Category: Random Tidbits

Random Musings

No comments

Folly and Failure in the Effort to Foster Catastrophic Climate Destabilization

  By ,

Dear Ecologists,

In the scientific community, catastrophic climate destabilization (a.k.a. climate change or global warming) is almost undoubtedly the most serious self-inflicted threat of harm to human civilization and the survival of hundreds of thousands of species on earth. Yes, almost . . . thank goodness for the scientific method. Otherwise, there would be no wiggle room for naysayers like myself to make a wager.

I did not want to have to bring up the fact that the ever-present possibility of a nuclear holocaust has given global warming a run for its money for more than half a century. I am saving that as my trump card. In the race to extinction one always needs to hedge a bet.

Gamblers of the world unite!

True, it has been an uphill battle on all sides. Trying to dissuade millions of people from changing their lifestyles, debunking nearly irrefutable scientific evidence, and demobilizing nations from taking substantial action to avert the smoldering carbon crisis has been incredibly taxing, figuratively speaking. However, there are many things that could have been done better with far fewer hassles, and affect engineering has helped me realize them.

Let us say the entity being valued is human civilization, and catastrophic climate destabilization is threatening to end it. What sorts of arguments should one make to alleviate concerns about perfectly legitimate hazards? Here are some samples.

Self-Distinction and Identification: Discouraging people from even identifying with civilization is a brilliant first step. The supposedly doomed human civilization is sometime in the future, not the here and the now. People have a hard enough time trying to identify with present-day society; what on earth could have made one think they would identify with future ones? Why overestimate their vicariously felt affect? Why encourage them to identify in the first place?

Existence and Attention: A tried and true favorite. If no one knows about catastrophic climate destabilization, then no one will think twice about it threatening civilization. If one stops talking about civilization, then maybe people will stop thinking it exists too. Time to stop using “How’s the weather?” as an icebreaker. Problem solved.

Uniqueness and Uniqueness: There could be plenty of civilizations out there, maybe in outer space too. What’s the harm in losing one? Another one will show up. There are probably extra ones already had that nobody even knows about.

Sufficiency: Civilization alone is not enough to make anyone happy. People will need something else too, perhaps some new land that no pioneer has despoiled.

Sentiment: There are other things more important than the survival of the species, like having the newest car model or a vacation getaway.

Severity and Susceptibility: Catastrophic climate destabilization is not that bad a thing, it might even miss earth.

Response Efficacy and Self Efficacy: Whatever one person could do to minimize catastrophic climate destabilization would likely be ineffective, and nearly impossible to achieve besides.

Benefit Intensity and Susceptibility: Climate destabilization might be a good thing.

Reasoning and Entropy: There are plenty of other things to worry about, like the economy. Why fuss over things that cannot be controlled? Best to divert one’s energy elsewhere.

Sincerely,
A Catastrophic Climate Destabilization Naysayer
P.S.

If a writer has to point out sarcasm, then the reader’s discernment has been overestimated.
If a writer has to point out sarcasm, then the reader’s discernment has been underestimated.

Both of these statements are true.

1) In the case of the former, the reader does not know that sarcasm is at play. The writer learns this and knows the point was lost.
2) In the case of the latter, the writer doubts the reader knows that sarcasm is at play. The reader learns this and knows the point was lost.

Pointing a finger at sarcasm is the only way to kill it.

No comments

May Day Musings

  By , ,

Three permissions acquired so far, just a few more to go! Accessibility and making it easy to comprehend is my main priority, after permissions that is and as far as editing the book goes.

At some point soon I will likely continue illustrating my epic comic strip. The upside to becoming a publisher is that I can someday publish it on my own terms. I am not sure what, if any appeal it might have to specific people, as both poetry and comic strips seem to be dying arts, in their traditional formats. If I were swimming in money and time then I would like to make a publisher page too, but first things first, like setting up a business bank account.

I will also be journeying to Colorado this summer, not sure for how long, but there will certainly be some dancing involved and maybe some improv. I have been reading up on a few other books, and practicing some international standard dances. It should be fun to actually have space and partners though.

And those student loans I still have… it would be nice to pay those off before contemplating tacking on any more.  At least it’s starting to feel like summer anyway.

No comments

Cobweb Cleaning and Caged Combat

  By ,

I figured it was about time I surfaced from editing, and a minor cold that has clouded my ability to think for the last couple of weeks. Possibility two is that I have a hidden allergy I do not know of, not sure which. Maybe I am missing some vitamin/mineral from my diet, which would be possibility three. Whatever it was, it certainly clouded my thinking ability. A few days ago I could not remember the word for antioxidant to save my life, and had to look it up on Google by using its definition. Anyone who knows my drinking habits personally would understand the severity of the mental fog I have been in (*hint* I consume more orange juice than water and drink lemon juice in shot glasses. I should know what an antioxidant is). My updates will be more frequent than they have been recently.

The manuscript to the book is underway (publishing company established, ISBN’s purchased, and permissions sent out). I also have a few beta-readers out there, to whom I would like to give thanks again for being guinea pigs. Moving on to today’s topic, I will start with what happened last night.

Yesterday I made myself watch an Ultimate Fighting Championship fight (UFC) for the first time, it was the Fabricio Werdum vs. Travis Browne match and the matches immediately before it. It did not dawn on me there would be so much bloodshed, mostly nosebleeds I assumed, but still it was much more than I expected. Though it is not something I will likely watch again, I have nothing to say about it ethically, good or bad, and I cannot really say anything about it ethically without denouncing sports in general. I did not know who any of the fighters were beforehand, as I do not follow mixed martial arts. Whatever factors I might possibly have used to decide which fighter to empathize with would have been superficial at best, and I am anything but that. From what I saw after each match, it looked like all of the competitors exhibited good sportsmanship, shaking hands and hugging the person who just some five minutes prior they were exchanging roundhouse kicks, elbows, jabs, uppercuts, and take-downs.

If one wanted to levy a charge that Ultimate Fighting Championships is unethical on the grounds that it promotes insensitivity to violence and the suffering of others, one would actually have to denounce every competitive endeavor. One cannot safely hope to vicariously experience the success of two competitors if one’s fortune comes at the misfortune of the other because they are in a duel. Vicarious malice will be felt for one’s purpose and vicarious joy for the other’s purpose. Simply wishing that they each compete well (i.e., conflict for the sake of conflict) does not avoid this conundrum, as a competitor would additionally judge his or her competitive effort based on the means along with the ends. Instead of just being a war between two competitors, an insurrection within the individual would also be added to the mix.

All sports are metaphors for armed conflict; it is part of their appeal. There are the obvious ones like football, but also the javelin throw, boxing, tennis, wrestling, boxing, and even many of the solitary sports like the marathon or archery have their origins in war, and the world has a love affair with conflict. Does anyone know the last time there was no war on earth? No, case in point.

Some of you may be thinking, “But what about mountain climbing?” That type of conflict would be man vs. nature. It would not be fair to call it a war when Nature holds all the cards and calls all the shots. It is more like a siege and game of brinkmanship, where some choose to see how close to the cannon they can make it before turning back to the safety of a crumbling fort.

In these lights mixed martial arts is no different, save that it is sport in its basest form, minus the trappings of most rules. I did note that attacks to the groin, even if incidental, are not permitted, and the referee stopped the clock to permit a fighter to walk it off. It also seemed that the referee would also stop the fight if a knock out is apparent, or if one of the fighters resigns (e.g., one is being suffocated and surrenders).

For some, the days of gladiatorial combat in arenas probably seem like relics from the past. The keener eye will note that they never really left us.

No comments

Why Are There Stars?

  By ,

If you have spent any significant amount of time on this website, by now you may be asking the question, “Why are there pictures of stars and galaxies in the header and not a colorful/fancy model of a brain like 99.9% of all the other psychology web sites out there?”

For starters, Affect Engineering is not like every other psychology website.

Secondly, many of you have probably heard the popular, though erroneous claim that there are more neural connections in the brain than there are stars in the universe.

In fact, every time someone says, “There are more neural connections in the brain than stars in the universe,” an astronomer somewhere explodes… maybe not like a supernova or anything, but they probably burn a little on the inside. I may have exaggerated just a bit there.

Most estimates of the number of neurons in the adult human brain are around 80 billion to 100 billion, with some quadrillion neural connections between them (10 ^ 15 or 1,000,000,000,000,000).

Estimated Number of Neural Connections in the Brain

Against this, most estimates hold that there are around 100 billion galaxies in the universe of about 100 billion stars each (i.e. 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000). That would put the estimated number of stars in the universe somewhere between a sextillion (10 ^ 21) and a septillion (10 ^ 24) stars.

Estimated Number of Stars in the Galaxy

The real answer is that nobody knows for certain. They are both impressively large. The making of a claim that one gargantuan value is bigger than an also gargantuan and unknown value is something that only a human would do. In short, I felt it more appropriate to include pictures of stars and celestial bodies in the header than another picture of a brain because these images capture the mystery of the mind better than a neon-lighted rendition of the nervous system, in my opinion.

As for why there are stars in the actual night sky, they are there for us to look at in wonder, to marvel at their vastness, and to dream up what stories they may hold.

No comments

The Zugzwang and the Zwischenzug

  By

Chess analogies are always fun to make to life, and equally exciting to dissect as they typically reveal something about the person who made them.

These two chess terms were chosen because, taken together, they account for nearly all of one’s success or failure in chess, with outright blunders making up the other portion. That, and all of those Z’s look pretty impressive in the headline.

First, a zugzwang (German term meaning compulsion to move) is a situation on the chess board where a player would prefer to make no move at all. Moreover, upon moving the player is forced to yield a decisive concession that leads to either defeat or a draw if one actually had the upper hand in material and winning opportunities. This can frequently occur in the endgame when both kings may be fighting to take the opposition. It goes without saying that one would want to avoid being put in a zugzwang as it is strongly associated with failure.

Secondly, a zwischenzug (German term meaning in-between move) is an intermediate move done before an anticipated response (i.e. before recapturing a piece) and can swing the outcome of a situation in one’s favor.  One would want to find a zwischenzug if it will lead to winning opportunities, compel one’s opponent to move into a zugzwang, or force a draw if one’s winning opportunities are slim to nothing. It is strongly associated with success.

These terms probably won’t make their way from the chess world into mainstream lexicon anytime soon. I might be surprised though. While people are not necessarily chess pieces that can be moved around to suit one’s whim, there are some who would beg to differ.