| |
| There are great benefits to connectedness, but we haven't wrapped our minds around the costs. |
|
Ghosts, UFOs, astrology, reincarnation, and witches, oh my! |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Society |
1:50 pm EST, Nov 27, 2004 |
About a third of Americans believe in ghosts (34 percent) and an equal number in UFOs (34 percent), and about a quarter accept things like astrology (29 percent), reincarnation (25 percent) and witches (24 percent). Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say they believe in reincarnation (by 14 percentage points), in astrology (by 14 points), in ghosts (by eight points) and UFOs (by five points). In case anyone was keeping score, by no means do the Reds have a monopoly on the wholesale denial of the scientific method. (Keep in mind that this poll was conducted on behalf of Fox News, though by an outside polling/research firm.) Ghosts, UFOs, astrology, reincarnation, and witches, oh my! |
|
The Religious and Other Beliefs of Americans 2003 |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Society |
1:45 pm EST, Nov 27, 2004 |
This Harris poll offers more useful data than the CBS poll. That very large majorities of the American public, and almost all (but not all) Christians believe in God, the survival of the soul after death, miracles, heaven, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the Virgin birth will come as no great surprise. What may be more surprising is that half of all adults believe in ghosts, almost a third believe in astrology, and more than a quarter believe in reincarnation -- that they were themselves reincarnated from other people. Of those aged 25 to 29, 43% believe in astrology and 40% believe in reincarnation. I should start a mock petition campaign to have astrology, ghosts, UFOs, and reincarnation inserted into high school science textbooks. The Religious and Other Beliefs of Americans 2003 |
|
Creationism Trumps Evolution |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Science |
1:13 pm EST, Nov 27, 2004 |
Americans do not believe that humans evolved, and the vast majority says that even if they evolved, God guided the process. Just 13 percent say that God was not involved. But most would not substitute the teaching of creationism for the teaching of evolution in public schools. Here is the most interesting divide that emerges from this poll: Humans evolved, God did not guide process:
Kerry voters, 21%
Bush voters, 6% There's a certain quality of reflexive incredulity to this story. It's as though the evolutionists (via the media) are saying to the creationists, "I can't believe you still don't believe!" And they're doing it in such a way that depicts the creationists as Slow. This poll is more entertainment than serious inquiry. I think it is unnecessarily issue-oriented, on the basis of writing a news story using the "findings." It would work better as a study instead of a poll. You don't really need to use the terms "evolution" and "creationism." First, ask them if they believe in God. Next, ask them to define the scientific method. Then ask or not they "accept" the scientific method. Finally, ask them how they react to conflicts between the scientific and the religious. You might get more dialogue going if you open it up a bit, allowing people to talk about cosmology. It would also reveal, perhaps to the surprise of some, just how many people still believe in astrology. --- In Britain, some people have taken to mocking Richard Dawkins, saying that he's had just "one idea" in his career, and he can't stop talking about it. His one idea is the "Selfish Gene." I suppose the same type of thing was said about Darwin in his day. Creationism Trumps Evolution |
|
Passionate Peeping Into Others' Depths |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Society |
12:58 pm EST, Nov 27, 2004 |
"[These are from] the late 70's and early 80's. Why did they appear in the late 90's? Why the granny panties? So many questions." Passionate Peeping Into Others' Depths |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Society |
10:40 pm EST, Nov 26, 2004 |
"My book is a wordless experience in remote Asia. The idea is that you open the book and fall into it. You become immersed in Asia." Watch the slideshow. Buy the book. Asia Grace |
|
Malcolm Gladwell on Human Nature | IT Conversations from Pop!Tech 2004 |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Science |
10:34 pm EST, Nov 26, 2004 |
In his forthcoming book, Blink, Malcolm Gladwell analyzes social intuition, or how we know what we know in social situations, and especially, how we read facial expressions. This presentation can enlighten anyone for whom human interaction deeply affects what they do. Blink will do for our knowledge of communication, both personal and corporate, what The Tipping Point has done for our understanding of trends. Malcolm Gladwell on Human Nature | IT Conversations from Pop!Tech 2004 |
|
Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Science |
10:33 pm EST, Nov 26, 2004 |
Malcolm Gladwell has a new book coming out in January 2005. Excerpts are available now. "Blink" is a book about rapid cognition, about the kind of thinking that happens in a blink of an eye. When you meet someone for the first time, or walk into a house you are thinking of buying, or read the first few sentences of a book, your mind takes about two seconds to jump to a series of conclusions. Well, "Blink" is a book about those two seconds, because I think those instant conclusions that we reach are really powerful and really important and, occasionally, really good. Lots of people are committed to the idea that more information is always better. But I describe lots of cases in "Blink" where that simply isn't true. "Blink" is concerned with the smallest components of our everyday lives -- with the content and origin of those instantaneous impressions and conclusions that bubble up whenever we meet a new person, or confront a complex situation, or have to make a decision under conditions of stress. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Technology |
10:21 pm EST, Nov 26, 2004 |
The theme of the 15th CFP is PANOPTICON We are particularly interested in receiving proposals that ask the hard questions about privacy and freedom in emerging surveillance societies, and challenging those assumptions. In addition, other topics of interest include SOCIAL NETWORKING CFP 2005 |
|
Is a meme still a meme when you know it's a meme? |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: Society |
10:17 pm EST, Nov 26, 2004 |
I've been wondering this as I watch the cult of the viral idea spread across the blogosphere -- or maybe, at this point, the memesphere. For the online cognoscenti, memes have become self-conscious tools for waggish fun. Thanks to technology, one nifty notion can globally infect tens of thousands of nerds within hours. Do memes really signify the death of meaningful information, or just a bit of symbiotic fun? One way or another, viral ideas affect the thoughtscape, dude. They change it, they push it, they retard it. Some think this unchecked replication will inevitably bite its own tail, transforming culture in a giant, cannibalistic meme. Me, I like to hope that technology will take memesis to the next level, transforming it into an outsider's method of creating culture, one that moves too fast to become homogenized. We'll see. Is a meme still a meme when you know it's a meme? |
|
Buzzing the Web on a meme machine |
|
|
|---|
| Topic: High Tech Developments |
10:10 pm EST, Nov 26, 2004 |
The Web is obsessed with anything that spreads, whether it's a virus, a blog or a rumor. And so the Internet loves memes. Meme and memetics were once terms batted around only by thinkers like Dawkins, Dennett, and Blackmore. Now the word "meme" is part of many would-be-trendy Web addresses like MemeStreams. One site says it tests "new, old and emergent memes that are sweeping the memesphere, the mediasphere or the buzzsphere." In fact, much of the site is a grab bag of blogs, quotes and theories about politics and culture. Another web site advertises a meme list that turns out to be just a dispensary of lame topics for bloggers. n other words, you add some meme gas to your blog to help it spread through the culture. The model here seems to be Sylvester McMonkey McBean, the Dr. Seuss character who invented a machine to put stars on the bellies of non-star-bellied Sneeches. The idea of the meme has, itself, become a meme. Spread the word. How did I miss this article? It's been relegated to the pay-per-view archive at NYT, but CNET still offers it up. ("Stop" your browser when loading this page to avoid being auto-forwarded to a "page expired" notice.) Buzzing the Web on a meme machine |
|
