This paper investigates three areas of cognitive science: cognitive biases, memory, and the self. It argues that these three areas are interconnected and pose problems for cooperation and decision-making due to tendencies to overestimate ourselves, remember inaccurately, and fall victim to cognitive biases. However, the paper notes that awareness of these issues and techniques like interactive games can help address them by making people more humble, cooperative, and aware of emotional influences. Overall, the paper aims to show that cognitive science can help solve problems posed by limitations in how people process information.
A detailed presentation on a ATTITUDE- a concept of applied psychology. ABC model, nature and components, centrality and valence are briefly described. For more info- @sajalmittal2021@gmail.com
A detailed presentation on a ATTITUDE- a concept of applied psychology. ABC model, nature and components, centrality and valence are briefly described. For more info- @sajalmittal2021@gmail.com
Social learning theories - Personalities theoriesManu Melwin Joy
social learning theory was proposed by Neal E. Miller and John Dollard in 1941. The proposition of social learning was expanded upon and theorized by Canadian psychologist Albert Bandura from 1962 until the present. . Bandura provided his concept of self-efficacy in 1977, while he refuted the traditional learning theory for understanding learning.
Personality: Meaning –Determinants of Personality: Types Theory, Trait Theory and Developmental Theory – Integrated Personality – Assessment of Personality: Projective, Non-Projective techniques and Dream Analysis.
Social learning theories - Personalities theoriesManu Melwin Joy
social learning theory was proposed by Neal E. Miller and John Dollard in 1941. The proposition of social learning was expanded upon and theorized by Canadian psychologist Albert Bandura from 1962 until the present. . Bandura provided his concept of self-efficacy in 1977, while he refuted the traditional learning theory for understanding learning.
Personality: Meaning –Determinants of Personality: Types Theory, Trait Theory and Developmental Theory – Integrated Personality – Assessment of Personality: Projective, Non-Projective techniques and Dream Analysis.
CALL PAPER OF PHILOSOPHY:Paper of philosophy botwana international universityDuncanhensisya
Being a Lecturer, I published this paper regarding Philosophy so that Teachers can learn regarding the concepts of Philosophy. All teachers are welcome to view the paper which is very educative in our today's life.
How Worker Well-Being Increases Your Bottom Line: November 2013 VolunteerMatc...VolunteerMatch
“Big Data” is a phrase we hear often in business these days, and not just in the context of client and customer-related operations. Companies that are putting data to use in innovative ways are finding it can have surprising benefits to the business’s bottom line. – For example, tools like Quantified Self, FitBit or Jawbone can track things like your employees’ sleep patterns, mood and emotions. Soon you'll be able to tell in real-time how your employees are doing and where they're happiest in their jobs.
For the November 2013 Best Practice Network webinar, VolunteerMatch is joined by John C. Havens, Founder of the H(app)athon Project and author of “Hacking Happiness - Why Your Personal Data Counts and How Tracking it Can Change the World,” and Arthur Woods, co-founder of Imperative, the leading consulting agency helping companies measure and maximize employee purpose and well-being. John and Arthur will describe the bottom-line benefits of tracking your employee well-being, and how to bring these merry methodologies to your companies. You’ll walk away with ideas for how to use existing tools and technologies to bring greater well-being to your workforce, and greater value to your customers and stakeholders overall.
Speakers:
John Havens
Founder, The H(app)athon Project
Arthur Woods
Co-Founder, Imperative
Follow the conversation on Twitter @VM_Solutions, #VMbpn
Ethics Grand Rounds: Cross-Cultural Care in a Culture of PovertyAndi Chatburn, DO, MA
Cultural Competence includes understanding and having empathy for the unique circumstances experienced in poverty. Presented in Providence Stevens County October 16 2015
Social Intelligence (SI) is the ability to successfully build relationships and navigate social environments.
Our society puts a huge emphasis on book smarts and IQ, but our relationships effect a much bigger part of our lives.
Social smarts are far more important than your book smarts.
Building strong social relationships is worth the effort:
Strong relationships improve our immune system and help combat disease.
Loneliness and weak relationships are one of the major sources of stress, health problems and depression.
Our relationships affect every area of our lives–from colleagues to spouses to friends to kids.
1. Visual illusions (also called optical illusions) show that the br.pdfmohammedfootwear
1. Visual illusions (also called optical illusions) show that the brain can be readily fooled. (1
page)
a. What insights do visual illusions offer us regarding the workings of the brain?
b. How can these insights be extended to explain the brain’s role in decision making?
2. One of the most intriguing questions we face when studying how the brain functions in
making decisions is: What role does the unconscious brain play in decision making? (1-2 pages
total)
a. What are the strengths and limitations of the conscious brain in decision making?
b. How can the unconscious brain contribute to an individual’s decision making capability?
c. What do anecdotal accounts—such as those provided by Malcolm Gladwell in Blink—tell us
about the role of the unconscious brain in decision making?
d. What do experimental studies—such as those carried out by Wilson and Dijksterhuis—tell
us?
e. Based on the experimental studies reported in Framing Decisions, what are the merits of
making on-the-spot decisions vs. decisions after substantial deliberation (e.g, by sleeping on a
decision)?
3. Page 104 of Framing Decisions identifies four sets of questions decisions makers need to
address when making decisions of consequence in order to surface potential moral hazard
situations. Explain the rationale underlying each question. If you ask these questions when
deliberating on decisions of consequence, how can you improve the quality of your decision
making? (1-2 pages)
Solution
Answer-1
a. When you look at something, what you’re really seeing is the light that bounced off of it and
entered your eye, which converts the light into electrical impulses that your brain can turn into an
image you can use. The process that takes about a tenth of a second but your eyes receive a
constant stream of light, an incredible amount of information, so it’s really difficult for your
brain to try to focus on everything at once. It would be like trying to take a sip of water from a
firehose. So your brain takes shortcuts, simplifying what you see to help you concentrate on
what’s important, which helps compensate for your brain’s tenth-of-a-second processing lag.
This trait helped early humans survive encounters with fast predators – or at the very least avoid
running into obstacles like trees.
b. a sample of three decision errors. First, the default effectoccurs when people end up
“choosing” different options when allowed not to choose at all, i.e., when a lack of any active
selection returns the default. Impressively, countries that allow individuals to decline being a
potential organ donor have far greater donor pools than countries that allow individuals to
decline not being a potential donor (Johnson & Goldstein, 2003). Second, Dan reports that
physicians are more likely to pull a patient back from scheduled surgery when they discover that
they forgot to test the efficacy of one drug, than when they notice that they overlooked two
drugs. In the latter case, the physicians would need t.
This week we will discuss consciousness and artificial intelligenc.docxrhetttrevannion
This week we will discuss consciousness and artificial intelligence. Watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chukkEeGrLM
Now read this article:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-machines-ever-become-conscious/
Using these two sources as well as your readings for this week to support your discussion, do you think robots will ever achieve consciousness in the same sense that humans are conscious? Why or why not? Should scientists be trying to achieve the goal of consciousness in machines? What are some ethical issues one might consider when arguing for or against the achievement of conscious robots?
Classmate post 1:
Do you think robots will ever achieve consciousness in the same sense that humans are conscious? Why or why not?
I think it is hard to tell whether or not AI will ever achieve consciousness because as humans we are prone to anthropomorphizing things and we cannot truly be sure whether or not the appearance of sentience in AI is just a “clever illusion,” at least as of now. I was watching a video about how one of the Google employees testing its LaMDA AI believed it had achieved sentience, and reading the transcript of the conversation between him and the AI was incredibly eerie and the AI certainly gave the appearance of being sentient. One thing I know is that people trying to figure out whether or not an AI has achieved consciousness will teach us a lot about human consciousness itself and how to define it, as we ourselves still can’t fully understand it.
Should scientists be trying to achieve the goal of consciousness in machines? What are some ethical issues one might consider when arguing for or against the achievement of conscious robots?
I think it would be very cool to be able to one day talk to a robot that has achieved consciousness, but I have to also think about whether it would be a good thing for humanity. I think if we intend to have machines and AI work alongside us and help us, it would be best to avoid trying to recreate consciousness in them. I think it would only cause issues with them fulfilling their actual purpose if humans come to see them as too similar to themselves and as having emotions and feelings; we would naturally be prone to becoming attached to them and could be easily manipulated by an AI with ill intentions. It would also raise some serious ethical issues in my opinion, as if an AI/robot is truly sentient and capable of human emotion, should we then treat them as human? Would shutting down a sentient AI be the same thing as murder? Can a sentient robot experience emotional trauma? This is a slippery slope, but I think that it is one we will have to deal with since scientists will likely only continue to seek to achieve AI consciousness.
Classmate post 2:
Humans are continually surprised and inspired by technological advancements since they make our daily life easier. Yes, it makes life simpler and more smooth. Humans are aware that our capacity for reas.
Angie Solis
Jeremy Sullivan
English 1020-25
October 20th, 2015
Tired of Living, and Scared of Dying
The expression self-harm can be defined as a variety of things that individuals do to themselves usually in a hidden and deliberate way (Klonsky, 2007) It includes swallowing harmful substances or objects, cutting, banging, burning or scribbling one’s body, derma till mania, trichotillomania and even breaking bones. Dermatillomania can be defined as the act of interfering with wound healing. Trichotillomania is defined as the act of hair-pulling. In some cases, when individuals self-harm, they intend that they feel to die at some level. Most of the people who commit suicide must have some history of self-harm. Though, the aim is more repeatedly to discipline themselves, express their suffering or release intolerable tension or even a collection of both. Self-harm may also be characterized by homelessness and quest for freedom.
Homelessness is living without a home due to loss of a parent, poor familial relations or general physical distress. Freedom in the context of self-harm is defined as the need to be a self-leader and living in the unrestricted environment (Klonsky, 2007). Self-harm is a common issue, and a lot of people are a strain to solve it. In life, one may feel or already felt the necessity do self-harm, or maybe they have friends, sister, son, daughter or brother who are victims of self-harming. This paper brings a clear understanding of self-harm, reasons for its occurrence, how to solve it victims may recover from the same (Klonsky, 2007). Self-harm is a matter that has been neglected and has not received the seriousness it deserve up to date. Some people treat it as taboo in the community. But this issue requires more seriousness more than people perceive.
By intentionally harming their bodies, people normally argue that they can influence the state of mind to handle better the ‘other’ trouble or pain they feel. People use fleshly pain as a method of diverting themselves from painful emotional feeling. For others, particularly those who are emotionally disfigured, it can be a method to ‘wake up’ in circumstances where they feel so numb that they do not have a sense of feeling. Self-harm is a technique of handling intense emotional pain (Kerr and Turner, 2010). The ignorance of self-harm is unaware of the huge effect on the daily life of an individual. They will always strive to hide what they do include the bruises and scars. However, the emotional secrecy and guilt is indeed very difficult to bear. Self-harm is serious to the extent that it can disturb everything including clothes they put on, the types of activities and sports they participate, sexual and physical relationships. Eventually, because people who do self-harm are aware of the humiliation that comes with it, it may distress their relationships with family and friends and even the inner sense of self-worth. People do self-harming in a bid to solve their feelings .
1. Livy1
TylerLivy
Short Philosophy Paper
This paper’s purpose is to investigate three specific areas of cognitive science;
cognitive biases, memory, and the self. All three of these areas contain limits or
constraints upon our cognitive capacities for processing information or other such
functions. These constraints, however, are often unnoticed by the average person, as well
as the connections between them. First, I will briefly introduce each area of interest, and
how they relate to each other. Next, I will explain why I believe this trinity can be
problematic. Finally, I will endeavor to impress upon you that this issue is of worthy
concern, and that cognitive science can provide potential solutions.
First, there is the self. But there is more than one “Self”, as Daniel Khaneman
proposes in his book, Thinking Fast and Slow. He holds that human beings opperate on
two systems. The first system is much faster, almost automatic in nature. From it comes
our ability to assess the emotional content of voices, compute basic mathematics, and
perform other simple tasks. Then there is the second system. This system is comparable
to a battery; it requires energy (attention) in order to work properly. In addition, the
system can be switched off if ones attention is not on the task at hand. Those tasks
include any function which requires a step by step process, or requires more attention.
According to Daniel Khaneman, man spends far more time in the first system, and
far less time in the second. If this is true, it is no wonder that memories of human beings
are so faulty; we barely pay attention to the day-to-day events of our existence.
Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons discussed in their book The Invisible Gorilla.
2. Livy 2
Humanity remembers and pays attention to much less than it gives itself credit for. In a
notable example in their book, a woman mistakenly remembered that her father read a
book to her throughout her childhood; in reality, the book was published the year after
her father died, in 1957. In addition, our memory is effected by our emotional state, and
how our memories end.
And yet, when we scan our memories, they appear to be fully detailed, with no
clear gaps. This is due to the mind’s ability to fill in these gaps in our perception. Such
fillers serve an evolutionary role. These delusions allow us to take action with relative
certainty; if we were less certain, would we have endured as a species? There is another
possible reason. We know only ourselves, so we overinflate ourselves, while any other
people we underestimate, because we know not what they are, only that they are like us.
This is one of multiple cognitive illusions that are held by many members of the
population. There are two other cognitive illusions worth mentioning. The first is a
tendency of people to overestimate their abilities. It is in part due to this tendency that we
are unable to notice our own cognitive defects, our lapses in memory, or how little we
pay attention to the world. Another cognitive apparition is hindsight bias, which is what I
am succumbing to even as I write this paper. Hindsight bias is a tendency to perceive a
conclusion, result, or finding as obvious in hindsight. While I recognize that I was as
ignorant as any other person at one point, hindsight and an inflated estimation of my own
abilities makes it hard for me to recognize and admit it. Several others exist, and I will
explain them as we go.
The problem, as I see it, is this; in all of our potential actions with each other, we
are generally unable to realize or recognize our own faults, due to the combined effects of
3. Livy 3
these three factors. Generally, we overestimate our own worth, we think ourselves
smarter than we actually are, and we think we remember more than we actually do. These
characteristics do have their values, but our capacity to cooperate with each other seems
to be increasingly strained.
Ware gradually losing our ability to switch between the two systems of self, and
are increasingly using the first one. The first system, that of automatic, quick processing,
is being promoted due to the social construction of time constrains and the influx of
instant-answer technology. It is also in this first system that our cognitive illusions are far
more difficult to combat.
For example, I believe that there is a widespread aversion to reading in the
Philosophy classes. I have heard that students will look up summaries of the readings
rather than take the time to purview the readings themselves. While this could be
attributed to multiple factors, such as lack of emotional investment, a character trait of
laziness, or circumstances, I hold that all of these are subliminally influenced by an
inability or unwillingness to use the second system. To attribute this pattern to a character
flaw is to submit to the actor-observer bias, in which one attributes others’ actions to their
character. The gradual fusion of the two brain systems is not necessarily a bad thing, but
it makes it even harder for us to escape from our cognitive biases.
There are several reasons why solving this problem is important, for both
practical and theoretical reasons. I will go over the theoretical reasons first, and then the
practical reasons.
4. Livy 4
The first practical reason is that the problem makes social and political
cooperation with others far more difficult. It is already difficult enough to work together
with others, especially when one considers how many factors may affect it; culture,
language, personality, characteristics, and values. But add in any of the biases, and it
multiples the difficulty. Take, for example, the bipartisan political system present in the
United States. Individuals with strong opinions, and a need to prove loyalty to a particular
political party, are made victims of biased assimilation and confirmation bias. Biased
assimilation is where we reject alternative opinions, and only accept information that
confirms what we believe. Taken with confirmation bias, where we only take in
information that confirms what we believe, U.S. politicians have almost no chance of
achieving anything. Now, imagine if the entire society was as inoperable as the U.S.
political system. Practically speaking, nothing could be accomplished.
Another reason is that such over-reliance on the first system could lead people to
be even more susceptible to advertisements and those with strong opinions. This would
be due to an unjustified amount of confidence in our own decision-making skills. This
problem is made worse by the fact that our automatic systems require instant information,
which usually implies internet usage. The internet, as we can probably guess, has
advertisements. By doing this, we are simply making a vicious cycle harder to break.
Yet another practical consideration is that people would become engrossed in
their own fantasy worlds. The biases, by their very virtue, allow people to simply ignore
all information that does not pertain directly to their own experiences and beliefs As a
result, while people can still be present in the world, they can also choose to opt out of it
5. Livy 5
completely. This makes getting people to be concerned about the world or even
participate in it just that much harder.
There is one final reason to care about this problem. It has to do with memory.
You see, individuals who are engaged in this mode, in addition to being more susceptible
to biases, are even less willing to admit that their memory could be unreliable. This is
problematic because it makes us less willing to accept when others forget to do things. As
a result the general amount of tolerance for mistakes and failures goes down.
This is a pretty extensive list of reasons for why this problem needs to be
addressed. As for how? I don’t know. The issue with these biases is that some of them
work so nicely against conventional means of psychology. A recent study in October
2015 by Carey K. Morewedge and Co. called “Debiasing Decisions: Improved Decision
Making With a Single Training Intervention” found that interactive games expose and
reveal cognitive biases to the participants.
Despite the difficulty, there are several benefits for attempting to solve this
problem. The first and most obvious benefit is that we will be more aware of how human
and fallible we are. Learning all of this certainly made me far more forgiving and
humble, especially when it comes to faulty memory. Another benefit of countering this
problem is that cooperation with others becomes easier. When one recognizes that they
hold strong opinions simply because of an inflated sense of self-importance, it becomes
easier to compromise them for the sake of cooperation. One final benefit is that you are
more aware of when you are being more emotional and being effected by emotions.
6. Livy 6
In conclusion, the self, memory, and cognitive biases is an inter-connected trap
that we should be aware of. This trinity could result in a plethora of potential hurdles,
including decreased tendency to cooperate. Thankfully, there are ways to combat the
issue this trio creates.
7. Livy 7
Works Cited
Chabris, Christopher F., and Daniel J. Simons. The Invisible Gorilla: And Other
Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us. New York: Crown, 2010. Print.
Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 2011. Print.
Morewedge, C. K., H. Yoon, I. Scopelliti, C. W. Symborski, J. H. Korris, and K.
S. Kassam. "Debiasing Decisions: Improved Decision Making With a Single Training
Intervention." Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2.1 (2015): 129-
40. Sage Journals. Web. 15 Nov. 2015.