Friday, February 26, 2010

Overall the peace of work was very interesting. Its main thesis being about cognitive fluency, "simply a measure of how easy it is to think about something, and it turns out that people prefer things that are easy to think about to those that are hard." This actually makes a lot of sense to me. In terms of stocks, myself being an active analyst and trader, I had to laugh at their point towards this. I then got to thinking about some of the more well run companies. Take Goldman Sachs for example (goldmen sax pronunciation). It is the the best ran business in the country because of its business model, and their ability to execute successfully strategies... Although Goldman sax is a pretty easy and smooth annunciation, I than got to thinking of other banks, who are very successful but don't share the same title, or perhaps are not even viewed in the same league, and lots of them have rather strange name. take Deutsche bank for an example, pronounced doy-tcha, are their analysts not as smart as Goldman's? Are their ceo's not former business school elite graduates with forward long-term thinking? Absolutly not yet Deutsche bank is not nearly as successfully in attracting customers to their investments, cause: Hard to pronounce name?? That can obviously never be linked to causality, but no one can deny the funny correlation.

Continuing on to their next point about names. This actually makes sense to me. I think of all my profesors that I have had sense college, and the one's names I remember first, and end up remembering in the future, are the most simple and ascetically pleasing. Paul Davis. Being exposed to this concept, I can see from the outside that I simply remember his name because of how simple it is. But, a year or two down the road, when the only professor's name I can remember is his.... will I remember that this is simply because he has a easier to pronounce name than my other professors at the time? The study of Cognitive Fluency thinks not; Their logic is that a few years later, the simple fact that I remembered his name will be linked with the idea that he was probably an influential professor. So looking at this deductively..... People in which you remember their name, made some sort of impact on you- people with easier names, are easier to remember (their names are easier to remember- SO, people with easier names, have a greater chance to make an impact on you... Its not the craziest logic I have ever heard. When speaking about this, I look back at my entire educational experience, in and out side of classes. I must admit there has been more than one occasion where I have seen someone get told something, 3 to four to five times and never take it in. However, one person will come along and say the same thing, just a little bit different, and than all of a sudden it clicks. Cognitive fluency could be a reason of how exactly this is possible.

Lastly in terms of looks, I truthfully could not agree more. On a broad scale there has been many occasions where I have had to make a choice, between a number of different things. Take coats for instance. Just the other day I was looking at three different styles of zip up sweaters made by the same company. All were consistent with the same Sort of patterns, slightly different colors, and the same structure. Thinking about it now, the one I did end up with, the one that at the time I thought was just the most "aesthetically pleasing" was in fact the greatest compilation of all the features all three jackets had to offer. I thought back to many different situations like this, and the logic of Cognitive fluency consistently made me smirk, and shake my head in a up and down vertical motion ( the act of me realizing that this stuff actually makes sense).

In terms of people, Mr. Drake Bennet applies this logic too, "beauty-in-averageness." At first this concept is easy to ignore and shake off. Because when the words looks, and average, are connected, its usually followed by an average response, certainty not beauty. However I than begun to think more in depth. In order to analyze "beauty-in-averageness" you have to throw away your application of the word average, towards beauty. Because our explanation of average is on a quartile median rather than mean scale. EX: If we saw 10 people, rated them from 1-10, the average person would be number 5. This is the type of thinking that needs to be thrown out in order to understand this quote. Now thinking about attractive people in my life, my self as a guy who has interest in only females, I found this hard to apply to the females that I knew. However I than realized that this is impossible, because my embedded and natural opinion of beauty has been consistent for 20 years. So rather than looking at someone I thought was attractive, I than switched rolls, and viewed and analyzed a subject that a mass group of people think is attractive, and I don't, so I looked at a picture of the Beatles. This was a lot easier for me to analyze seeing hows I am not attracted to men. Once again my smile and nod re appeared. They don't necessarily have thick illustrious hair, chiseled jaw lines, or Diamond blue eyes, their just rather average looking to me. They posses traits in their facial structure and hair, that many of their followers can probably relate to. The fact that they are acclaimed to be the greatest band of all time might have a pull, but I think Cognitive fluency can appeal to that too. Who on this planet doesnt listen to music? Who on this planet has never had a wild dream? Who on this planet has never slightly desired to be a rebel? All these traits the beatles excelled in, so many can relate to them, thus making them attractive. Take for instance John Lennon vs the most attractive olympic Freestyle Ski jumper of all time. John Lennon would be drewled over 10 times more than the olympic Freestyle guy (of coarse my opinion). Is this because he was chizeled like a god, no its because he did something that almost everyone can relate to.




The concept itself is extremely interesting and very applicable in my opinion. The way it was presented all in all was good. A philosophical/maybe even scientific phenomenon like this, is very difficult to put on a page in the manner that everyone can agree and understand. Because of this I think the article lacks some logic in some of the questionable explanations, but all in all they did a good job enlightening people to this development


a good job, but possibly not perfect, or Cognitive Fluency might say... Average ;)

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

There he goes, the leader of the pack, possessing a presence like a giant among dwarfs, and growing his legend triumph by triumph, instilling fear into any brave warrior who challenges his greatness – with a big grin on his face, every Sunday he steps onto the battlefield, battered and beaten, ready to demolish his opponents, shatter records, win games, and strengthen his legacy – a legacy respected by teammates, opponents, and fans alike; he is the gunslinger, he is Brett Favre.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Legacy of Brutality

Nowhere else in the world does an eardrum shattering, teeth chattering and gut busting assortment of gain and reverb laden chord progressions transcribed to an amp through slightly chatter-some rail humbucker pickups from a double necked, ivory fret inlaid, drop-tuned, Gibson Les Paul, Flying V style guitar –overlain with automatic rifle-esque rapid fire kicks from a dangerously taut double bass drum and the sickly melodic, half screamed tirades of a sweaty, oversexed and altogether barbaric leather-lunged crooner– garner as much reverence from a literal legion of hellish demon spawn (mostly black t-shirt clad, pasty face teenagers with the occasional jaded ex-hipster and true blooded thrash metal sociopath) as it does in the Western portion of the Scandinavian Peninsula; vengeful gods of all things “heavy” and Cthulhu, dark lord of chaos, discord, madness and patron saint of Black Metal unite to preserve Norway, the land of white face paint, fake blood and troublesome piercings!

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Emotions

Emotions are the microphone of the mind as I see it, because they deliver the message of the mind that others are unable to hear, for instance people are going to know what is going on inside your head based upon your emotions on the outside, if you are thinking good thoughts and having a positive experience in life you will act happy, if you are thinking sad thoughts, depression is sure to show, sometimes the microphone doesn’t get turned on and your emotions are in short supply, occasionally the microphone is up far too loud and your emotions blare, and unfortunately there are those times that you get all tangled up in the cord not knowing what you are feeling and confusing your audience in the meantime, but when used correctly your microphone can be just the motivation and inspiration that your audience needs.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

to seise to exist?

The phrase, "to seise to exist," - to fail to be alive - draw's many different thoughts, in which might cause one-self to ask, what exactly does this phrase mean to me, which is a very hard question to answer without breaking down the context and meaning of each indivdual word in the phrase, more specifically exist: Is existing a physical state; is existing a mental state in which existing means living, however in this situation, what exactly does living mean: to be physically alive- or perhaps something more deep, which might behoove oneself to ask, am I really living life?

Monday, February 8, 2010

"Expect the Unexpected"

“Expect the Unexpected”

To “expect the unexpected,” was a quote my father originally used to make my baseball team always stay one step ahead. Now that I'm older I realize that he was instilling in all of us, a tool that we can use for the rest of our lives. Originally the quote by Oscar Wilde reads, “To expect the unexpected shows a thoroughly modern intellect.” None of us on the team even knew who Oscar Wilde was at the time. Back then, we thought the quote only applied to baseball. To us it meant to never expect everything to go as planned. Errors are always bound to happen in baseball, so a player should think ahead about what to do to counter those errors in the event one takes place. If we were always thinking ahead and expecting the unexpected, then we would be better baseball players. Now my baseball years are long gone, but I can still fully appreciate the meaning of the quote when dealing with the curve balls life can throw at you at any given moment. I've realized that baseball is just a very elementary level for this quote, and only when you apply it to everyday life can you fully appreciate the entire meaning behind the brief phrase.

In a nut shell, to “expect the unexpected,” is to be prepared for every situation. People cannot live their lives believing everything is going to unfold perfectly to plan. Instincts definitely help, but instincts come more with experience, and a lot of times experience alone cannot prepare people for the crazy situations life can throw at you. Someone with “modern intellect,” as Oscar Wilde would describe, is an individual who has a plan when things go haywire, or in other words have the ability to adapt in unexpected situations. One who can see alternative solutions to alternative outcomes is a true intellectual. Some people may assume that to “expect the unexpected,” is to have a plan for every possible outcome, but this is not necessarily true. The ability to adapt is crucial because one cannot possibly derive every possible outcome of every possible situation. The idea and lesson behind the quote is both true and necessary in the pursuit of success. Though a little cliché, it becomes evident that this quote can be used in an endless variety of life situations. To “expect the unexpected,” is a brief phrase that encompasses an overwhelming truth, and any individual living by this code truly possesses “modern intellect.”

As far as style goes, the quote displays deductive logic, where the premise of truth is validated through the trial and error of all humans both past and present. Also, its use of repetition provides an interesting play on words. “Expect,” and “unexpected,” may sound the same, but these words completely contrast each other. This repetition is meant to emphasize and possibly even dramatize the meaning behind the quote. Although the idea of the quote is somewhat cliché, the words used to emphasize the idea are both fresh and witty. The word choice also leads to alternative conclusions such that if one truly does expect the unexpected, then aren't they assuming they ultimately have a solution no matter what? Is it possible to truly take into account all possible unexpected outcomes and have reactions for each of them, or does expecting the unexpected have more to do with one's flexibility in unfamiliar territory? As I explained before, I am a proponent of the ability to adapt as the quotes ultimate meaning. The quote can be seen many ways, and used in a wide variety of situations, but it is ultimately up to each person to make it their own.

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Walking with Friends...

I think “Walking with a friend in the dark is better than walking alone in the light,” says it best when considering our dependency on other people. This quote is saying that going blindly through something with a friend is better than to know exactly where you are going but going there alone. In other words this quote is describing a journey and it could be an emotional journey, a physical journey or even a hypothetical journey and even though you may not know where the journey will take you or how you will get there, if you have a friend you will be ok. And going blindly through this journey with a friend is far better than being able to anticipate what is coming and how you will get there having to get there by yourself.

This quote is by Helen Keller and knowing that, it can take on a whole other meaning. To me in this case it means that Helen Keller would rather be blind and have a friend to go through life then to be able to see, but have no friends. Keller is physically walking through the dark, and with no amount of light would she give up her friends. It is important to understand that even though Keller is “walking in the dark” physically, it is also mental. She is on a mental journey of the mind it is extremely difficult, so having a friend with her to aid her in that journey is also crucial.

I also think it is important to realize that this quote mentions nothing about actually finding an end, because many have heard before that it is not about the destination, it is about the journey. And think in a way this quote is sort of rewriting that. The ones who think only of the destination are likely to go about it in the light and alone. But those who value the journey and learning on the way would rather be in good company regardless if they are fully aware of where there steps will take them.

I think the word choice is also very important in this quote. I like the choice of the word “walking” because to me it is more of place holder for anything you would want to insert there, and it really could be any number of things, it is left up to the interpretation. It could be interpreted by saying “Traveling…,” “Growing…,” “Learning…,” or maybe “Exploring…” It allows the imagination of the reader to turn this saying into whatever he or she needs it to be. Walking in the dark does not get solved by being with someone else, but it makes it easier to figure things out when you have two people there. So instead you have two blind people putting their heads together trying to sort through this “dark” place. In the second part of the quote “light” signifies and end or solution, and that it is “better” to not know where you are headed or how to get there as long as you are with a friend then it is to know exactly where you are going and how to get there but to be alone.

People are dependent on other people. Nobody’s life is fulfilled unless they have friends that help them or are helped. Inductive reasoning is used in this quote by showing us how to go through life. From past experiences it has shown us that we rely on other people and nobody can or even should be or act alone.

The tone of this quote, I think, is empowering. It shows that why should anyone have to go through life alone, when you in reality it is much better to have a friend to assist you and for you to assist them. The sacrifice of knowing where you are going is worthwhile and necessary when comparing whether to have friendship or to be alone. It is inspirational and one is wise to follow it. The diction of this quote is important, because in order to induce a tone of empowerment, the words need to be understandable to greater audience and something that people can relate to, so it does not have a high diction and I think it makes it easier to relate to in that sense. Many people have a lot of pride and think they are capable of doing things alone, and that’s ok if you know what you are doing. But think about whether or not you really do know what you are doing because what if you ended up walking through the dark alone.

V for vendetta

I, Like God, do not play with dice and do not believe in coincidence.

This fantastic introspective quotation was derived from the film, V for Vendetta (based off of Alan Moores graphic Novel). This idiom posse’s inductive logic. It was originally coined in the film as a que to the spectators that, the similarities in V’s and EVE’s (The two protagonists in the film) names are not just a silly coincidence, but rather a symbolic meeting of two different people uniting in pursuit of a bigger image, and perhaps the meeting of soul mates. And for me, it’s also the way I apply this little piece of Buddha intellect: as an explanation that certain events might not make sense in the present time, but they still posses context.

This quote was presented and highlighted through spectics. Because “V” is a fictional character, clearly this thought was not derived from himself, but derived from the author’s ideas, Mr. Alan Moore. If Alan Moore, released a statement like this, on a web posting or a blog, it might facilitate creative sparks with whoever reads it, there inlies the problem. From Alan Moore this quote would be quickly forgotten. But, coming from the fictional character V- a freedom fighter from one of the higher selling graphic novels of all time, and a character from the same Blockbuster movie- this quote will be heard numerous times, and becomes something more to its viewers like me. So although this quote may be emphasized and highly marketed through a spectic crazy superhero who harnesses a Guy Fox mask (Guy Fox attempted to blow up Parliament some time ago), it still has meaning and power.

The reason that I like this quote is because it combines many different idioms, “Everything happens for a reason,” “Everyone one has there own unique path.” V’s quote is certainly not the genisis of these idioms, henceforth it they cannot be derived from V’s quote. However, because Mr. Alan More, did such a fantastic job in combining these idealistic ideas into one phrase, I do see the dice quotation as a negative derivative function, (from quotations like “everything happens for a reason,” a true base was reversely derived). Lastly to me, this quote provides hope. Given that god exists, it gives us hope that we have all have a plan and a purpose.

Saturday, February 6, 2010

"Ending is Better Than Mending"

Huxley Knows How to Get Under My Skin…In a Good Way

Musings on Thought Terminating Clichés

My background in writing has always taught me to treat clichés as taboo, a cardinal sin tarnishing your journalistic credibility. However, clichés and especially thought-terminating clichés have always been of particular interest to me. A thought-terminating cliché is a saying that dismisses dissenting opinions or validates improper logic, often employed in a clever or almost lyrical sentence structure. Examples of this include sayings like: “an apple a day keeps the doctor away”, “the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” and “if you’re not with us you’re against us”.

Simple and memorable sayings like this can punctuate narratives and introduce incredibly pleasing rhythms. Aldous Huxley makes extensive use of this type of saying in one of my favorite books, Brave New World. Huxley creates so many catchy little phrases it is almost impossible to choose a singular favorite. One of the more memorable examples of this type of phrase is, “ending is better than mending” (pg. 49, 2006 edition).

To understand the nuances of this saying a little context must be given first. Brave New World is Aldous Huxley’s critique of the way modern civilization is continually trending towards an increasingly unabashed adoption of pain avoidance and consumerism. He does this by creating a dystopian world government set in the distant future where “everyone belongs to everyone else” and the entire system is founded on industrialism and fed by constant consumption. “Ending is better than mending” is a term that epitomizes this schema; the whole system relies on production so it is integral that the upper echelons of this government create a throwaway culture.

“Ending is better than mending”, like most of the phrases in the book, is a short and memorable phrase. Phrases like this usually rely on a simple rhyming scheme to increase their validity. This validation is achieved through the phrases ability to be easily remembered and subsequently repeated. Constant repetition is a way to drive in the subject matter, to the point where it seems second nature and above criticism.

At least that is the purpose of these types of sayings in the novel. However, when I hear singsong phrases like this they produce almost the opposite effect. Not simply the catchy ones, but the entire menagerie of thought terminating clichés, feel incredibly hollow to me. While many of them are so ingrained in daily life that people rarely notice them, I cannot help but prick up at their dismissive and often insubstantial level of analysis.

I must be in the minority because these types of trivializing comments have been around for centuries, despite how much they perturb me at present (maybe it is the masochist in me but this is also why I have find them enthrallingly interesting as well). They have successfully permeated all forms of discourse. They adorn signs of support and protest at liberal and conservative rallies alike. They can be found emblazoned throughout children’s stories concerning fluffy bunnys, in pamphlets proselytizing hatred or simply serving as the catchphrases of popular T.V. characters.

Their wide use and extensive reach is founded in their effectiveness in spreading rhetoric; as in ”(in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast” or ”the art of influencing the thought and conduct of an audience” and not “the art or science of all specialized literary uses of language in prose or verse, including the figures of speech” (dictionary.com). These types of phrases just brim with possible applications.

Despite my chagrin I must admit that phrases like “ending is better than mending” have a definite time and place. Like in children’s shows or forums where complicated discourse is difficult. Juxtaposed, these types of sayings should have no home in a political, philosophical or educational setting. Discourse is a necessary part of any society and one sentence cannot substitute for a fully thought out argument. While it is able to synthesize a main point into a key phrase its prevalent usage is alarming. If I may be permitted to use a thought terminating cliché to end my tirade as well as denounce thought terminating clichés, it would have to be: thought terminating clichés are bad!

While I feel that I may have strayed too far from my original saying: “ending is better than mending”, it is my humble opinion that Aldous Huxley would forgive me. I think he would enjoy my quibbling with abridged discourse and applaud my efforts. Hopefully my blog moderator does as well.