Recognise that you are being MANIPULATED

Why is there no "SINGAPORE STANDS WITH DEMOCRATIC IRAQ" FB group?

Why are there no Singaporeans writing open letters to ministers asking them to make a stand on the Iraqi crisis?

Why are there little/no (not that I have seen) posts which merge the Singapore and Iraqi flag?

There are war crimes (civilian casualties and wanton executions) happening right now in Iraq too. And the scale of the situation in Iraq is larger than what is happening in Gaza.

Simple. the besieged in Iraq are not as adept as Hamas (which allows the Palestinian people to be besieged for their benefit) at playing the politicking and "rally around the flag" game.

"Mr Mahmoud Abbas, the sometimes moderate, often ineffectual leader of the Palestinian Authority, just asked his rivals in Hamas a question that other bewildered people are also asking: “What are you trying to achieve by sending rockets?”"

"In reaction to these indiscriminately fired missiles, Israel has bombarded targets across Gaza, killing more than 100 people so far. Compared with violent death rates in other parts of the Middle East, the number is small. (More than 170,000 people have been killed in the Syrian civil war to date.) But it is large enough to suggest an answer to Mr Abbas’s question: Hamas is trying to get Israel to kill as many Palestinians as possible.

Dead Palestinians represent a crucial propaganda victory for the nihilists of Hamas. It is perverse, but true. It is also the best possible explanation for Hamas’ behaviour, because it has no other plausible strategic goal here."

-----The futility of prayer-----

The logical fallacies with regard to the act/concept of praying = Post-hoc rationalising + Patternicity + Agenticity + "Wishful thinking" fallacy + Credo Consolans + confirmation bias. In addition, the efficacy of prayer and its implied supernaturalism defies all known laws of Science. Lastly, the efficacy of prayer also has never been studied and proven mathematically and scientifically.

When I was younger and experienced pain/crisis, I remember making pleas and bargains with a "higher power" to help me and those involved because it was a natural thing to do...no one had instructed me to do this but I did. It was so natural, like it was a reflex action of sorts. I communicated with this "higher power" through my mind's voice.

Now that I am older and more critical, I don't do this anymore. I recognise that pain is either an emotional or physiological response/marker and focus on bettering the condition. How do I console myself? Things could be worse, which is always true. And others may be experiencing worse than me. Many are definitely experiencing and many have experienced worse than me.So I am always lucky/luckier. In addition, I am lucky to even be/have been alive and part of the beautiful evolutionary biological history of our planet.

And if I were to not succeed in overcoming this pain, I will die (at worst). And dying is nothing to fear. Sure, the pain if any to be endured when dying is something that any being with self-consciousness and a functioning nervous system would want to avoid. In addition, the emotional and psychological ties and tasks that we leave behind is something else that we seek to avoid. Beyond this, why is death nothing to fear? Well, simple. Ask yourself...do you remember anything before you were born? No. That is exactly how being dead feels like. NOTHING! You wouldn't even know that you are dead. (Anyone who does combat sports and has been choked out/knocked out would know what I am talking about, :P)

And if I were to know that I was to die. Sure. I will be sad....but I promise myself that I will only be sad for a while. And I will then rally myself to spend my last days effectively....to add value to the lives of others. As much as I have taken and benefited from others during my existence, it is then my moral duty to give back as much as I can and it would be selfish not to do so when I do know that I am going to die. That would be a good death.

Divine guidance? Divine inspiration? Spiritual consolation? Spiritual strength? These all originate from your mind and your mind is but a product of your brain which means that you have everything that you need in yourself to find strength and inspiration to overcome adversity.

So the next time you encounter pain/crisis.....Pray? Nah. Get off your butt and do something productive and tangible. Positive actions WILL improve our world

--More on Animal intelligence---

More good stuff from NOVA documentaries.

Bonobos and Chimps can cooperate on tasks but chimps will stop cooperating if the rewards are placed in one container. Bonobos will still go ahead and cooperate and share if the rewards were placed in one container.

Chimps can learn to ask for help when faced with tasks and help human researchers with task (which they understand the goal of).

 Chimps also can understand the actions of other chimps to be good and/or bad...they will then sabotage the other chimps if they did a bad action and innocent chimps would not be punished.

Chimps can also learn to recognise numbers as symbols and how they ascend/descend in pattern.

Apes learn by copying. There is a group of chimps who have learned (via copying) how to make and use spears to hunt bush-babies. They also have learned to enjoy taking baths in shallow water bodies. Thus ape groups have culture.

But emotions and impulsive actions deny chimps greater success in cooperation. Chimps consistently are unable to control choosing bigger rewards even though they were always given less as a result. The understanding of delayed gratification and better control over our emotions give us the edge in cooperative tasks.

Dogs are less volatile, more interested in human behavior/actions and more tolerant towards humans as compared to wolves. Border Collies are even able to make inferences when the information that they have doesn't gel with the orders that they have been given. The gene CTNND2 in the dog genome is found in the genome of Border Collies and is important in humans for cognitive development.

Octopus can learn how to undo puzzles in order to get to food. They also use their mental processing in order to put on camouflage to deceive predators. Pattern, color (brightness) and 3 dimensional shape are accomplished by octopus in 7/10s of a second. Octopus have also used environmental tools to hide and ambush prey: this shows cognitive planning.

Alex the parrot (1976-2007) was an ordinary bird who was trained by Dr Irene Pepperberg with items and names. He was very inquisitive, could make requests and identify similarities and differences. He could even combine symbols in new ways to create meaning (he termed cake as "yummy bread" when he first tried it) and simple maths. He had the intelligence level of a 5/6 years old child.

--Science of lust--

*good stuff from another NOVA documentary*

Men will act out in 'louder' mannerisms when attractive women are about. This is known as 'peacocking'.

Men also demonstrate more artistic creativity after coming into interactions with attractive women.

Women will demonstrate more kind actions when attractive men are about.

Men are designed to be lustful more often and get lustful easier so as to be more evolutionarily successful. Women tend to take longer and are less inclined to be lustful because the costs of choosing a wrong mate would be higher. 

Being in the presence of an attractive woman hikes the testosterone levels in men whether or not they consider her a prospective mate.

Some people are hypoactive sexually and often describe themselves as asexual. Others are hyperactive sexually. They have a mutation on a gene which controls dopamine.

People when primed to think about love rather than lust were more inclined to push away relationship alternatives and stay faithful. Love is an evolutionary design to get us to attract and be attracted and mate. Love on the other hand enables us to stay together to raise offspring.

The "warrior" gene

The "warrior" gene can be found in 1/3 of men but it does not necessarily make them more violent. Mice with the "warrior" gene (a dysfunctional version of the MAO-A gene, a neuro-gene) bite and scratch more.

How about people? Such people have less grey matter in the communication between their prefrontal cortex and their amygdala and more stimulation in their amygdala (the part of the brain which alerts us to danger). But nurture also plays a big part in whether such people exhibit aggressive behaviour.

People with Intermittent Explosive Disorder perceive danger when there may not be any. But do people with IED have the "warrior" gene? NO!

A combination of factors (mainly environment) determines whether someone will have IED. Therefore this is good news: we may not be able to change our genes but we definitely can change our environment.

"wear white"?

Another logical fallacy to point out on the same issue from this article

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/06/23/singapore-christians-and-muslims-join-forces-to-protest-against-gay-rights/

Another logical fallacy to point out on the same issue from this article.

“Return to Fitrah”, meaning innocence or nature -> "Naturalistic fallacy" OR "Appeal to nature fallacy" which logic is as follows: "...the assumption that because some quality or combination of qualities invariably and necessarily accompanies the quality of goodness, or is invariably and necessarily accompanied by it, or both, this quality or combination of qualities is identical with goodness. If, for example, it is believed that whatever is pleasant is and must be good, or that whatever is good is and must be pleasant, or both, it is committing the naturalistic fallacy to infer from this that goodness and pleasantness are one and the same quality. The naturalistic fallacy is the assumption that because the words 'good' and, say, 'pleasant' necessarily describe the same objects, they must attribute the same quality to them."

Simply put, whether something is natural or not has no fixed bearing on its goodness. Many natural things are harmful to us. Many unnatural (synthetic) things are good for us.

But if you wish to defend the logic of this slogan based on the term "innocence" as per religious understanding, then that is acceptable within the religious rationality of the community (if the meaning of the term "innocence" is agreed upon within the religious community).

Correct me if I am wrong but the religious meaning of "innocence" here points to the "original goodness"/ spiritual purity of an individual as how God created man (as according to the respective creation narrative mentioned) thus pointing to the problem of "nature VS nurture".

We cannot yet judge (from a non-religious point of view) the "nature vs nurture" argument in relation to one's sexual orientation as we just have not arrived at any conclusive evidence for either side of the argument yet. Therefore we should not then come a hasty judgement and continue to work to find the true answers as per critical thinking and then collectively come to a solution about the issue as per democratic principles.

Now I know some of my religious friends may take offence to this but a logical fallacy is a logical fallacy regardless of whichever individual of whatever faith used it. So I hope you see past any affiliations and just treat it as an issue of critical thought and logic.

Religion "still helps shape views on morality"....YUCKS

I think articles like this are misleading and counter-effective, 

http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/religion-still-helps-shape-views-morality

Honestly with regard to such nebulous issues like morality, is it really helpful to poll people based on vague questions like "Is it wrong?". 

Then again, if we were to keep the analysis of certain actions and the morality of these actions in vague emotivist labels like "wrong" then yes, you will get an emotive response to a moral issue and no further thought/reflection on the part of the respondent. The publication of such polls does not help breed moral actions...this instead reinforces a "react first, do not reflect" and then justify one's stand with being in the "moral majority" sequence.

Instead, we need to educate people that "right" and "wrong" labels are evolutionary, social and historical constructs as responses to environmental concerns. Only then can we move beyond 'right" and "wrong" and advance towards "better" and possibly even "best".

So many of our countrymen are stranded in the foggy world of cultural morality and understand themselves to being morally opposed to others when in reality, our moral sense are much closer than what we assume (see "the trolley problem" and how people of various faith react to it). This is because they have had no formal exposure to ethics (moral philosophy) and also lack knowledge on how cutting edge research (in neuroscience and animal behavioural studies) for example is enriching our understanding in this field.

And also, we will not proceed far as a critical thinking society if we do not allow for free constructive criticism (backed with evidence) about all set of beliefs/values. Labelling any set of beliefs/values as sacred and unquestionable does not allow for genuine critical thinking to flourish.

Lastly I lament the constant need for the maintenance of religious and racial harmony which comes from ignorant tribalism that a society founded on critical thinking and science (for example, see iGENEA: DNA Gennealogy research) will demolish. If only more people knew more science and allowed for their constructs to be destroyed with the clarity of science and critical thinking....

Nova's documentary on 'what animals are thinking'

Just finished watching Nova's documentary on 'what animals are thinking' and as usual I learned a lot from it.....Nova's documentaries are just awesomeness.  

Pigeons navigate to their home roosts through hearing the low frequency sounds of the location. Scientists at first theorized that they navigated through magnetic fields and smell but later eliminated these theories after experiments. 

Rats have displayed empathy and sharing of food in experiments featuring trapped companions and moral dilemmas (friend or food first?). Bonobos also released other bonobos to allow them to share fruits. Ants bit through nylon trappings to release other ants but only if they were their kin.

Dogs have displayed an understanding of fairness by refusing to 'perform' after repeated unfair treatment (the other test doggies got food for similar actions while they didn't). In another series of experiments, scientists found that the guilty expression that dogs displayed was in response to scolding from their owners and not because of guilt.

Slime mould have inter-cellular communication and can figure the most efficient way through a maze to find a food source.

Bees have a hive mind. In an experiment featuring a choice between 2 new hive locations, scouts came back and wiggle-danced to show the location of the new location. Convinced bees then spread the dance to communicate and convince more bees. They also interrupted the dancing of rival bees who supported the other hive location. Once a critical mass was achieved, they departed en masse to the new location.

Monkeys would steal when no one's looking.

The ability of animals to think, communicate, plan and adapt gives us a better understanding of our once narrow and species-centric conception of intelligence.

The moral sense of animals gives us clues as to how our morals developed and allows us to reflect our own moral concepts. It also imbues us with greater humility and a greater sense of awe as to how we fit in with the the rest of our living world.

---'Why people believe weird things' by Michael Shermer--

---'Why people believe weird things' by Michael Shermer--

Interesting 'newbies' from the book
1. People confuse skeptics with cynic. 
2. I am therefore I think..sum ergo cogito

-Why do people believe weird things-
1. We evolved to be skilled pattern-finding and casual-finding creatures. 

2. Credo consolans- because they want to. It feels good and comforting. 

Traditional psychology is formal, expensive and time-consuming. Deep insight and improvement may take months or years. Delay of gratification is the norm, instant gratification the exception.

3. Simplicity. Immediate gratification of one's beliefs is made all the easier by simple explanations for an often complex and contingent world. Scientific and critical thinking does not come naturally and needs training, experience and effort.

4. Others believe in weird things for reasons of morality and meaning.

5. Hypnopompic hallucinations: visions of the supernatural that occur as one emerges from deep sleep. Hypnagogic hallucinations: occurs soon after falling asleep

6. People have errors in thinking because:
a. Without corroborative evidence, anecdotes do not make a science
b. scientific language does not make a science
c. Heresy does not equal correctness
d. Burden of proof lies with the person making the claim
e. Emotive words provoke emotion and obscure rationality

7. Confirmation bias. Paranoia is just another form of confirmation bias.

Psychics depend on the power of confirmation bias by telling their clients what to expect in their future.

-Why do smart people also believe in weird things?-
1. They are smart and good at defending their illogical beliefs.

Although there is some evidence that intelligent people are slightly less likely to believe in some superstitions and paranormal beliefs, overall conclusions are equivocal and limited.

2. For the most part, intelligence is orthogonal to and independent of belief.

3. Smart people might be smart in only 1 field.

4. Intellectual attribution bias where we consider our own actions as being rationally motivated whereas we see those of others as more emotionally driven.

- Belief in weird things as related to profession, gender and age-
With regard to psychic belief, women are the vast majority. Ufology are guy beliefs. There are No differences between men and women in the power of belief, only in what they choose to believe.

People under thirty were more superstitious than older age groups. Religiosity and belief in god steadily decreased with age until about 75 when it went back up.

Psychologists were the most skeptical of all because they best understand the psychology of belief and how easy it is to be fooled,

Deep commitment to belief in esp entails that one has a strong internal locus of control.

Dreams

There are 2 sleep patterns: Non-REM and REM. Dreams have a physiological function/purpose and not a physiological one like what Freud posited.

Learned a lot after watching the NOVA episode on dreaming.

Scientists managed to turn off the paralysis mode in the brain during REM sleep and studied cats stalked prey and played with mice. So cats dream catty dreams. :P

Human subjects when awakened during REM sleep experienced negative emotional patterns (when asked to do word association activities) with regard to self-regard due to high levels of activity in the amygdala during REM sleep.

REM sleep was the period of sleep when the brain tested out limits and made free and loose connections between events and concepts. So REM sleep is often tied in with creativity.

Non-REM sleep provided the brain with memory replays of activities during the day for processing and refining memories and learning thereafter. And when studied subjects dream about activities during the day, they got better at these activities.

As we grow up, our nightmares take on more modern and tangible concerns/events. Whereas in children, nightmares concern threats that are more primal.

FAITH IS NOT LIKE WIFI!

A common argument of SUPERNATURALISTS: Faulty Comparison!!

WIFI is invisible but can be tested for with empirical evidence. WIFI communication across a wireless network is a lot like two-way radio communication. 
This is the process:
1) A computer's wireless adapter translates data into a radio signal and transmits it using an antenna.
2) A wireless router receives the signal and decodes it. The router sends the information to the Internet using a physical, wired Ethernet connection.

Its "power" aka effects can be easily observed and tested for.

FAITH on the other hand, is invisible and cannot be tested for with empirical evidence. FAITH is defined as confidence or trust in a person (as in their ability), thing, deity, in the doctrines or teachings of a religion, or view (e.g. having strong political faith) even without empirical evidence. It can also be belief that is not based on proof.

The "power" aka effects of FAITH can never be observed or tested for.

FAITH IS NOT LIKE WIFI.

How to be a really good PAIN IN THE ASS: Dicarlio

Some new/interesting stuff from this book on Critical Thinking.

Fallacies of logic
Modus Tollens (Denying the Consequent)
If A, then B. B did not occur, A could not have occurred.

But, fallacy of affirming the consequent
If A, then B. B, therefore A. Not logical since there are other ways of arriving at B.

Another fallacy would be ad hoc rescue which happens when a person is determined to believe what she wants to and will come up with as many additional premises as it takes to do so.

Disjunctive argument
Either A or B. It is a type of "false dichotomy".

Biases work as a series of filters through which information must pass in order to be considered. When it comes to experiencing new information, one generally has 3 options: acceptance, rejection or suspension of judgement. A confimation bias happens when an individual finds evidence to support what they believe in.

It is important for us to identify context related to arguments or information because if we fail to do so, we may judge and react unfairly and too quickly. Like how we interact with news of atrocities happening elsewhere in the world, too little information is available to make sense of a situation that is so horrifically different from my daily life.

We must also be mindful of "noise": factors that may or may not provide context.

Anecdotal evidence can be made more credible with statistical significance: no longer just an individual's personal experience but a collection of consistent personal experiences. Be mindful that it is only more credible but not necessarily true as what we know from ad populum. We should also be mindful that these do not apply to arguments based on evidence which also become popular but because of their soundness and ability to explain phenomenon.

Another fallacy would be "poisoning the well": a preemptive attack on a person's character in order to discredit him. 

The fallacy of Disanalogy occurs when an analogy is used and it mars our understanding of the argument. Euphemisms are an example which in the effort of being less harsh or dramatic, tends to distort information.

Post Hoc fallacy

Because A precedes B, A must cause B.

Critical Thinking and its implications
An evidentialist would argue rightfully that it is morally binding to accept information for which one has satisfactory evidence.

There is no middle ground between two truth values. Truths are understood from convincing arguments. Such arguments must be consistent, simple, reliable, relevant, sufficient and devoid of logical fallacies.

We are also mindful of personal biases and historical facticity.

We need to be aware of the Relations of Natural Systems and Relations of Cultural Systems in order to understand what we know.

Range of freedoms: we have total freedom (Libertarian), we have no freedom (hard determinism), we have limited freedom (soft determinism).




The BIG 5 questions

What can I know?
Why am I here?
What am I?
How should I behave?
What is to come of me?