Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
I would claim that all adults are significantly more sophisticated in all ways from children. However, in the matter of intellectual sophistication American adults do not differ enough from children to assure that our species will not self destruct within the next several generations. The American adult, because s/he was taught what to think rather than how to think, has not yet become sophisticated enough to manage our high tech culture.
Can our brain survive this high tech modern world? I doubt that our present generation of adults has the sophistication required to even comprehend the question. Why is this the case? It is the case because our brains have not been able to move from its primitive level to the modern level.
“Our political system sometimes produces such skewed results that it’s difficult not to blame bloviating politicians. But maybe the deeper problem lies in our brains.
Evidence is accumulating that the human brain systematically misjudges certain kinds of risks. In effect, evolution has programmed us to be alert for snakes and enemies with clubs, but we aren’t well prepared to respond to dangers that require forethought.â€
The “human brain systematically misjudges certain kinds of risksâ€. We go berserk looking for a stick to beat a snake to death. We sleep without disturbance while stock piling thousands of nuclear weapons. Our brain has evolved to be instantly alerted by enemies with sticks or snakes in the grass but we give little regard to any situation that is a long range gigantic threat to our well being.
Unfortunately when science informs us of the danger that our carbon emissions will destroy the planet as we now know it “only the small part of the brain that focuses on the future — a portion of the prefrontal cortex — will glimmerâ€.
“We humans do strange things, perhaps because vestiges of our ancient brain still guide us in the modern world, notes Paul Slovic, a psychology professor at the University of Oregon and author of a book on how our minds assess risks.â€
“That’s why people are incensed about flag burning, or about what kind of sex people have in private, even though that doesn’t really affect the rest of us,†Professor Gilbert said. “Yet where we have a real threat to our well-being, like global warming, it doesn’t ring alarm bells.â€
Quotes from NYTimes article When Our Brains Short-Circuitby Nicholas Kristof
HTTP://WWW.NYTIMES.COM/2009/07/02/OPINI ... ISTOF.HTML
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
I would claim that all adults are significantly more sophisticated in all ways from children. However, in the matter of intellectual sophistication American adults do not differ enough from children to assure that our species will not self destruct within the next several generations.
Fortunately we are not dependent on Americans to save the species. Do you ever come to any conclusions yourself on the the matters you post on?
you might find this of interest-assuming of course you haven't already read it.
Future Shock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Future Shock (1972) 1/5
Fortunately we are not dependent on Americans to save the species. Do you ever come to any conclusions yourself on the the matters you post on?
you might find this of interest-assuming of course you haven't already read it.
Future Shock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Future Shock (1972) 1/5
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
gmc;1217312 wrote: Fortunately we are not dependent on Americans to save the species. Do you ever come to any conclusions yourself on the the matters you post on?
you might find this of interest-assuming of course you haven't already read it.
Future Shock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Future Shock (1972) 1/5
Toffler is speaking about psychological shock. That is so yesterday. I am speaking about the destruction of our global civilization within the next several generations. Unfortunately few Americans are sophisticated enough to comprehend this reality thus making its probability much greater.
you might find this of interest-assuming of course you haven't already read it.
Future Shock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Future Shock (1972) 1/5
Toffler is speaking about psychological shock. That is so yesterday. I am speaking about the destruction of our global civilization within the next several generations. Unfortunately few Americans are sophisticated enough to comprehend this reality thus making its probability much greater.
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
coberst;1217446 wrote: Toffler is speaking about psychological shock. That is so yesterday. I am speaking about the destruction of our global civilization within the next several generations. Unfortunately few Americans are sophisticated enough to comprehend this reality thus making its probability much greater.
No it is not so yesterday. It's perhaps even more relevant now than it was in the seventies. The pace of change has actually speeded up and even more people find themselves unable to acquire the skills and keep pace with the technological changes than back then. America was relatively late to industrialise and gained as a consequence. But it is also in many ways still a backward inward looking society. The world is not dependent on America and while it may be very important now it wasn't always the case and the rest of the world will adapt and go on if the US is unable to keep up the pace.
The “human brain systematically misjudges certain kinds of risksâ€. We go berserk looking for a stick to beat a snake to death. We sleep without disturbance while stock piling thousands of nuclear weapons. Our brain has evolved to be instantly alerted by enemies with sticks or snakes in the grass but we give little regard to any situation that is a long range gigantic threat to our well being.
The article you posted is also talking about psychological shock and the inability of people to cope with modern society and the implications of rapid technological change for their long term future. Also especially, or at least it it seems sometimes, in the case of americans to understand that we are all connected to each other and what we do with our technology and to the environment has long term effects that we might not be able to just fix and can see only the immediate short term affect.
America is not the world and you seem to be showing the same narrow viewpoint in that you seem to think it is only what america does that matters. It matters to you and affects the rest of the world but if america doesn't pick up on new technologies because it can't see the need and tries to protect old industries and ways of doing things other countries will.
No it is not so yesterday. It's perhaps even more relevant now than it was in the seventies. The pace of change has actually speeded up and even more people find themselves unable to acquire the skills and keep pace with the technological changes than back then. America was relatively late to industrialise and gained as a consequence. But it is also in many ways still a backward inward looking society. The world is not dependent on America and while it may be very important now it wasn't always the case and the rest of the world will adapt and go on if the US is unable to keep up the pace.
The “human brain systematically misjudges certain kinds of risksâ€. We go berserk looking for a stick to beat a snake to death. We sleep without disturbance while stock piling thousands of nuclear weapons. Our brain has evolved to be instantly alerted by enemies with sticks or snakes in the grass but we give little regard to any situation that is a long range gigantic threat to our well being.
The article you posted is also talking about psychological shock and the inability of people to cope with modern society and the implications of rapid technological change for their long term future. Also especially, or at least it it seems sometimes, in the case of americans to understand that we are all connected to each other and what we do with our technology and to the environment has long term effects that we might not be able to just fix and can see only the immediate short term affect.
America is not the world and you seem to be showing the same narrow viewpoint in that you seem to think it is only what america does that matters. It matters to you and affects the rest of the world but if america doesn't pick up on new technologies because it can't see the need and tries to protect old industries and ways of doing things other countries will.
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
I speak only about America not because that nation is alone in this matter but because I live in America and thus am informed mostly about America. I suspect that all nations are in similiar circumstances or worse.
Our human problem is not genetic it is a lack of character and will.
Our human problem is not genetic it is a lack of character and will.
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
coberst;1217591 wrote: I speak only about America not because that nation is alone in this matter but because I live in America and thus am informed mostly about America. I suspect that all nations are in similiar circumstances or worse.
Our human problem is not genetic it is a lack of character and will.
Know what you mean. I have a viewpoint from the other side of the pond. It's only in america that you get people who seriously argue that global warming is some kind of strange left wing conspiracy designed to ruin the economy. perhaps it's because we live in countries where the effects of de-forestation and intensive farming and industrial pollution have had longer to have had an impact on us and we can see the effects of measures taken in cleaning up our rivers and controlling the use of pesticides and chemicals by our farmers. Perhaps we re also a bit more cynical when it comes to the motives of big business. We don't get incensed about people burning our flag because we've had it going on for centuries and who cares what foreigners think anyway.
We're not actually dependent on the united states-though many Americans seem to think we are. If you don't pick up on the need for new green technologies it just means you will lose out in the technology race. The US economy is a large percentage of world trade but there are rivals out there that will pick up any slack. The bulk of our trade is actually with the EU with eastern europe and russia and china becoming more important as time goes on. All that will happen is that businesses will look for other markets. The constant eu us quibbling over trade treaties just hastens the process. The US is perceived as being ever ready to use unfair trade practices to keep out competition. All that does is drive home the need not to be dependant on just one big customer.
If americans can't grasp the reality of the threat to our global civilisation posed by global warming and the running out of resources it might end up just being an American problem. If you look at ww2 and its aftermath what has happened after it, and leaving aside the politics for the moment, the conflicts have been as much about control of resources as anything else. That certainly is what it is all about in the middle east. The next war might not be a shooting war after all if other nations get away from a dependence on oil and the US doesn't because of a reluctance to face reality the power base goes.
I know PNAC, neocons and the like see america as the new imperial power (in all but name anyway ) and advocate using the military strength to pursue and protect it's interests it does so from the standpoint of a narrow range of interest groups and is a way of using power that IMO has had it's day. It works on the flawed assumption that all the other countries just stand by helplessly.
I can't view things as bleakly as the author of that article for the simple reason I am not an american and don't think the solution is solely in american hands. Perhaps the problem is a lack of character and will at present but human nature is a lot more complex and resilient than it gets credit for.
Course I could be talking a load of bollocks
Our human problem is not genetic it is a lack of character and will.
Know what you mean. I have a viewpoint from the other side of the pond. It's only in america that you get people who seriously argue that global warming is some kind of strange left wing conspiracy designed to ruin the economy. perhaps it's because we live in countries where the effects of de-forestation and intensive farming and industrial pollution have had longer to have had an impact on us and we can see the effects of measures taken in cleaning up our rivers and controlling the use of pesticides and chemicals by our farmers. Perhaps we re also a bit more cynical when it comes to the motives of big business. We don't get incensed about people burning our flag because we've had it going on for centuries and who cares what foreigners think anyway.
We're not actually dependent on the united states-though many Americans seem to think we are. If you don't pick up on the need for new green technologies it just means you will lose out in the technology race. The US economy is a large percentage of world trade but there are rivals out there that will pick up any slack. The bulk of our trade is actually with the EU with eastern europe and russia and china becoming more important as time goes on. All that will happen is that businesses will look for other markets. The constant eu us quibbling over trade treaties just hastens the process. The US is perceived as being ever ready to use unfair trade practices to keep out competition. All that does is drive home the need not to be dependant on just one big customer.
If americans can't grasp the reality of the threat to our global civilisation posed by global warming and the running out of resources it might end up just being an American problem. If you look at ww2 and its aftermath what has happened after it, and leaving aside the politics for the moment, the conflicts have been as much about control of resources as anything else. That certainly is what it is all about in the middle east. The next war might not be a shooting war after all if other nations get away from a dependence on oil and the US doesn't because of a reluctance to face reality the power base goes.
I know PNAC, neocons and the like see america as the new imperial power (in all but name anyway ) and advocate using the military strength to pursue and protect it's interests it does so from the standpoint of a narrow range of interest groups and is a way of using power that IMO has had it's day. It works on the flawed assumption that all the other countries just stand by helplessly.
I can't view things as bleakly as the author of that article for the simple reason I am not an american and don't think the solution is solely in american hands. Perhaps the problem is a lack of character and will at present but human nature is a lot more complex and resilient than it gets credit for.
Course I could be talking a load of bollocks
Can politicians talk to Americans like adults?
gmc
It appears to me that we are all in the same boat. If we do not solve our problems together we will destroy the species if not all life on the planet.
It seems to me that our major problem is that we now cannot "just get along" with other nations.
If we add to this the fact that we have placed extraordinary power into the hands of ordinary people we can see that morality is the only answer that is sustainable. We can no longer depend upon having greater military power than the other nation because this method leads to the extinction of the species and perhaps all life on this planet.
Morality is about human relationships and if we do not solve this problem we are faced with MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) either through destruction of our environment or through WMD.
It appears to me that we are all in the same boat. If we do not solve our problems together we will destroy the species if not all life on the planet.
It seems to me that our major problem is that we now cannot "just get along" with other nations.
If we add to this the fact that we have placed extraordinary power into the hands of ordinary people we can see that morality is the only answer that is sustainable. We can no longer depend upon having greater military power than the other nation because this method leads to the extinction of the species and perhaps all life on this planet.
Morality is about human relationships and if we do not solve this problem we are faced with MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) either through destruction of our environment or through WMD.