Did you notice how in movies, people never wear seat belts? That’s probably a large part of why people refuse to wear seat belts (just like actors smoking in movies may contribute to people smoking in real life).
Archive for June, 2010
Seat Belts
Tuesday, June 8th, 2010The feeling of forgetting
Tuesday, June 8th, 2010It’s much worse to discover something and then forget it (or achieve something and then lose it), than to never have known it in the first place. I dislike the feeling I get when I’m aware I have forgotten. Perhaps this is why I strive to write things down — the fear of having forgotten is just too much to bear.
Of course, if we stop relying on our memory, it gets worse, but that’s a simpler problem to solve.
This Flight is Very Full
Tuesday, June 8th, 2010This is one of my pet peeves. What, exactly, is the difference between a full flight and a very full flight? Perhaps the latter is filled with fat passengers?
Surprising Origins of Things (part III)
Monday, June 7th, 2010Many people who know what they are talking about claim that humans’ abandonment of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle — the invention of agriculture — is one of the most meaningful events in the history of mankind. It is that invention that led to the rise of civilization and thus all the good things we know of — mathematics, medicine, poetry, computers, space travel, microwave ovens, Twinkies, and so on.
This is a fascinating topic and one post will not do it justice. For one, I find it interesting that what we now see as examples of mankind’s intellectual superiority and conceptual ability is simply a by-product of necessity, all stemming from agriculture. For example, agriculture increased the importance of land — suddenly the concept of ownership developed. Ownership necessitated the need to keep track of what belongs to whom, which led to accounting which led to writing which in turn led to higher, more abstract thought (and, yes, also poetry). But agriculture increased the importance of schedules which led to the idea of a calendar, which led to astronomy and then to mathematics. What if we hadn’t adopted agriculture? Would we still have mathematicians and poets? Would some other need necessitate the development of these abstract disciplines? I think so — it seems to me that fields such as mathematics lie on top of the pyramid of abstraction, and as mankind solves its problems — any problems — and becomes more efficient at whatever it does, it travels up that pyramid, ultimately arriving at those high abstractions.
What is more interesting than asking about the consequences of agriculture is questioning it in the first place — there are dissenting voices — that agriculture was, in fact, mankind’s greatest mistake. There is some compelling archaeological evidence, such as the fact that we’re just now beginning to match our pre-agricultural ancestors’ average height and disease rate, plus it’s not particularly clear to me what short-term benefit an agricultural life that demands much more of humans has — just like today you’d think I’m crazy if I tried to convince you to become a hunter-gatherer, it wouldn’t have made much sense to the humans eight thousand years ago to do the opposite.
Whether or not you subscribe to the dissenting view or the prevalent one, I think this is an extreme example of what I would call a local view of history, a phenomenon related to a kind of confirmation bias we have about events that have happened recently. In other words, we may be blind to a fact that what we’re experiencing is not what it appears to be because we haven’t stepped back enough and considered a broad enough historical perspective. Often, what appears as fundamental properties of our society are just arbitrary results of a chain of events that seem irrelevant and relatively insignificant.
For example, a lot of Americans consider eating food very pleasurable, but — arguably — prior to Julia Child’s efforts, food had a much more utilitarian function in the American society. Similarly, we value financial success but that has not always been the case, as the pursuit of material comfort has its roots in Calvinism.
Taking this notion to the extreme, perhaps agriculture — and with it the notion of progress — is also arbitrary; zooming out enough (more than eight thousand years to the times of our hunter-gatherer ancestors) displays an entirely different flavor of society that may not necessarily be inferior to ours. What, therefore, is progress, and is it a good thing?
On a total tangent, the topic of agriculture as an unlikely villain has been raised in a freakish display of coincidence in three very distinct sources I happen to be a subscriber of — PRI’s To The Best of Our Knowledge, BBC World News, and a Stuff You Should Know podcast. It happens every so often and I am beginning to form a theory that it’s a phenomenon rather than just coincidence — similar to how studios sometimes come up with near-identical movies within few months of one another.
The latter source remarks that it is not the desire for efficiency that caused us to adopt agriculture, but the desire to brew alcohol. Beer, it is quite likely, may have led to human civilization.
Rational Thinking versus Unemotional Thinking
Sunday, June 6th, 2010People often confuse rational thinking with unemotional thinking. They say the former thinking it implies the latter.
I am a big proponent of rational thinking. I think it allows us to solve problems more effectively and more efficiently. It’s rather formulaic and it’s easy to make sure you’re doing it right. I think everyone should think rationally, especially when they are dealing with problems they want to solve.
What is not realistic is assuming that we can solve these problems without emotion. Emotionality is in the human nature, and it’s a huge driver for a lot of what we do. It factors into our happiness. If we don’t take emotions into account, we will not be satisfied with the outcomes.
So how do we reconcile the two? The two are not in conflict with one another. Rational thinking involves understanding all the factors that comprise a problem, the pros and the cons of all options, and a decision that is a calculated trade-off of the options. Emotions can be understood and taken into account, just like all other factors. It’s possible to be both rational and consider one’s emotions; in fact, a good rational process necessarily includes emotions and their impact (it’s simply that the rational process itself can’t be impacted by emotions).
A good example of a rational process that includes (in an instrumental way) emotion was the process I went through to decide how to get stuff done by going in decreasing order of anxiety generation. Anxiety is an emotional response but I can’t ignore it because at the end of the day, my feelings define me. Rejecting them would be tantamount to lying to oneself.
The Hairball of Air Travel
Sunday, June 6th, 2010Why is air travel significantly more complicated than alternative forms of transportation? This is true not just for the actual duration of travel (I don’t think I have to say how uncomfortable airplanes are relative to, say, cars and trains), but the entire system, from booking to departing.
Airlines overbook their flights, which means that it’s possible that you could pay for a flight but not be able to fly.
Booking has always been difficult. In the past, travel agents would make money helping you find the right schedule amidst all the constraints. I remember when you could get a better deal on tickets if you got this special student card, but it all smelled like some kind of scheme since nobody at the airport verified that I actually had the card.
Now, web startups have taken up that role and booking is not as hard as it used to be but it still took me several hours to find a good way to fly form New York to London, stay there for a day, then fly home, then fly with my family to Italy, finally to fly my family back home, and fly myself back to London, and New York.
There are all sorts of booking codes, miles, elite points, brownie points, statuses, colors and precious metals associated with flying, unlike for other forms of transportation. Like, when you can redeem miles but if you only have gold status you will have to use up 60% more miles to fly during blackout dates. Blackout dates? Huh??
If you miss your train, you can still use the ticket later. The same is not true for flights.
There are all sorts of limitations regarding changing your flights or canceling them.
Airlines have all these funny luggage restrictions.
I’m violating the airline rules by writing this right now because apparently it’s unsafe to have electronics turned on when the plane is about to land (why, exactly, is that? Will my laptop cause interference with the plane’s electronics? Really? If that’s an actual risk then I don’t want to by flying!)
The food has become so bad, and so scarce — a snack for a seven hour flight?!
There are a couple of explanations. Either air travel is fundamentally a different kind of beast, a highly constrained problem, which requires it to be governed by highly complex rules. Or, air travel is the form of transportation that has seen the most corporate development (in the pursuit of profit) and the others like rail travel simply haven’t caught up yet. Or, it’s a relatively immature form of transportation and everyone’s running like chickens with their heads cut off.
It’s probably a little bit of each of these. The worst thing is that we all seem to have become numb to all this.




elevenseconds.com
blog.elevenseconds is powered by