- Apr 2024
-
Local file Local file
-
We quote because we are afraid to-change words, lest there be a change in meaning.
Quotations are easier to collect than writing things out in one's own words, not only because it requires no work, but we may be afraid of changing the original meaning by changing the original words or by collapsing the context and divorcing the words from their original environment.
Perhaps some may be afraid that the words sound "right" and they have a sense of understanding of them, but they don't quite have a full grasp of the situation. Of course this may be remedied by the reader or listener not only by putting heard stories into their own words and providing additional concrete illustrative examples of the concepts. These exercises are meant to ensure that one has properly heard/read and understood a concept. Psychologists call this paraphrasing or repetition the "echo effect" (others might say parroting or mirroring) and have found that it can help to build understanding, connection, and likeability between people. Great leaders who do this will be sure to make sure that credit for the original ideas goes to the originator and not to themselves simply because they repeated it, especially in group settings where their words may have more primacy amidst their underlings.
(I can't find it at the moment, but there's a name/tag for this in my notes? looping?)
Beyond this, can one place the idea into a more clear language than the original? Add some poetry perhaps? Make the concept into a concrete meme to make it more memorable?
Journalists like to quote because it gives primacy of voice to the speaker and provides the reader with the sense that they're getting the original from which they might make up their own minds. It also provides a veneer of vérité to their reportage.
Link this back to Terrence's comedy: https://hypothes.is/a/xe15ZKPGEe6NJkeL77Ji4Q
-
- Aug 2023
-
danallosso.substack.com danallosso.substack.com
-
Thomas Kuhn applied the concept of the paradigm to describe the progress of scientific thought over time. The idea generated interest and discussion across a number of fields in addition to the history of science, eclipsing to some extent Kuhn’s original focus.
Thomas Kuhn's book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions was directed to scientific thought over time, but he was aware of it potentially being applied, potentially improperly, to other areas. As a result, he narrowed down his definitions and made his assumptions more explicit.
This sort of misapplication can be seen in Social Darwinism, the uncertainty principle, relativity, and memes.
It also happened with Claude Shannon's information theory which resulted in his publication of The Bandwagon (IEEE, 1956).
-
- Aug 2022
-
psyarxiv.com psyarxiv.com
-
Zhao, W. J., Coady, A., & Bhatia, S. (2021). Computational mechanisms for context-based behavioral interventions: A large-scale analysis. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8cyad
-
- Aug 2021
-
psyarxiv.com psyarxiv.com
-
Sanders, J., Spruijt, P., Dijk, M. van, Elberse, J., Lambooij, M., Kroese, F., Bruin, M. de, & Unit, C. B. (2021). Understanding a national increase in COVID-19 vaccination intention: A mixed methodological approach. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/rpc2g
-
-
en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
-
Named after Soviet psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik, in psychology the Zeigarnik effect occurs when an activity that has been interrupted may be more readily recalled. It postulates that people remember unfinished or interrupted tasks better than completed tasks. In Gestalt psychology, the Zeigarnik effect has been used to demonstrate the general presence of Gestalt phenomena: not just appearing as perceptual effects, but also present in cognition.
People remember interrupted or unfinished tasks better than completed tasks.
Examples: I've had friends remember where we left off on conversations months/years later and we picked right back up.
I wonder what things effect these memories/abilities? Context? Importance? Other?
-
- Oct 2017
-
savsview.net savsview.net
-
Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of fumbling
WWI marked the introduction of chemical warfare which in return created complete terror and pandemonium; soldiers were not prepared for the effects of chemical warfare. As Jones indicates, the use of chemical warfare was to “terrorize the enemy and make their troops temporarily lose their minds.” Alexander Watson also claimed in his study (as cited in Jones, 2014) “gas created uncertainty: unlike shrapnel, it killed from the inside, eroding a soldier’s sense of control, while raising the terrifying fear of being suffocated." Going off the “created uncertainty” we have the use of "ecstasy" which encompasses a trance-like state; coinciding with the idea of being "drunk with fatigue" (see above annotation) from the effects of the gas. The delayed reactions of the soldiers against the gas would result in a behavior of "fumbling." The gas was designed to attack the nervous system; accelerating the deterioration of the body and mind.
-