Notes 10/29

 

Fallacies:

1. Karen Richardson: Wishful Thinking Fallacy

            ex. Placebo Effect

 

2. Not present

 

Eliana wants outlines back to put presentation list up

Break at Baby Doe’s? No

 

Discussion Questions:

1. How would creativity fit in with all of the thinking styles mentioned by Sternberg? (legislative, executive, judicial, etc.)

-creativity is needed for all thinking styles

-is one style more likely to be judged as creative?

-Laura thinks creativity helps to get around rules

-legislative is more creative, spontaneous

-how does executive lead to creativity?

-they have ideas but they are not spontaneous

-creativity within boundaries

 

2. In the last chapter of the book for Thinking Styles, the author raises many issues of how these styles may not be empirically valid and may not really matter at all anyway, but he never really provides arguments to the contrary (thereby giving a reason for why he even wrote this book to begin with). So why are thinking styles important if they are not research-supported or empirically/statistically valid?

-Jacquelle doesn’t care

-decides that you don’t necessarily need research to support it

-center provides basis for a statistical work

-any science project

-styles are not abilities

-does that make it more useful?

-more credible

-to certain people it is more useful

-depends on where you are

-president of a company would benefit when looking for specific employees

-find the job that makes you happy

-helpful to know own personal style, but doesn’t help to know your kids styles if you are just going to discourage them from trying new things

-should people even know their thinking style?

-serves as deterrent and excuse

-Laura jokes “we need more labels in this society”

-“Hooziefoots” is introduced by Laura into English language

-Can anybody see why we should write this book?

-pretty clear, emphatic no by positive class

-not important to classify people

-is it important to recognize that people think differently?

-yes, but we don’t need a book to do that

-expand in 2^nd edition to teach how to address each style

-you can do more useful thinking with that

-Eliana: “use information for good not for evil”

-Jeff: “yes, this is the vain of civilization”

 

3. Just as a general thing, all these thinking styles seem like pretty general and randomly chosen categories to throw people into. Why are the styles listen in this book better than some random ones that I think up as a way to divide people? The author never supports why the styles he presents are better.

-perfect answer!

-Brendon: “yeah well, whoever did this is a cognitive psychologist and you’re just a student…nothing personal”

-arbitrary

-Eliana is a cognitive psychologist so she should know

-Eliana: “do you enjoy being scared?”

 

4. Do you think certain psychological disorders might be manifestations of different cognitive styles? For example, compartmentalization might be similar to OCD. Can you think of another example?

-Brandon: Sure, I guess. I don’t see causation, but probably predisposition. Compartmentalization and introversion are like OCD.

-Brad: and introversion with sociopathy

-Brandon has an older brother named Randy

-There’s a difference between not being good at something and not being functional

 

5. Apply one of the teaching styles described on page 146 (actually 144 as Brandon points out) to another one of the cognitive styles discussed in the book.

-Brad: Legislative is like cooperative planner. He doesn’t have his book.

-How does planter fit?

-Brad: “what is the legislative again? Putting ideas together…”

-Planner???

-because they’re planning for…I don’t know…there you go…

-judicial=learning-centered

-maybe?

-raises eyebrow

 

6. I am curious about the field dependence and independence discussed in this weeks reading. The book suggested that there is a positive correlation between intelligence and field-independence. Is there a particular brain area that regulates this or is it just an abstract entity? And if there is, can we relate that area to a region of intelligence within the brain?

-Court switches with Ashleigh for this question

-Court: “I don’t really know if there is a brain area for that, but it’d be cool…but I don’t think so…”

-no one knows

-Court can totally tell

-there should be a spot somewhere in the brain for that

-Brendon: “could be balance”

-field-independent finds out of place keys and can tell angle in plane without looking

-Brendon, Brandon and Ashleigh discuss vestibular cochlear nerve further

-Jackie’s swoops hand over head

-Autism is affected by vestibular cochlear

-if fixed they regain language abilities

-amygdala and medulla needed for higher thinking and intelligence

-that’s a place where lots of thinking comes together

-intermodal input—integration from varying sensory systems and how it produces intelligence

-evidence from biological system

 

7. The C. G. Jung theory of psychology types seems like it covers more ground than the others in the book. Are there other types of personalities you can think of besides the ones mentioned (ex. Extroversion, introversion, thinking, feeling)?

-the others in the book

-but instead of labeling

-in terms of describing everyone

-it’d be cool on a continuum

-Court: “make me look good in there”

-Laura reads Jung categories aloud (16 in all)

-Brandon: “I can’t remember these abstract things”

-Jeff is done burning Chemical Brothers CD

-do Sternberg’s styles give you more information?

-Angie differentiates between personality and style. Jung’s theory of personality has styles that are ways you think and interpret

-Eliana: “those sound strangely similar to me”

 

 

-Laura suggests 2 breaks

-Jacquelle notes that we act absolutely like 5^th graders

-Eliana: “you can do 50 minutes”

-is that why you whine so much?

 

Skip to next set of questions....

…Megan likes her question

…turns bright red

…she’s just kidding

 

Who’s next?

Karen…

8. If computers were considered to be executive and I was a legislator, would we work well together? Would there be clashing of personalities?

-could overview a 2/3 majority

-no do it Megan’s way

-according to the book no one likes to follow rules

-Karen wants to do her own thing

-Laura: “what if they didn’t clash?”

-Karen: “well yeah, but I don’t think so”

-Angie: “ I totally disagree—they need eachother”

-Eliana: “I see potential conflict”

 

Eliana is going to get goldfish crackers

 

BREAK

 

Eliana thinks pizza for presentation

I trip Brandon getting up to pee

Someone wants tequila

Eliana: “no getting drunk in my class”

Jackie: “what if we get drunk before presentations”?

Meet at La Iguana?

 

Is getting pizza feasible?

Dietary restrictions?

No one fesses up

Brendon thinks some sausage is gross

Jeff thinks BJ

Brandon Jalinos

Megan likes vanilla coke

 

Eliana offers to sell baby to afford night out drinking

Brad thinks we should have a keg in the next room and run the tap through the window

Someone behind me says: “I’m not learning about this damnit”

 

Back to Discussion Questions…

9-11.    9.Are you a legislative, executive or judicial thinker?

            10. Are you monoarchic, hierarchic, oligarchic or anarchic?

            11. Do you have an internal or external style?

-why?

-it’s based on the text book scores

-Jeff has no solid answer for that

-Jacquelle: “It’s 4:15…5 more minutes”

-Jeff has name, email address and phone # on inside of glasses-TYPED!!!

-Courtney warns she would keep them just because he’s retarded

-Jeff frequently changes labels

-Jacquelle wants meat

-Eliana misses it

-Laura wants a BBQ and a keg

-Jeff thinks we should roast a pig

-Eliana: “just what I need”

-Jacquelle: “where do I get a pig?”

 

12. How would a field-independent or field-dependent person fit in with a bureaucratic work environment?

-Angie: “field-dependency thing—I just don’t get how it pertains…”

-Karen wrote that questions

-she apologizes for being dumb

-just put the words together

 

13. Don’t you think we all use the legislative style when doing things we know a lot about, and the executive style when it’s something we don’t know about?

-Angie again…she gets to pick because the last question didn’t make sense…

-Angie: “as an executive thinker I have no use for the legislative style”

-she likes rules—somebody else’s or her own

-if you know your style you can find things to watch for

-Eliana: “guys, let’s not all talk at the same time”

-Jeff keeps burning CDS

 

14. How does the legislative style fit with embodied cognition? Could you program a robot to this style of thinking?

-Lindsey (sp?) thinks no because legislative style doesn’t have statistics to back it

-we’re merely going on his defintion

-can’t build robots without concrete ideas, right?

-Jacquelle reaches for Brendon’s butt

-Eliana: “pay attention and contribute too slacker corner”

-Jacquelle whispers about how cute Lindsey’s shirt is

-Jeff is playing with phone-phone rings…surprise

-Brad: “meowwwww”

-Brandon makes raindrop noise

-Court suggests class dunce cap

-Jacquelle gives them an ultimatum

-Eliana: “what kinds”?

-rules? No funny noises or reading the newspaper

-Boden’s explanation is a good fake description of creativity

-not really known

-characterizes what people do

-Jacquelle plays with her hair

-Angie’s less creative than legislative people

 

15. Would it be easier to program a robot to the executive thinking style as it “prefers” guidance on when/how to operate?

-Beth thinks not necessarily—some are rule based, some aren’t (kismet), but computers need rules

-agree…disagree??

-robots only function on rules

-doesn’t know anything about programming

-Laura’s question

-Eliana doesn’t know what is involved in programming these styles

-visual system and decision making hard to model

-Laura: “we had a little mini conversation…woo hoo”

-Eliana thinks it’s a huge program because there are lots of specifications

-can have one big rule that defines behavior

-Laura needs to get a list of priorities to look at rules

-more code for legislative and judicial?

-yeah, but that’s not really the case

-lots of experience, but not programming

-learning is not programming

-Eliana says it’s not a program but a database

 

Laura wants to go to the next question

“c’mon we can do your [Megan] question but not mine!!”

 

16. Since the judicial thinking style is fond of evaluating rules and judging could a robot be used to replace court systems? So like, feed in the laws of the county/state/country and the facts of the current case and take out the impact of emotion (no human influence) and voila, better judicial system?

-Laura does 16 even though it’s her question to begin with

-Brendon thinks its more complicated case law

-Eliana: “I just like to watch Law and Order—that’s all I know about it” and “strange reminding of a logical engine that would help lawyers before a case—spot contradictions”

-are emotions important in court?

-Brad says Court and I are freaks because we can feel our hearts beat on our right side and he can’t

 

17. Are learning rates a measure of intelligence? If you learn faster does this mean you are more intelligent than someone who learns slower?

-Sheri thinks that’s not true

-can have some intelligence and know same think but be slower at getting the thoughts out

-memory could be another factor to looks at

 

18. Does language contribute to human intelligence? How? Does it contribute to animal intelligence? Do you think humans are viewed as more intelligent because of our use of language?

-humans are viewed an more intelligent because they came up with the concept

-Jackie thinks language contributes because you can communicate knowledge with each other and learn from each other

-animals can communicate as well

-language helps with intelligence overall

-Angie says in linguistic community you need to distinguish between human and animal communication

-language is more indicative of intelligence

-nobody really knows

-Megan says monkeys learn to speak with tail

-Brad says still limited, not diverse

-Eliana says not as complicated as human

-Laura: “but can you meow”?

-Eliana…that’s the thing

-Eliana says ultimately human language is superior. Evidence is that language is a tool like a diagram that explains a 4-way interaction but it helps you to understand…language expands you capacity and understanding

-chimp babies are better than infants

-but at 3 humans surpass chimps

-what makes intelligence?

1)    language

2)    tools

3)    culture

-chimps raised more like people can learn to speak sign language without being taught explicitly

-they pick up from the environment

-Laura says difference between humans and chimps is hairiness

-joint attention (which Eliana is not necessarily convinced by) is the ability to know what the other person is looking at (both have the same thing in mind)

-Megan is 12 months old

-joint attention helps a lot

-people are very good at following gaze (even infants) but chimps are not

-eye contact with chimps is aggressive

-is it cultural?

 

 

 

NOTE: Speech by Tomasello on Culture and Language on Friday from 330-500 in D214

They are serving alcohol because it’s a big guy invited speaker

Have a wine bottle

 

p.s. dogs have more social abilities because they are more aware of what you are looking at.