4,618
edits
Social Studies skills: Difference between revisions
m
→Confirmation bias
| (26 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 233: | Line 233: | ||
=== butterfly effect === | === butterfly effect === | ||
> small effects that lead to larger events | > small effects that lead to larger events | ||
>> to do: George Washington sparking the French-Indian War | |||
=== Goldilocks principle === | |||
* like Goldilocks who found the right bowl of porridge and bed to sleep on, | |||
** the "just right amount" is the "Goldilocks Principle" | |||
** = the sufficient (needed and perfect) conditions for something to happen | |||
* ex. | |||
** habitable planets require a perfect set of conditions to support life, which only earth presents | |||
*** see the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis | |||
** in economics, the Goldilocks economy is one in which economic inputs (trends/ happenings) are in balance and the economy is stable (very rare) | |||
==Contingency== | ==Contingency== | ||
| Line 285: | Line 293: | ||
=== Dictators paradox === | === Dictators paradox === | ||
* from | * from President Herbert Hoover (1927-1931): | ||
** "It is a paradox that every dictator has climbed to power on the ladder of free speech. Immediately on attaining power each dictator has suppressed all free speech except his own." | ** "It is a paradox that every dictator has climbed to power on the ladder of free speech. Immediately on attaining power each dictator has suppressed all free speech except his own." | ||
* the idea that | * the idea that | ||
| Line 415: | Line 423: | ||
=== Economic disparity === | === Economic disparity === | ||
* | * a measure of disparities in income distribution across an economic unit or country | ||
* Thomas Picketty | ** i.e., the extent to which income is distributed equally or unequally | ||
** ex. high economic dispary means that a small percentage of a country controls a high percentage of that country's assets or economic activity | |||
* see [[wikipedia:Gini_coefficient|Gini coefficient - Wikipedia]] | |||
* see Thomas Picketty / todo | |||
* problems include | |||
** while a certain segment of a population may control a significant portion of assets, it may not also constitute a disproportionate amount of economic activity | |||
** government dispersals of or redistribution of income may hide underlying economic disparities in standards of living, purchasing power, etc. | |||
==Order & Chaos== | ==Order & Chaos== | ||
| Line 868: | Line 882: | ||
* see also | * see also | ||
** [https://www.cairn.info/revue-cahiers-d-economie-politique-1-2015-2-page-203.htm The discovery of the comparative advantage theory (on James Mill, 1821)] | ** [https://www.cairn.info/revue-cahiers-d-economie-politique-1-2015-2-page-203.htm The discovery of the comparative advantage theory (on James Mill, 1821)] | ||
=== Desire Path === | |||
[[File:Desire path - 52849400711.jpg|thumb|right|A desire path between concrete sidewalks at the Ohio State University (wikipedia)]] | |||
* specifically: a path created by people off or outside of an established, planned path | |||
* generally: the idea that people will more efficiently choose their methods and means of conducting day-to-day affairs better than planners | |||
** related to Frederick Hayeks' idea of the "emergent order" created by accumulated individual decisions rather than by a collective decision | |||
=== Economies of scale === | === Economies of scale === | ||
| Line 884: | Line 904: | ||
* Hayek | * Hayek | ||
** dispersed knowledge | ** dispersed knowledge | ||
** emergent order | ** emergent order/ spontaneous order | ||
* Locke | * Locke | ||
* Smith | * Smith | ||
** invisible hand | ** invisible hand | ||
** universities | ** universities | ||
==== I Pencil ==== | === Gresham's law === | ||
* "Bad money drives out good money" | |||
** Sir Thomas Gresham (1519–1579), was an English financier in the 16th century | |||
** he advised Queen Elizabeth to restore confidence in the English currency, which had been "debased" (made impure) | |||
** Gresham argued that the monetary value of coinage should equal the value of its metallic base | |||
*** i.e., $1.00 gold coin should be worth the weight in gold of that coin | |||
* inflation results from "bad" money | |||
* historical instances include: | |||
** Roman empire debasement of silver coins (from 92% purity to | |||
** Yuan Dynasty issuance of paper money to finance war, resulting in inflation | |||
==== "I Pencil" ==== | |||
* a parable in which a pencil describes to the narrator just how magical its creation is | * a parable in which a pencil describes to the narrator just how magical its creation is | ||
| Line 897: | Line 928: | ||
* see [https://fee.org/resources/i-pencil/ I, Pencil by Leonard E. Read - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)] | * see [https://fee.org/resources/i-pencil/ I, Pencil by Leonard E. Read - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)] | ||
=== Herbert Stein's law === | |||
=== Herbert Stein's | |||
* "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" | * "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" | ||
* in economics and history, this concept is important for students to appreciate | * in economics and history, this concept is important for students to appreciate | ||
| Line 908: | Line 937: | ||
** example: why did such-and-such policy fail over time? | ** example: why did such-and-such policy fail over time? | ||
** source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Stein | ** source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Stein | ||
* Stein's law is an expression of "Regression to the Mean" (see entry) | |||
=== Jevons | === Jevons paradox === | ||
* also called "Jevon's effect" | * also called "Jevon's effect" | ||
* law that states that increases in efficiencies lead to more and not less use of a resource | * law that states that increases in efficiencies lead to more and not less use of a resource | ||
| Line 918: | Line 948: | ||
** controversial in the 2000s regarding energy use | ** controversial in the 2000s regarding energy use | ||
*** see New Yorker article on subject Dec/ 2010 >> to confirm | *** see New Yorker article on subject Dec/ 2010 >> to confirm | ||
=== Lucas critique === | |||
* Univ. of Chicago professor Robert Lucas "critiqued" (criticized) macroeconomic theories or models that describe large-scale systems, especially as drawn from "aggregated data" (accumulated) won't impact individual choices or behaviors, or those individual choices and behaviors won't change | |||
** in other words, macroeconomic models fail to account for micro-economic or individual behaviors | |||
* the utility of the Lucas critique is to point out that policy makes often fail to recognize that individuals make rational decisions that macroeconomic forecasting cannot account for. | |||
=== Milton Friedman's "Four ways to spend money" === | === Milton Friedman's "Four ways to spend money" === | ||
| Line 1,007: | Line 1,043: | ||
* also known as the "80/20 rule" or "law of the vital few" | * also known as the "80/20 rule" or "law of the vital few" | ||
* = the idea that 80% of consequences come from 20% of causes | * = the idea that 80% of consequences come from 20% of causes | ||
* the early Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto observed that | * the early Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) observed that | ||
** in Italy 80% of the land was owned by 20% of the population | ** in Italy 80% of the land was owned by 20% of the population | ||
* other observers have found that many natural and human systems follow this distribution pattern<br /> | * other observers have found that many natural and human systems follow this distribution pattern<br /> | ||
=== Other useful Economics and "Political Economy/-ics" terms and concepts === | === Other useful Economics and "Political Economy/-ics" terms and concepts === | ||
* 80/20 rule (see the "Pareto Principle" above) | * 80/20 rule (see the "Pareto Principle" above) | ||
| Line 1,088: | Line 1,125: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
=== | === Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon / Frequency Illusion/ New Car Syndrome === | ||
* the phenomenon in which upon buying a new car, one all of a sudden sees other cars of the same model or color that one didn't notice before | |||
* first identified as the "Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon" following an internet message board user who mentioned the name of the German terrorist organization, Baader-Meinhof, realized that he started seeing numerous references to the group, even though he had never noticed it before | |||
* the phenomenon was later labeled "frequency illusion," in reference to the tendency to notice things only after noticing it for the first time, which leads to the assumption that the frequency of that thing is greater than it really is | |||
** i.e., it was always there | |||
** but the person didn't notice until first experiencing or observing it | |||
* thus the "new car syndrome" | |||
* | === "Cargo Cult" fallacy === | ||
** i.e., | * fallacy of superficially mimicking someone, something, or some activity will result in the same benefits accrued to those who are being copied | ||
* | ** i.e., by taking sticks and marching in military-lines, that one would have the same power as the real army being mimicked | ||
* in science, called "cargo cult science", whereby one researcher copies the results of another without testing it independently | |||
* the term "cargo cult" originated in belief by indigenous Pacific islanders that ritualistic mimicking of Western symbols, constructions or actions would yield the same benefits observed of those westerners | |||
** especially construction of mini-airstrips and models of airplanes that the U.S. military brought to Pacific Islands during WWII would also yield the benefits those things brought to the westerners, such as material goods, health care, etc. | |||
* the term "cargo cult" was coined by Australian planters in Papua New Guinea | |||
** anthropologists adopted the coin regarding certain indigenous beliefs across Melanesia (eastern Pacific islands) | |||
=== Confirmation bias === | === Confirmation bias === | ||
| Line 1,105: | Line 1,154: | ||
* origins of the idea of confirmation bias | * origins of the idea of confirmation bias | ||
** Aesop's fable: Fox and the Grapes, which is where we get the expression, "sour grapes" ("oh well, those grapes are probably sour") | ** Aesop's fable: Fox and the Grapes, which is where we get the expression, "sour grapes" ("oh well, those grapes are probably sour") | ||
*David Hume and confirmaton bias | |||
* David Hume | |||
** 18th century Scottish philosopher who argued that knowledge is derived from experience (called "empiricism") | ** 18th century Scottish philosopher who argued that knowledge is derived from experience (called "empiricism") | ||
** however, Hume warned against reason alone as the basis for knowledge, as one can "reason" just about anything | ** however, Hume warned against reason alone as the basis for knowledge, as one can "reason" just about anything | ||
| Line 1,117: | Line 1,160: | ||
** Hume warned against jumping to conclusions based on limited knowledge | ** Hume warned against jumping to conclusions based on limited knowledge | ||
*** i.e. drawing conclusions based on our own confirmation bias | *** i.e. drawing conclusions based on our own confirmation bias | ||
* may also be called "motivated reasoning" | |||
** i.e. drawing conclusions ("reasoning") based upon bias or reason for ("motives") | |||
* see: | |||
** [http://www.devpsy.org/teaching/method/confirmation_bias.html Confirmation Bias & Wason (1960) 2-4-6 Task (devpsy.org)] | |||
** [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/seeing-what-others-dont/201905/the-curious-case-of-confirmation-bias The Curious Case of Confirmation Bias | Psychology Today] | |||
==== historical examples of confirmation bias ==== | |||
*in 1938, British Prime Minister Chamberlain returned from Germany after signing the Munich Agreement, under which Hitler agreed not to many further claims on Czechsolvakian territory (after siezing the Sudetenland), and announced that the agreement would bring "peace for our time." | |||
**within six months Germany had annexed more of Czechoslavia and would soon after invade Poland. | |||
**Chamberlain and his allied nations so wanted Hitler not to be a problem that they accepted anything he proposed thinking that appeasing him would stop his agression. | |||
*the Salem Witch Trials of 1692 were driven by confirmation bias that considered evidence gave proof of witchcraft, and even otherwise harmless things, like a broken fence, served as proof of it. | |||
**Worse, authorities accepted without question ridiculous claims such as that a witch supposedly made cows jump | |||
*The New Testament tells of various miracles performed by Jesus, some of which occur on the sabbath, which is the Hebrew "day of rest" (no work is allowed) | |||
**when some of the Jewish leaders, "Pharisees," witness a miracle, instead of responding in awe of it (such as healing a cripple or giving sight to a blind man), they become upset that Jesus performed the miracle on the sabbath | |||
***basically, saying, "Yeah, whatever, you healed a dude, but you can't do that on a Saturday!" | |||
**the bias of the Pharisees was so strong that they ignored the miracle and instead accused Jesus of breaking the law by "working" on the sabbath | |||
=== Correlation is not causation === | |||
* a cause and effect fallacy that mistakes "correlation" for cause | |||
** i.e., just because two events are related or coincidental does not mean one caused the other | |||
* this fallacy is one of "conflation" as opposed to bad logic, as in the ''Post hoc'' fallacy | |||
=== False dilemma fallacy === | === False dilemma fallacy === | ||
* fallacy of conclusion drawn from limited evidence or a false premise | * fallacy of conclusion drawn from limited evidence or a false premise | ||
* the fallacy ignores evidence contrary to the conclusion drawn from it | * the fallacy ignores evidence contrary to the conclusion drawn from it | ||
=== Framing effect === | |||
* the 'effect" or phenomenon that people will select an option based upon how it is "framed" in positive or negative terms | |||
* the framing effect occurs when the options are of equal value (are the same), even if presented in oppositive terms | |||
** the difference is in how it is presented or perceived by the decision maker | |||
* examples: | |||
** 33% survive v. 66% die | |||
*** A) given this choice, 33% of people will be saved; versus | |||
*** B) given this choice, 66% of people will die | |||
**** respondents are more likely to select A) because it focuses on lives" saved" versus "people who will die" | |||
**** even though both outcomes are the same (33% saved = 66% die) | |||
** an event has a late registration fee | |||
*** option A) the late registration fee is highlighted on top of the regular cost of registration | |||
*** option B) regular registration is treated as a discount from the total cost of late registration | |||
**** respondents are more likely to select A) because they want to avoid the perceived additional cost | |||
**** even though the early registration for A) is the same as for B) | |||
** an opinion poll asks for support of a policy, with emphasis on either its positive or negative impact | |||
*** A) 100,000 people will get jobs, while only 10,000 unemployed will result | |||
*** B) 10,000 people will lose jobs, while only 100,000 people will find employment | |||
**** respondents prefer A) due to its positive emphasis on jobs gained | |||
**** even though the net jobs gained or lost are the same | |||
=== Gambler's fallacy === | === Gambler's fallacy === | ||
| Line 1,133: | Line 1,218: | ||
=== Heinlein's Razor === | === Heinlein's Razor === | ||
* “Never assume malice when incompetence will do” | * “Never assume malice when incompetence will do” | ||
**from | ** similar to Occam's Razor, which posits that the most direct explanation is likely the most accurate | ||
** in that many human endeavors are the result of "incompetence" as much as good or bad intention | |||
** makes for a good test for "conspiracy theories" | |||
*from wikipedia: | |||
A similar quotation appears in Robert A. Heinlein's 1941 short story "Logic of Empire" ("You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"); this was noticed in 1996 (five years before Bigler identified the Robert J. Hanlon citation) and first referenced in version 4.0.0 of the Jargon File,[3] with speculation that Hanlon's Razor might be a corruption of "Heinlein's Razor". "Heinlein's Razor" has since been defined as variations on Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice.[4] Yet another similar epigram ("Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence") has been widely attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte.[5] Another similar quote appears in Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774): "...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent." | |||
=== Law of averages === | === Law of averages === | ||
| Line 1,227: | Line 1,316: | ||
** Galton called it "Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature" | ** Galton called it "Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature" | ||
=== Regression fallacy === | |||
* errors in observation or prediction that fail to account for regression to the mean | * errors in observation or prediction that fail to account for regression to the mean | ||
* = observations or predictions that include extremes or outliers (beyond the normal range) and ignore the law of regression to the mean that would otherwise indicate that those extremes and outliers are just that and not indicative of the mean (average) | * = observations or predictions that include extremes or outliers (beyond the normal range) and ignore the law of regression to the mean that would otherwise indicate that those extremes and outliers are just that and not indicative of the mean (average) | ||
| Line 1,514: | Line 1,602: | ||
* confirmation bias has significant effects in science, as many, even empirical, studies yield results that the investigators are looking for | * confirmation bias has significant effects in science, as many, even empirical, studies yield results that the investigators are looking for | ||
** note that confirmation bias may also yield great insight, especially if that bias leads to a new or different perspective that others would not see | ** note that confirmation bias may also yield great insight, especially if that bias leads to a new or different perspective that others would not see | ||
=== Crab mentality === | |||
* also called "crabs in a bucket" effect or mentality | |||
* when groups or individuals prefer to deny to others something they do not or cannot have | |||
** out of jeaousy or resentment | |||
* expressed as: "If I can't have it, neither can you" | |||
* see also the "Tall Poppy Syndrome" | |||
=== Dunning–Kruger effect === | === Dunning–Kruger effect === | ||
* the cognitive bias of overestimation of one's own competency and lack of awareness of one's own limited competence | * the cognitive bias of overestimation of one's own competency and lack of awareness of one's own limited competence | ||
| Line 1,524: | Line 1,621: | ||
* the Dunning-Kruger effect is observable but not provable | * the Dunning-Kruger effect is observable but not provable | ||
** i.e., it can happen but just because someone does not have competence does not mean that person will draw hasty, broad and wrong conclusions | ** i.e., it can happen but just because someone does not have competence does not mean that person will draw hasty, broad and wrong conclusions | ||
=== Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) === | |||
[[File:Elaboration Likelihood Model Information Graphic of Bias and Objective Thinking.jpg|thumb|Elaboration Likelihood Model Information Graphic of Bias and Objective Thinking. Peripheral Route is to the left ("biased") and Central Route to the right ("ojbective")]] | |||
* identifies the association between persuasion and bias | |||
* "elaboration" means the extent to which a person engages in objective mental processing before making a decision or adopting a point of view | |||
* ELM shows that much persuasion is driven by perceptions of status | |||
** i.e. high or low status perceptions drive people's attitudes towards persuasion | |||
* ELM identifies two paths to persuasion or "attitude change": | |||
*# high-elaboration likelihood, called "Central Route" = motivated to engage the argument with critical thought open to evidence | |||
*# low-elaboration likelihood, called "Peripheral Route" = external cues or influences are present that shape reception to the argument without critical thought | |||
* the "Central Route" requires intellectual honesty and engagement | |||
* the "Peripheral Route" engages biases and emotional states and yields little critical thought | |||
** related to confirmation bias and [[logical fallacy]] | |||
* the "Route" taken at any given time is related to a person's self-perceived social status or that of the source of the argument or information (or persuation) | |||
** that is, people process arguments or new information according to their perception of the source of that argument or information | |||
** also called "prestige bias" | |||
* "Motivation" strongly impacts the "Route" taken by the recipient of the information/ persuasion (i.e., decision-maker) | |||
** motivation = conditions, desires, perspectives, or states of mind that influence a decision | |||
** thus motivation may engage biases and thus the "Peripheral Route" | |||
* see | |||
** [[wikipedia:Elaboration_likelihood_model|Elaboration likelihood model - Wikipedia]] | |||
** [https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/how-dumb-ideas-capture-smart-and Why Dumb Ideas Capture Smart and Successful People] | |||
*** also published here: [https://clips.cato.org/sites/default/files/cato_quillette_Prestige.pdf Persuasion and the Prestige Paradox: Are High Status People More Likely to Lie?] | |||
** [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/after-service/202105/do-the-most-educated-people-look-down-everyone-else Do the Most Educated People Look Down on Everyone Else? | Psychology Today] | |||
=== Entropy === | |||
* "entropy" is the 2nd Newtonian Law of physics that energy will move from high to low systems | |||
** i.e., a something hot will transfer its heat to something colder | |||
* in Social Sciences, entropy indicates that systems will tend to decline over time\ | |||
** related to ''Thucydides Trap'' and ''Stein's Law'' | |||
=== Hawthorne effect / Observation bias === | === Hawthorne effect / Observation bias === | ||
| Line 1,586: | Line 1,715: | ||
=== Munchausen syndrome === | === Munchausen syndrome === | ||
* named for the fictional character Baron Munchausen, an absurd adventurer who recounted ridiculous stories, such as riding on a cannonball, with objectivity and detachment | * named for the fictional character Baron Munchausen, an absurd adventurer who recounted ridiculous stories, such as riding on a cannonball, with objectivity and detachment | ||
* = a "factititious disorder" in which a person tells exaggerated or dramatic stories with the intent to impress or | * = a "factititious disorder" in which a person tells exaggerated or dramatic stories with the intent to impress or deceive | ||
* the Munchausen syndrome is also used to express "circular logic," as in the story of Munchausen saving himself from drowning by pulling himself out of the water by his own hair | * the Munchausen syndrome is also used to express "circular logic," as in the story of Munchausen saving himself from drowning by pulling himself out of the water by his own hair | ||
* see entry for [[Baron von Munchausen]] | * see entry for [[Baron von Munchausen]] | ||
| Line 1,641: | Line 1,770: | ||
** the "frame" guides the audience to that "point of view" | ** the "frame" guides the audience to that "point of view" | ||
* also called '''"spinning"''', which is to "spin" or redirect a negative into a positive | * also called '''"spinning"''', which is to "spin" or redirect a negative into a positive | ||
=== Prestige bias / Prestige paradox === | |||
* also called "myside bias" (a form of confirmation bias) | |||
* the idea that perceptions of status drive people's attitudes and decision making | |||
* it is a "paradox" is because people with self-perceived "high status" are less likely to think objectively (without bias) | |||
** because "high status" people are "preoccupied with how others perceive them" | |||
* see [https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/how-dumb-ideas-capture-smart-and Why Dumb Ideas Capture Smart and Successful People] | |||
** also published here: [https://clips.cato.org/sites/default/files/cato_quillette_Prestige.pdf Persuasion and the Prestige Paradox: Are High Status People More Likely to Lie?] | |||
=== Rorschach test === | === Rorschach test === | ||
| Line 1,654: | Line 1,792: | ||
* however, as with the original Inblot test, use of a Rorschach test in the humanities is itself biased | * however, as with the original Inblot test, use of a Rorschach test in the humanities is itself biased | ||
** so one must be careful in its application | ** so one must be careful in its application | ||
=== Seven is the most selected number === | |||
* 7 is the number most frequently chosen by people when asked to select a number between 1 and 9 | |||
** see [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232582800_Predominance_of_seven_and_the_apparent_spontaneity_of_numerical_choices | The Predominance of Seven and the Apparent Spontaneity of Numerical Choice] | |||
* 7 is considered lucky or holy in many cultures and religions | |||
** "lucky seven" | |||
** in Vietnam, 7 is an unlucky number | |||
=== Smarter than the Average bias === | === Smarter than the Average bias === | ||
| Line 1,677: | Line 1,822: | ||
** named for "shock jock" Howard Stern, a radio personality, who specializes in offensive, rude, or shocking content | ** named for "shock jock" Howard Stern, a radio personality, who specializes in offensive, rude, or shocking content | ||
=== Theory of | === Tall poppy syndrome === | ||
* criticism, scrutiny, resentment and even legal recourse against successful people | |||
* i.e., the "tall poppy" gets cut down because it is higher than the rest | |||
* related to "Law of Jante" | |||
** a social code (tradition, more, informal rule) in Denmark that disapproves of expressions of individuality or personal success | |||
* egalitarian tribal culture also dislikes stand-outs | |||
** some tribes will assault anyone who brags or shows off | |||
** the idea is that an individual who is or acts better than others endangers tribal coherence and is a threat to take over the tribe | |||
* see also "crab mentality" | |||
=== Theory of errors === | |||
* also called "observational errors" | * also called "observational errors" | ||
| Line 1,695: | Line 1,851: | ||
* | * | ||
== Other theories & conceptual tools == | == Other theories & conceptual tools == | ||
=== | |||
=== Glasl's model of conflict escalation === | |||
[[File:Glasl's Model of Conflict Escalation.svg|thumb|Glasl's "Nine stages of conflict escalation"|385x385px]] | |||
* when analyzing conflict, diplomacy, events, etc. students may employ the conceptual framework of "conflict escalation" by Friedrich Glasl ([[wikipedia:Friedrich_Glasl's_model_of_conflict_escalation|here from wikipedia]]) | |||
* Glasl's model divides disagreement or conflict scenarios into "stages" based upon three core outcomes: | |||
** win-win | |||
*** both sides benefit | |||
** win-lose | |||
*** one side benefits, the other loses | |||
** lose-lose | |||
*** conflict w/ bad outcomes for one or both parties | |||
* conflicts escalate through and into: | |||
** tension and dispute | |||
** debate | |||
** communication loss | |||
** coalition building (seeking sympathy or help from others) | |||
** denunciation | |||
** loss of face (pride) | |||
** threats and feelings of threat | |||
** depersonalization (treating the other as not human) | |||
** attack, annihilation, defeat | |||
* deescalation includes: | |||
** mediation from third-party (intercession, intermediation) | |||
** process guidance | |||
** arbitration, legal actions | |||
** forcible intervention, especially from higher power | |||
* Glasl's model works at the individual (a family fight) or global level (international affairs) | |||
=== Graham's hierarchy of disagreement === | |||
[[File:Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement-en.svg|thumb|Graham's hierarchy of disagreement]] | |||
* tech entrepreneur Paul Graham in 2008 proposed a model for levels (hierarchies) of disagreement | |||
* the top of the hierarchy is refutation of the "central point" | |||
** i.e., that the opposing idea is fundamentally "refuted" | |||
*** via logic, demonstration, evidence, etc. | |||
* the bottom of the hierarchy is "Name-calling", which leads to no resolution and further anger or dispute | |||
* key points in the negative side of the hierarchy are essentially [[Logical fallacy|logical fallacies]]: | |||
** name-calling (ad hominem) and | |||
** criticism of tone or attitude rather than substance ("responding to tone") | |||
** contractions without evidence | |||
* on the constructive side are | |||
** strong argument via reason, logic, evidence | |||
** refutation: proof | |||
=== Overton Window === | |||
* [[File:Overton Window diagram.svg|thumb|An illustration of the Overton window, along with Treviño's degrees of acceptance]]Joseph Overton observed that along the spectrum of social or political thought, policy, or opinion | |||
** there exists a mainstream "middle" of consensus | |||
*** that middle may have variances, but most people generally agree with it | |||
** with extremes on both sides that are not generally accepted | |||
** however, as one extreme or the other becomes acceptable, they enter into the "Overton Window" | |||
** example: | |||
*** in the 1950s, rock music was considered anti-social, thus lay outside of the Overton Window | |||
*** as its popularity grew, especially following Elvis Presley, rock music became popular music | |||
**** and thus, entered the Overton Window | |||
* in the Overton Window, "Policy" should reflect a consensus of points of view within the window, and will move according to changes within that window | |||
** so, while "Policy" may not always reflect the middle of the Window, it acts to reflect changes in the window. | |||
=== Weber's "Protestant Work Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism" === | === Weber's "Protestant Work Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism" === | ||
* Social Scientist Max Weber attributed the economic success of U.S. and northwestern European nations to their dominant "Protestant work ethic" | |||
* based on | |||
** individualism and notions of self-sufficiency | |||
** ethics of hard work, timeliness, frugality, etc. | |||
*** that cumulatively yielded productive economies and a dominant middle class | |||
* note that Weber's seen today by "critical race" theorists as elements of "white privilege" | |||
==External Resources== | ==External Resources== | ||