CNN Trys To Make The NSA Surveillance Scandal Seem Not That Bad

Buzzwords

George Orwell, Politics and the English Language:

In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning(2). Words like romantic, plastic, values, human, dead, sentimental, natural, vitality, as used in art criticism, are strictly meaningless, in the sense that they not only do not point to any discoverable object, but are hardly ever expected to do so by the reader. When one critic writes, ‘The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality’, while another writes, ‘The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness’, the reader accepts this as a simple difference opinion. If words like black and white were involved, instead of the jargon words dead and living, he would see at once that language was being used in an improper way. Many political words are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’. The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. Statements like Marshal Petain was a true patriot, The Soviet press is the freest in the world, The Catholic Church is opposed to persecution, are almost always made with intent to deceive. Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: class, totalitarian, science, progressive, reactionary, bourgeois, equality.

Buzzwords can be used in order to hide intent. Politicians are notorious for this, and as a result they compose long winded empty speeches. Steven Pinker does a great job at explaining this:

Empty rhetoric also exists in the form of buzzwords. "Clinically-tested", "vitality", "angus beef", "natural", "max", etc are all hollow and empty terms.

This concept reaches farther than just the words that we think of as buzzwords. For example, since most products are exactly the same, they can all legally be referred to as being the best without justification. If you want to go ahead and state that your product is better however, you need to have a reason for saying so. When Papa John's claimed that their "fresher" ingredients made for a "better" pizza than Pizza Hut pizza, Pizza Hut sued them in federal court and won.

Another buzzword that gets thrown around is natural. A concept we associate with healthy foods. Arsenic, mercury, and radium are all one-hundred percent natural. I don't know what makes Wendy's fries any more real, or natural than the ones they had before. Sea salt doesn't change the fact that there is still salt on my fried potato. Although we may think otherwise; natural and healthy are not synonymous. Wendy's fries are still bad for you, even if they still are delicious.

Meersalz - Sea salt, I can't even escape
this bullshit in Germany!

Advertisers are always using silly little fallacies to get at you. The assurance of a clinically-tested trial for a product usually means the research was financed and published by the company itself. Going on to use these results to promote the product, or by saying something like "nine out of ten doctors agree...", or "experts say..." is a fallacious appeal to authority.

Maybe you have read something like this in a newspaper article: "Could help keep you healthy" Could -in this context means may. So it might not work. Help - Wont necessarily work on it's own. Keep - will only maintain a helthy heart, so you already need to be healthy in the first place. Sounds like a sack of bullshit to me, you would be better off exercising with the time it would take to read that article.

The Emotion of Thought

Today's post has been supplemented with an update post! Simply scroll down, or click here to see it.

This post was supposed to start out with a quote from Buddha, but unfortunately I could not find the primary source for the quote. Nevertheless, here it is:

“All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think, we become.”
Guatama Buddha (probably)

This quote is spot on, whether the Buddha said it or not. I remember one of my professors asking "if our thoughts are just brain chemistry, then shouldn't we be able to alter our brain chemistry with our thoughts"? Anybody who has been depressed knows how depression can turn into a reciprocal loop which feeds on itself. On the other hand thinking happy thoughts, or smiling really does make you feel better.

What we think is proportionate to how we feel. One of the first things you learn in rhetoric class are the logical fallacies of argument. If one doesn't know any better, they could trap themselves in one of these. For example, have you every asked, or told yourself something along the lines of: "Why am I so fat?", "I'm so stupid." "How come everybody thinks I'm a jerk?" ? These are all loaded questions (or statements). They are a logical fallacy Fox News often uses, here are some examples:

Understanding and knowing these fallacies is the first step you can take to protect yourself from predatory propaganda, or more importantly, from yourself!

As humans, we are victims to more than just false logic, we are also victims to our emotions. Sometimes people will decide on a whim that they are going to do something all of a sudden like quit smoking, or lose a bunch of weight. Most of the time, they are not successful. In fact I had a friend who upon announcing that he was going to quit smoking, ended up smoking more then ever. Why? The need to avoid pain is biological. It is a survival mechanism that has been programed deep into our ancient brains. Those of us who could not feel pain were genetically pruned because they couldn't tell when they needed to get away from whatever was affecting them adversely.

For this reason, pain is stronger than pleasure. If we tell ourselves things that are going to hurt, things like "I'm too fat", then we're begging the question, convincing ourselves of a logical fallacy. If we want to change this, then we have to change the experiences we link pain and pleasure with. By associated more pleasure than pain with something, it is easier to accomplish that thing. The classes I do well in, I do well in because I enjoy those courses. When I have a class I don't find interest in or find boring, I focus on why I am taking that class, and how the good grade at the end of the semester will feel to me, and what those grade will do for me later on.

We can control the biochemistry of our brains.

When we think of experiences, the thought of the experience affects us whether it really happened or not. Think of a time a good friend or family member went behind your back. Or when you thought somebody was doing something adverse to you, and then that wasn't the case. How did you feel after being wrong? What state of mind does that put you in? Alternatively, when you think of things that are going really well for you right now, or what are you proud of? How does that make you feel?

Thinking is reality. Our brains do not know the difference between what we lucidly imagine, and what's reality. Neurons start firing when we think of something, and along with all that brain potential comes the emotions tied with those memories. It is what makes us human. Buddhists really are not far off when they try to end suffering through meditation.

Political Rheoric

Steven Pinker is the man.

 

THE MAN

On top of being the man, he is also a professor of psychology at Harvard College, and a linguist. He has also been on The Colbert Report. Multiple times. I was going to hold off writing about him but I recently read an article Douglas Adams (author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy) wrote over ten years ago entitled How to Stop Worrying and Learn to Love The Internet. In the article, where he writes concerning people who thought the Internet was just a fad, he mentions Steven Pinker. Today it might be a bore to read because it is redundant about how the Internet has turned out.

"Another problem with the net is that it’s still ‘technology’, and ‘technology’, as the computer scientist Bran Ferren memorably defined it, is ‘stuff that doesn’t work yet.’ We no longer think of chairs as technology, we just think of them as chairs. But there was a time when we hadn’t worked out how many legs chairs should have, how tall they should be, and they would often ‘crash’ when we tried to use them. Before long, computers will be as trivial and plentiful as chairs (and a couple of decades or so after that, as sheets of paper or grains of sand) and we will cease to be aware of the things. In fact I’m sure we will look back on this last decade and wonder how we could ever have mistaken what we were doing with them for ‘productivity.’

But the biggest problem is that we are still the first generation of users, and for all that we may have invented the net, we still don’t really get it. In ‘The Language Instinct’, Stephen Pinker explains the generational difference between pidgin and creole languages. A pidgin language is what you get when you put together a bunch of people – typically slaves – who have already grown up with their own language but don’t know each others’. They manage to cobble together a rough and ready lingo made up of bits of each. It lets them get on with things, but has almost no grammatical structure at all.

However, the first generation of children born to the community takes these fractured lumps of language and transforms them into something new, with a rich and organic grammar and vocabulary, which is what we call a Creole. Grammar is just a natural function of children’s brains, and they apply it to whatever they find."

Douglas Adams Playing With Pink Floyd on His 42nd Birthday.

Why I'm writing about Dr. Pinker today is because I want to post one of my favorite videos of him. It is about how politicians use empty rhetoric in order to get their messages across because they do not want to tick anyone off. At the same time we the voters push the candidates into a corner because we don't want them to support anything we are against. Check out the video:

I for one blame the two party system. If you're at all interested in psycholinguistics, reading any book by Steven Pinker is a must, and used copies go for a few bucks.

(revised 11/25/2012)