Ineffable

There is always a tendency to lavish words upon what cannot be described, in the hope that some of them might stick – a little like throwing paint in the direction of The Invisible Man in order to make him out. 

~ Lionel Bailly, 2009, p. 98

A Death of One Thousand Subtractions

Alzheimer's is the cleverest thief, because she not only steals from you, but she steals the very thing you need to remember what's been stolen - Jarod Kintz, This Book Has No Title.

It'll become an epidemic once the baby boomer generation starts getting over 65 years of age. It's the revenge of longevity. 65 to 70% of Dementia is Alzheimer's. It always begins in the hippocampus, thus the loss of short term memory at the beginning of the illness. Short term memory (STM) just gets worse and worse at first, followed by the person's analytical abilities. Frustration can lead to aggression and even violent outbursts, muscle and movement loss progressively follow and the inability to swallow, then you're more or less looking at it really beginning to kill the person.

You can't converse with Alzheimer's sufferers in the way you do with others; the dialogue tends to go round in circles - Kevin Whately.
 

The care givers are also the heroes in this disease, along with the scientists. A death of 1000 subtractions, bit by bit, day by day, week by week, month by month, year by year. A slow death sentence. However, not everyone who lives to an old age gets Alzheimer's. No one is immune to the disease. Yes there is a genetic component, but inheritance is only about 5%, so you're far more likely to be in the 95th percentile.

People think it's just forgetting your keys. Or the words for things. But there are the personality changes. The mood swings. The hostility and even violence. Even from the gentlest person in the world. You lose the person you love. And you are left with the shell... And you are expected to go on loving them even when they are no longer there. You are supposed to be loyal. It's not that other people expect it. It's that you expect it of yourself. And you long for it to be over soon - Alice LaPlante, Turn of Mind.

299.00 (F84.0)

Autism is a lifelong neuro-developmental disability that affects the development of the brain in areas of social interaction and communication. People with autism have difficulties in communicating and forming relationships with people, in developing language and in using abstract concepts. It also impacts on their ability to make sense of the world around them. It was first described by Leo Kanner in 1943. The following year in 1944, a German scientist named Hans Asperger describes a "milder" form of autism now known as Asperger's Syndrome. It wasn't until 1994 that Asperger's Syndrome was added to the DSM, expanding the autism spectrum to include milder cases in which individuals tend to be more highly functioning.

 

Over the years, the definition, classification and diagnostic specifics of autism have undergone many significant changes. In 2013 the DSM-5 folded all subcategories of the condition into one umbrella diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Asperger's Syndrome is no longer considered a separate condition. The severity levels for Autism Spectrum Disorder, 299.00 (F84.0) from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) are outlined below.

Level 3: "Requiring very substantial support"

Social communication: Severe deficits in verbal and nonverbal social communication skills cause severe impairments in functioning, very limited initiation of social interactions, and minimal response to social overtures from others. For example, a person with few words of intelligible speech who rarely initiates interaction and, when he or she does, makes unusual approaches to meet needs only and responds to only very direct social approaches.

Restricted, repetitive behaviours: Inflexibility of behaviour, extreme difficulty coping with change, or other restricted / repetitive behaviours markedly interfere with functioning in all spheres. Great distress / difficulty changing focus or action.

Level 2: "Requiring substantial support"

Social communication: Marked deficits in verbal and nonverbal social communication skills; social impairments apparent even with supports in place; limited initiation of social interactions; and reduced or  abnormal responses to social overtures from others. For example, a person who speaks simple sentences, whose interaction is limited  to narrow special interests, and how has markedly odd nonverbal communication.

Restricted, repetitive behaviours: Inflexibility of behaviour, difficulty coping with change, or other restricted / repetitive behaviours appear frequently enough to be obvious to the casual observer and interfere with functioning in  a variety of contexts. Distress and / or difficulty changing focus or action.

Level 1: "Requiring support"

Social communication: Without supports in place, deficits in social communication cause noticeable impairments. Difficulty initiating social interactions, and clear examples of atypical or unsuccessful response to social overtures of others. May appear to have decreased interest in social interactions. For example, a person who is able to speak in full sentences and engages in communication but whose to-and-fro conversation with others fails, and whose attempts to make friends are odd and typically unsuccessful.

Restricted, repetitive behaviours: Inflexibility of behaviour causes significant interference with functioning in one or more contexts. Difficulty switching between activities. Problems of organization and planning hamper independence.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

'If they can't learn the way we teach, we teach the way they learn' ~ O. Ivar Lovaas 

Political Persuasion

What does an elected individual do or portray that may benefit them in the run up to polling day? In election campaigns, candidates attempt to promote themselves and try to communicate a positive message to get the support of the deciding voters. Along with expressing their motives if elected, does an understanding of the voter’s mind benefit their campaign strategy? A promotion of this idea could be witnessed in a haunting statement from Adolf Hitler (1933) who remarked in his infamous literature Mein Kampf,

'' … the greater the scope of the message that has to be present, the more necessary it is for the propaganda to discover that plan of action which is psychologically the most efficient''

Political communication and persuasion may have intrigued a tyrant in Nazi Germany,  but how does modern day political messages affect the public? In political elections advertising is regularly used to communicate a candidate's message in the hope of being elected. The public are exposed to images of politicians on campaign posters, campaign buses, leaflets through their letterbox, political broadcasts and televised debates. Whether the individual is walking on the street, driving in their car or sitting in front of the TV, they will likely witness political campaign advertising in some form or another.

 

In what ways does this advertising affect the mind of a voter? In the 2008 US presidential election Barack Obama’s campaign slogan of ''Yes we can'' may have been transformed into a victorious ''Yes we did!'' (Miller, 2009).  The ‘Mere exposure effect’ proposed by Zajonc (1968), says that a repeated exposure to a particular object results in a greater attraction to that object. If this theory is applied to political advertising, you could argue that people who continually witnessed Obama's campaign signs, may have developed a preference for his slogan and thus his party in general.

However, voters are not easily fooled by familiar and attractive faces alone (Mattes et al., 2010). First impressions of a political candidate can also be important. Primacy effects refer to people's tendency to assign more importance to the first information we learn about a person. Research suggests that a candidate who arouses positive feelings in a voter at an early stage, may have a heavy bearing on the day citizens go to the polls. Research from Abakoumkin (2011) highlighted the relationship of primacy effects in the ballot order of candidate's names and election outcomes. According to the author, those candidates listed earlier on a voting list may have had an advantage over those listed afterwards.

Contrary to these primary effects are recency effects, the enhanced memory of recently learned information. Can recency effects have an impact in how they influence vote decision? On October 24th 2011, in the race for the Irish Presidency, allegations were made against front runner Sean Gallagher that he received a €5,000 payment from convicted fuel smuggler Hugh Morgan. An argument could be made that recency effects of the allegations played a role in Mr. Gallagher losing votes and not being elected President. The recency effects coupled with this revelation may have removed feelings of trust and popularity among the Irish electorate.

Popularity and liking is also psychologically important for creating an association with a person. In his book 'Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion', Cialdini (2007) says that people tend to comply with the requests of someone they know and like (p. 167), with other researchers arguing that the likeability of a candidate suggests caring, trust and sociability (Hoegg & Lewis, 2011). Candidates trying to win votes may employ this tactic in order to create a 'one of us' connection. Cialdini also discussed peoples need to reciprocate; a politician who canvasses door to door making promises about what they will do once elected, or what they have done, can leave people in a situation where they feel an act of reciprocation is due (Cialdini, 2007). The political promises are acknowledged and in exchange for a vote, the 'reciprocity rule' lets the person avoid feelings of indebtedness to the other party.

Another method of creating an association with voters is in the linking of celebrities to political parties (Cialdini, 2007). Name dropping to associate yourself with desirable individuals and therefore improve other people's impressions of you, is referred to as BIRGing, 'Basking in Reflected Glory' (Cialdini et al., 1976).

An early example of this was portrayed in an overt media act instigated by Edward Bernays,  a pioneer in public relations. In 1924, the media had portrayed US President Calvin Coolidge as a dull, humanless figure who was viewed as a national joke. President Coolidge contacted Bernays for help in boosting his popularity with the masses. Bernays organised 34 film stars to visit the White House, and in this act of combining public relations with politics, the morning newspapers contained front page articles that increased the President's ratings among the public (Curtis, 2002).

A more recent example demonstrated in 2001, showed Tony Blair inviting celebrities to 10 Downing Street in an attempt to "add some spice" to the Labour Party. Political tactics like 'BIRGing' may sway the undecided votes, by creating a positive mental schema of the politician and thus reducing initial cognitive dissonance.

Basking in reflected glory may have helped President Coolidge boost his self enhancement in 1924, but in the modern era of elections, social media sites can act as a new communication tool for politicians (Vitak et al., 2011). With the younger generation of today being the future voters, politicians may need to increase political interest through relevant mediums. The internet provides people with more information in elections than that of traditional media. Facebook and MySpace were extremely popular among younger voters in the 2008 US Presidential race (Vitak et al., 2011). These social media sites allow politicians to interact with younger voters who may not have been previously interested in politics. Facebook users could post comments, share videos, express thoughts, become a "fan" of a candidate, and connect with other users in ways that previous elections did not offer (Vitak et al., 2011). Thus, from the use of social media sites, the peer to peer interactions among younger users can benefit a politician to convey their message to a broader audience.

An additional attraction of online political communication is how cost effective it can be. Research by Hoegg & Lewis (2011) states, ''A huge determinant of the success of a political campaign is the money spent on it'' (p. 898). It is therefore beneficial to the candidate to engage in powerful online mediums that save on expenditure and are less resource intensive, with any surplus expenditure being directed elsewhere. However, online activities may also have negative implications for political candidates. With the popularity of mobile phones, a member of the public standing in a campaign crowd can record a candidates "gaffe" and immediately post it online for millions to view (Johnson & Perlmutter, 2011). Mistakes can be highlighted and damage political reputations, where in previous decades an unfortunate incident may have gone unnoticed and be quickly forgotten.

The effective use of internet mediums has also been questioned by Morozov (2009). The author regarded the users of online resources for political interaction as ''slacktivists'', where participants were merely engaging in feel-good online activism that has little or zero real world impact. Online participants in chat forums who attempt to generate publicity for a particular candidate, is an ideal form of activism for a ''lazy generation'' and are not interested in following through on their morals (Morozov, 2009).

Political elections continue to be a prominent topic in news and general discussion. With the development of new trends in an internet era, politicians are faced with new challenges in exhausting all possible resources to create the most accessible campaign message. There are a myriad of psychological influences present in political campaigns. The psychological motives of a politician's actions are not always the most obvious from a voter's perspective, but for the candidate they may be a decisive factor in securing the position sought after.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive."  
                                                                                                                                                - Blaise Pascal, De l'art de persuader

The Chameleon Effect

According to authors Chartrand and Bargh ,"The chameleon effect refers to nonconscious mimicry of the postures, mannerisms, facial expressions, and other behaviors of one's interaction partners, such that one's behavior passively and unintentionally changes to match that of others in one's current social environment." (Journal Of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999).

 
How many times have you yawned after viewing another person do it? Or noticed your tone of voice depended on the company you were in. What about meeting up with people from where you used to grow up and now realising that your homeland accent has suddenly started coming out of your mouth...

 

The chameleon effect can happen naturally and frequently because we feel a rapport with people who mimic our moves. Most of us do it automatically to varying degrees, we mimic the people around us all the time without even realizing it.

 

In one study of the chameleon effect, Chartrand and Bargh found that students who rated high on empathy were more likely to imitate others. "Those who pay more attention mimic more," says Chartrand.

 

We also mimic the facial expressions of other people. This is so hardwired that one-month old infants have been shown to smile, stick out their tongues, and open their mouths when they see someone else doing the same (Meltzoff & Moore, 1977).

Unintentional mimicry and imitation functions as a social cohesive. The chameleon effect actually becomes a warm response that facilitates social interactions. Mirroring a persons language shows that you understand your conversation partner, and that you are an empathetic listener.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

''When you are in the company of lunatics, behave like a lunatic. When you are in the company of intelligentsias, speak with brilliance...that is how a chameleon behaves, the territory changes it, and it adapts to the changes.''
                                                                                                                    ~ Michael Bassey Johnson

Chinese Room Argument

The Chinese room argument is a thought experiment. It was first proposed by the US philosopher John Searle (pictured) in the journal Behavioural and Brain Sciences in 1980 , in which many people feel he thoroughly disproved the notion that any computer program could acquire true intelligence. It is one of the best known and widely credited counters to claims of artificial intelligence (AI) - that is, to claims that computers do or at least can (someday might) think.

It was written to demonstrate a simple point - intelligent behaviour does not equate to intelligence. This doesn't mean AI design is impossible, but that a behavioural-based model for intelligence is flawed.

Imagine yourself a monolingual English speaker, ''locked in a room, and given a large batch of Chinese writing'' plus ''a second batch of Chinese script” and ''a set of rules'' in English ''for correlating the second batch with the first batch.'' As Searle explains how it works: ''Suppose that unknown to you the symbols passed into the room are called 'questions' by the people outside the room, and the symbols you pass back out of the room are called 'answers to the questions' ''. Just by looking at your answers, nobody can tell you ''don't speak a word of Chinese.''

The point he makes is that you may hand out the appropriate and even accurate answers and that those responses may serve to connect with the expectations of those asking the questions.  However, it does not indicate that any real understanding has taken place or that any sort of meaning is actually attached to the question and answer process that is taking place.

 

It should be conceded that Searle's argument is effective in showing that certain kinds of machines - even machines that pass the Turing Test - are not necessarily intelligent and do not necessarily "understand" the words that they speak. This is because a computer sitting on a desk with no sensory apparatus and no means of causally interacting with objects in the world will be incapable of understanding a language. Such a machine might be capable of manipulating linguistic symbols, even to the point of producing output that will fool human speakers and thus pass the Turing Test. However, the words produced by such a machine would lack one crucial ingredient: The words would fail to express any meaningful content and thus would fail to be "about" anything.

What's the point?

It doesn't matter how perfectly a computer is designed to simulate the intelligence of a human being - because its behaviour is a result of aimlessly executing instructions, not understanding. In this case, the means defines the end. You're reading this sentence, and understanding it without demonstrating behaviour of any kind. A system's behaviour doesn’t indicate intelligence or understanding, and a system that behaves intelligently is not necessarily ''intelligent.''
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Before we work on artificial intelligence why don't we do something about natural stupidity

Neurotic Society

Who ever said rap music was all about the Bitches, Hoes and Cristal? Lauryn Hill's new track goes deep.




Freud never relied on notes during analysis...
but he sure liked those Benjamins

Sick psycho psychology
In desperate need of psychiatry
Exorcisms, sobriety
Forcing Social lobotomies
People stuck in dichotomies
Pseudo sicko anxieties
Serial criminals dressed in variety
Social transvestism
Subliminal dressed up as piety
Transference projections
Like Cartesian images
Robbing innocence
Stealing inheritance
Quiet victims with no defence
Betrayed over dollars and cents
Maladjusted and ignorant
Maladdiction and dissonance
Too much addiction no consciousness
Don't trust it
The cosmology's busted, broken
It returns to the dust
It stinks of corruption
Oppression, deceit
Abuse in repeat
This Neurotic, Godless society.

''Is this a Neologism I See Before Me?''

They say that the average human being has a lexicon of about 10,000 words. While Shakespeare had a vocabulary of 60,000 including the introduction of about 3,000 words alone to the English language . . . But hey, screw Shakespeare! Nobody likes a show-off.

 

Seemingly the benchmark of an educated mind usually correlates with the size of the person's vocabulary. So in attempts to overtake Shakespeare and his MASSIVE . . . dictionary, people seem to be continually creating their own neologisms - newly coined words or expressions.

"These words are razors to my wounded heart"...well suck it up Tarquin, spoken language is only about 50,000 years old, and we're only getting around to the good stuff now!

1) mouse potato A 21st century version of the couch potato.
2) yellular The loudness one adopts during a bad cell phone connection.
3) academic bulimia Cram study session that results in everything you've learned being 'ink-puked' onto the paper; with immediate forgetting of everything you've learned.
4) spillion An immense number, especially of gallons of oil in the Gulf spill.

5) fatacular Spectacularly fat.

6) vegetarian A bad hunter; someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff food eats.

7) brickberry old, out-dated, monstrosity of a phone

8) staycation Takes time off but stays at home.

9) stitch n' bitch A gathering of women who like to partake in some knitting while having a good 'aul rant.

10) seagull manager A manager who flies in, makes a lot of noise, sh*ts on everything, and then leaves.

11) 404 Clueless.
12) Christmas bogus Receiving nothing from your employer at Christmas.
13) awk-word Difficult word to pronounce.
14) Darth Breather That annoying person wheezing away beside you at the cinema.
15) Bro Favor As opposed to 'Por Favor'; undertaken by a friend.
16) Frisbee-tarianism The belief that when you die, your soul flies up onto the roof and gets stuck there.
17) piss-hap A mishap that generally involves you getting sh*t-faced.
18) Writer's Crap As opposed to 'cramp'.
19) Resolution rush people who swarm to the gym in the weeks after New Years.
20) scrou-venir Anything that you've kept (or stolen) from someone's house after you've slept with them.

Just another 49,980 and we'll be laughing...
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

- Chomsky would be turning in his . . ? . . bed . . . , if he heard some of this nonsense!

I think, therefore I am...unemployed

Up to now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is, as opposed to why it is. On the other hand, the people whose business it is to ask why - The Philosophers, have not been able to keep up with the advance of scientific theories.

 

In the 18th century, philosophers considered the whole of human knowledge, including science, to be their field and discussed questions such as whether the universe had a beginning. However, in the 19th and 20th centuries, science became too technical and mathematical for the philosophers, or anyone else except a few specialists. Philosophers reduced the scope of their inquiries so much that Wittgenstein, the most famous philosopher of the 20th century, said, ''The sole remaining task for philosophy is the analysis of language.''

 

What a comedown from the great tradition of philosophy from Aristotle to Kant!

    

                                                                                                                                                                   (Hawkin & Mlodinow)

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 

Forget the economic downturn, it's pesky science that's putting people out of work!