Every fortnight I curate a few of the observations and insights that had been shared on social media. I name these Friday’s Finds.
Not in a field. Not with a fox.
Not in a home. Not with a mouse.
I might not [retweet] them right here or there.
I might not [retweet] them wherever.
I might not [retweet the bots and spam].
I don’t like them, Sam-I-Am.
We give newspapers a free move by calling them “the tabloid press”, as if the issue is the format. It’s not. The downside is the possession. We ought to name them what they’re. “The billionaire press”. — @GeorgeMonbiot
“We have been combating the system … we have to be combating on the stage of pondering that created the system. Homo economicus is pseudoscience. It isn’t scientifically legitimate. They had no proof, no empirical work … What is the financial system? I might argue that it doesn’t exist within the bodily world. It is a product of our creativeness. It is made out of concepts. It does impact the bodily world. But the imagined order that we now have is just not succeeding.” —@EricBeinhocker by way of @sfiscience
“This upends the traditional narrative about the obedience experiments as a demonstration of our slavish obedience to the orders of authorities and as an explanation for events such as the Holocaust. Our results shift the focus to the issue of defiance of authority, and empathy and altruism as the dominant reactions of subjects who volunteered for this research.” …
“The key findings of our study, that obedience to authority is not as unreasoning and automatic as Milgram would have us believe, but was based on commonsense judgements by subjects who were variously convinced and unconvinced by the experimental scenario and responded accordingly, should prompt textbook writers to significantly revise their presentations of the research,” Perry stated.