Category Archives: Linking Thinking

Link­ing to what oth­ers are think­ing about learn­ing as a way to explore how we learn online.

A
The New Paternalism →

Richard Thaler and Cass Sun­stein artic­u­late an approach to design­ing social and eco­nomic poli­cies that incor­po­rates an under­stand­ing of people’s cog­ni­tive lim­i­ta­tions: pol­icy mak­ers should nudge peo­ple into mak­ing good deci­sions.

♦ ♦ ♦

V
The Stupidity of Dignity →

Steven Pinker dis­misses dig­nity as a basis for bioethics dis­cus­sions in bio­med­ical research, which US con­ser­v­a­tives and reli­gious lead­ers are invok­ing to dis­miss poten­tially life-saving med­ical advances. Unfor­tu­nately “over­ween­ing hubris” char­ac­ter­izes most for­mal dis­cus­sions of real revolutions:

In every age, prophets fore­see dystopias that never mate­ri­al­ize, while fail­ing to antic­i­pate the real rev­o­lu­tions. Had there been a President’s Coun­cil on Cyberethics in the 1960s, no doubt it would have decried the threat of the Inter­net, since it would inex­orably lead to 1984, or to com­put­ers “tak­ing over” like HAL in 2001. Con­ser­v­a­tive bioethi­cists pre­sume to sooth­say the out­come of the quin­tes­sen­tially unpre­dictable endeavor called sci­en­tific research. And they would stage-manage the kinds of social change that, in a free soci­ety, only emerge as hun­dreds of mil­lions of peo­ple weigh the costs and ben­e­fits of new devel­op­ments for them­selves, adjust­ing their mores and deal­ing with spe­cific harms as they arise, as they did with in vitro fer­til­iza­tion and the Internet.

♦ ♦ ♦

R
Dare To Be Yourself →

Real­iz­ing an authen­tic life can be painful, exhaust­ing, seem­ingly impos­si­ble, and one of our deep­est psy­cho­log­i­cal needs. Psy­chother­a­pist and for­mer monk Thomas Moore on the role that fail­ures in play under­stand­ing self: “Peo­ple carry around a heavy bur­den of not feel­ing authen­tic because they have failed mar­riages and their work life hasn’t gone the way it should, and they’ve dis­ap­pointed every­body, includ­ing them­selves. When peo­ple think of these as just fail­ures, as opposed to learn­ing expe­ri­ences, they don’t have to feel the weight of their lives or the choices they’ve made. That dis­own­ing cre­ates a divi­sion that becomes the sense of inauthenticity.”

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Does your brain have a mind of its own? →

Why can’t we stick to our goals like “I will lose weight” or “I plan to fin­ish this arti­cle before the dead­line. “Nice thoughts, but not for­mu­lated in terms that your ances­tral, reflex­ive brain might under­stand,” says psy­chol­o­gist Gary Mar­cus. The work around? “Trans­late those abstract goals into a form your ances­tral sys­tems – which traf­fic largely in dumb reflexes – can under­stand: if-then. If you find your­self in a par­tic­u­lar sit­u­a­tion, then take a spe­cific action.”

♦ ♦ ♦

A
Want to Remember Everything You’ll Ever Learn? →

The spac­ing effect posits that the best time to study some­thing is at the moment you are about to for­get it – an insight that was use­less in the real world, until Piotr Woz­niak intro­duced Super­Memo.

♦ ♦ ♦

L
Death of the Guidebook: Lost in a Cutthroat World →

Chris Tay­lor calls “desk updates” the travel guide­book industry’s “dirty secret.” “In times past, the only way to research a guide­book was to actu­ally go there — the alter­na­tive, pla­gia­ris­ing another guide­book, was, and still is, dif­fi­cult to cover up. Today, you can sit at home and Google the town you might oth­er­wise be explor­ing on foot, and hope­fully some ran­dom blog­ger has done the leg­work for you.” But the dirty part is not the fact that they stayed at home, it is the mis­rep­re­sen­ta­tion of the source of their exper­tise and the betrayal of their read­ers’ trust. They should learn from the best blog­gers: write every­where (includ­ing from home), bor­row from every­one, give credit where it’s due, and add value to the con­ver­sa­tion from your own gen­uine experiences.

♦ ♦ ♦

R
Noble Eagles, Nasty Pigeons, Biased Humans →

Natalie Ang­ier explains bio­big­otry: “If you have two impor­tant birds from the same region of Latin Amer­ica, said Mr. Fraser [psy­cho­log­i­cal con­ser­va­tion­al­ist], one a hyacinth macaw that looks like fly­ing jew­elry and can vocal­ize like a human, the other a storm petrel that is brown, squawky and cakes the coast­line with guano, guess which face ends up on the next fund-raising calendar.”

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Decision Making: Is It All ‘Me, Me, Me’? →

Clas­si­cal game the­ory pre­dicts that peo­ple inevitably act in their self-interest, lead­ing to “Nash equi­lib­rium.” Team rea­son­ing the­ory sug­gests indi­vid­ual self-interest is not always fore­most in the way peo­ple act as they will act in the best inter­est of their “team.” A recent study sug­gests that the lat­ter is a bet­ter pre­dic­tor of decision-making.

♦ ♦ ♦

L
Online Libraries Are Not Libraries At All →

David Wein­berger on why online libraries are not libraries at all: “So, even if the dis­trib­uted online library we’re build­ing at first seems sort of like a library, it will quickly invent itself into some­thing new, some­thing unpre­dictable and quite pos­si­bly, some­thing that will change us deeply.”

♦ ♦ ♦

N
Social Media Will Change Your Business →

Catch up or catch you later. Social media will change your busi­ness: “But here’s bet­ting that we [pro­fes­sional pub­lish­ers] also forge ahead in the open world. The mea­sure of suc­cess in that world is not a fin­ished prod­uct. The win­ners will be those who host the very best conversations.”

♦ ♦ ♦