan told an epic story of World War II courage and sacrifice, an inspiration for all of us. Only it never happened; it was the plot of the movie A Wing and a Prayer.
Legends influence apparitions and vice versa.
Chapter 9:
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. -- Sherlock Holmes
The power or intensity with which something is felt is no guide regarding its truth.
What a more critical mind might recognize as a hallucination or a dream, a more credulous mind interprets as a glimpse of an elusive but profound reality.
Paul Ingram spent fifteen years in prison because he was gullible enough to believe "expert" suggestions that he was denying memories of satanically abusing his daughter.
Chapter 10:
Magic requires cooperation of the audience with the magician.
-- The absence of suitable counterexplanations doesn't make a proposed explanation correct.
The credibility of science is only a consequence of the method.
Carl Jung, regarding people who accept incredible testimony at face value:
"These people are lacking not only in criticism but in the most elementary knowledge of psychology. At bottom they do not want to be taught any better, but merely to go on believing -- surely the naivest of presumptions in view of our human failings."
Chapter 11: Reader Mail
-- Reader mail always baffles me. People are weird and/or retarded.
Chapter 12:
We tell children about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy for reasons we think emotionally sound, but then disabuse them of these myths before they're grown. Why retract? Because their well-being as adults depends on them knowing the world as it really is. We worry, and for good reason, about adults who still believe in Santa Claus.
-- reminds me of the Forestry official who believed that trees were infinite and that if they all were cut down, God would just make more.
Who cares which breakfast cereal has more vitamins when we can take a vitamin pill with breakfast?
There are no authorities in science. At best, there are experts.
Tools for skeptical thinking:
- Independent confirmation of facts
- Substantive debate by knowledgeable proponents
- Multiple hypotheses: how ELSE could that have happened?
- Compare your hypothesis fairly with the alternatives
- Think of the ways your hypothesis could be rejected
- Quantify
- Make sure every link in an argument chain works
- Use Occam's Razor
- Never entertain untestable propositions
- Use carefully designed and controlled experiments
Logical fallacies:
ad hominem (to the man): attacking the arguer, not the argument
non sequitur (it doesn't follow): reaching a conclusion from facts that one can't logically reach
correlation implying causation (post hoc, ergo propter hoc)
argument from authority
argument from consequences
appeal to ignorance: if it can't be disproved, it must be true, right?
special pleading: any "technical" non-explanation
begging the question (assuming the answer): relying on an unproven premise
observational selection: seeing the roses and not the thistles
statistics of small numbers
misunderstanding statistics
meaningless question
false dichotomy: splitting a situation into two choices, at least one of them a straw man
short-term vs. long-term false dichotomy: the belief that a solution to one renders impossible the solution to another
slippery slope
straw man: caricaturing a position to make it easier to attack
bogus evidence
weasel words
-- I'll add statistical extrapolation to that mix: the idea that the current trends will continue, at the projected, into the future.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
There are many brands of low-tar cigarettes. Why is low-tar a virtue? Because the refractory tars are where polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and some other carcinogens are concentrated. Aren't the low-tar ads a tacit admission by the tobacco companies that cigarettes indeed cause cancer?
Chapter 13:
A man who sees evidence that his ship is unsound and tricks himself into believing that everything's fine is guilty of causing the deaths of the men aboard that ship when it goes down.
-- Don't care whether or not someone believes, care about the evidence on which their belief stands.
In his brief list of psuedoscience and superstition he mentions four things I found interesting:
- that flatworms who know a task can be fed to other flatworms, which can then do the task -- I'd heard of this one
- Facilitated Communications -- this one could easily be scientifically tested, I'd still try it if my child was autistic
- more crimes being committed when the moon is full -- that one made sense to me, but it needs more empirical research I think
- the secret life of plants book, though I learned that was written by a crackpot well before reading this
- you can stop your pulse by holding a ball in your armpit and squeezing
Nearly half of all Americans believe there is such a thing as psychic or spiritual healing.
-- reminds me of George Carlin's line, something to the tune of: "What are you people, stupid?"
When a child's spleen is ruptured, perform a simple surgical operation and the child is completely better. Take that child to a faith healer and she's dead in a day.
"Carlos", a hoax staged by James Randi in Australia, was pretty badass - they said this kid could channel a dead spirit, used completely unverifiable sources, and the media and countryside ate it up. Once it was revealed as a hoax, people felt betrayed, but justified their behavior.
What a medium needs is darkness and gullibilty.
A scientist places an ad in a Paris newspaper offering a free horoscope. He sends 150 people the horoscope of a serial killer, along with a questionnaire regarding accuracy. 94% of the respondents, as well as 90% of their family and friends, reply that they were recognizable in the horoscope.
-- 94% of respondents? I think people who thought it was inaccurate would be more likely to throw the horoscope away than mail in its questionnaire.
- it talks about cold reading, which is cool, and the list of "evidence" for disorders, which is not so cool
Chapter 14:
The rate of change in science is responsible for some of the fire it draws. Just as we've finally understood something the scientists are talking about, they tell us it isn't true.
-- as opposed to other "pathways of knowledge", which reinterpret, realign, and deny erroneous beliefs in efforts to maintain their claim to truth
- scientists have human failings, but to refute their discoveries based on those is an ad hominem attack
Chapter 15:
Societies that teach contentment with one's present station in life, in expectation of post-mortem reward, inoculate themselves against revolution.
-- How can the Human Genome Project call itself complete when they've sequenced 92% of the genes from no more than 10 people?
By making pronouncements that are, even if only in principle, testable, religions however unwillingly enter the arena of science. . . this, in turn, has infuriated the followers of some religions.
- The Roman Catholic Church didn't admit that the Earth revolved around the Sun until 1992?
Chapter 16:
The Spanish Inquisition sought to avoid direct responsibility for the burning of heretics by handing them over to the secular arm; to burn them itself, it piously explained, would be wholly inconsistent with its Christian principles.
"Absolute secrecy corrupts absolutely": CIA Inspector General, 1995
Open and vigorous debate is often the only protection against the most perilous misuse of technology.
What realm of human behavior is not morally ambiguous? Consider aphorisms: Haste makes waste, but a stich in time saves nine. Better safe then sorry, but nothing ventured, nothing gained. Where there's smoke there's fire, but you can't tell a book by its cover. . . there was a time when people planned or justified their actions on the basis of such contradictory platitudes.
-- That time's not over: "No apologies, no regrets"
-- you have to read between the lines on these: the sum of these aphorisms isn't zero.
Chapter 17:
Because its explanatory power is so great, once you get the hang of scientific reasoning you're eager to apply it everywhere.
We cannot have science in bits and pieces, applying it where we feel safe and ignoring it where we feel threatened.
Societies with a supreme god who lives in the sky tend to be the most ferocious, though this is a statistical correlation only.
Many psuedoscientific and New Age belief systems emerge out of dissatisfaction with conventional values and perspectives -- and are therefore themselves a kind of skepticism.
-- the trashing of Western medicine by Ayur-Ved enthusiasts
If you're only skeptical, no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything. You become a crotchety misanthrope convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.)
-- hah
It means nothing to be open to a proposition you don't understand.
Chapter 18:
Factors contributing to the development of the scientific method in Greece:
- The assembly, where men learned to persuade each other through rational debate
- A maritime economy that prevented isolation and parochialism
- A widespread Greek-speaking world around which travelers and scholars could wander
- An independent merchant class that could hire its own teachers.
- The Iliad and the Odyssey
- A literary religion not dominated by priests - ???
- The persistence of these factors for 1,000 years
In cultures lacking unfamiliar challenges, where fundamental change is unneeded, novel ideas need not be encouraged. Indeed, heresies can be declared dangerous.
Thales - the philosopher who, when ridiculed for his poverty, used his climatological skills to form a monopoly on olive presses and make a killing
Eratosthenes - the guy who measured the circumference of the Earth from the shadows cast by the wells
Empedocles: a guy who proved that air isn't just empty space - he also came up with his own version of evolutionary theory
Chapter 19:
When what needs to be learned changes quickly, especially in the course of a single generation, it becomes harder to know what to teach and how to teach it. Students complain about relevance; respect for their elders diminishes.
-- easily solved by teaching the present method while explaining the past methods it was built upon
- he talks about how high schoolers are surly and don't want to ask questions: a phenomenon I observed immediately when I switched to public school
I find many adults are put off when young children pose scientific questions. . . why adults should pretend to be omniscient before 6-year-olds, I can't for the life of me understand. . . is our self-esteem so fragile?
Sixty-three percent of American adults are unaware that the last dinosaur died before the first human arose.
-- 63 as in 63 MILLION YEARS! AGO! - thanks, Bill Nye, for telling me when the dinosaurs died
-- er, wait: 65 MILLION YEARS! AGO! - my mistake, stupid fallible memory
75% don't know that antibiotics kill bacteria but not viruses.
-- I didn't know that, but now that I think about it, I don't really know what a virus is. *research*
-- ...they're basically just wandering gene transmitters that infect and reproduce... very weird
57% don't know that electrons are smaller than atoms.
-- I would have had to think about that for a second, but since I know atoms have electrons, protons, and neutrons, I would've (or should've) gotten that one right.
These are typical questions in "scientific literacy". The results are appalling. But what do they measure? The memorization of authoritative pronouncements. What they SHOULD be asking is HOW WE KNOW these things. . . such questions are a much truer measure of public understanding of science.
-- well thought
Chapter 21:
- There's a good story about Frederick Douglass here.
Chapter 22:
- he talks about the networks claiming The Flintstones has educational value. Also, he mentions The X Files, and suggests, half tongue-in-cheek, that it be replaced by a show in which the paranormal claims turn out to be explainable under skeptical scrutiny
The United States may be the best-entertained nation on Earth, but a steep price is being paid.
Chapter 23:
- the Westminister project: Queen Victoria's idea, in 1860, to fund the invention of television.
- the nature of spin-off scientific discoveries resulting from curiousity preclude an entirely market-driven approach to scientific funding
Chapter 24:
The ink was barely dry on the Bill of Rights before politicians found a way to subvert it -- by cashing in on fear and patriotic hysteria.
-- USA PATRIOT ACT NOW A PERMANENT LAW, NO KNOWN ABUSES FOUND
Exploiting tensions between France and the U.S., and a widespread fear that French and Irish immigrants were somehow intrinsically unfit to be Americans, the Federalists passed a set of laws that have come to be known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. . . the Alien Act gave President John Adams the power to deport any foreigner who aroused his suspicions. . . the Sedition Act made it unlawful to publish "false or malicious" criticism of the government or to inspire opposition to any of its acts.
As soon as Thomas Jefferson was elected - in the first week of his presidency in 1801 - he began pardoning every victim of the Sedition Act because, he said, it was as contrary to the spirit of American freedoms as if Congress had ordered us all to fall down and worship a golden calf. By 1802, none of the Alien and Sedition Acts remained on the books.
-- can such a thing happen in our age?
Whatever the problem, the quick fix is to shave a little freedom off the Bill of Rights. Yes, in 1942, Japanese-Americans were protected by the Bill of Rights, but we locked them up anyway -- after all, there was a war on. Yes, there are Constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable search and seizure, but we have a war on drugs and violent crime is racing out of control. . . the pretexts change from year to year, but the result remains the same.
Chapter 25:
There is no nation on Earth today optimized for the middle of the twenty-first century.
Most of us are for freedom of expression when there's a danger that our own views will be suppressed. We're not all that upset, though, when views we despise encounter a little censorship here and there.
The book mentions the "Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither" quote, but attributes it to J.S. Mill instead of Ben Franklin. Probably a mistake, since Franklin died before J.S. Mill was born.
In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)