Thinking more about this I have decided human behaviors are part of
our animal camouflage (predator-prey). And body language is often
unconscious reflexes that can be discerned- even those of a sociopath
or psychopath.
On Dec 28, 12:22 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe women read signals differently. :-) It could be that motherhood/
> wifedom trains them to anticipate. I'm pretty good at spotting a
> phoney- even better in retrospect.//Maybe fear is the unlying motive
> of a lie- starting in childhood.//We learn behaviors that give us
> security in the family and groups- even negative behavior- as in
> addictive personalities seeking relationships that are familiar to
> deal with, etc.//My daughter is quite ill with a 104 temp (the flu)
> and the last two days have been pretty hectic but she is coming round
> and thankfully the grandchildren are very easy for me and have lots to
> keep them busy and entertained.
>
> On Dec 27, 5:19 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I don't agree on the body language or behavioural cues rigs - all the
> > tests done show we are about as reliable as the toss of a coin. The
> > people who are best at making us think we can read them are
> > psychopaths - three times more likely to secure parole from 'experts'.
>
> > On 27 Dec, 09:15, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes the rich have more opportunities and exposure to make more
> > > wealth.. why would you say that is Rigsy?? Why are not these
> > > opportunities and exposure created for the poor? .. they are the ones
> > > that need it. or could it be part of the perks of worshiping at the
> > > feet of the golden calf??
> > > Allan
>
> > > On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 2:49 AM, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > It may be the rich have more opportunities and exposure, Allan. Human
> > > > nature is human nature. Also, celebrity creates another kind of
> > > > challenge as the artist types gain fame and fortune- often to laugh at
> > > > their own popularity and adulation of the public and critics- Picasso
> > > > comes to mind, for instance- have a savage quote of his around here
> > > > somewhere.
>
> > > > On Dec 25, 8:04 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Oddly I think you have a better chance for good ethics among the poor
> > > >> over the rich,
> > > >> Allan
>
> > > >> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > I wonder if the researchers took into account that a truly ethical person
> > > >> > would not participate in the kind of rubbish that presents predictable
> > > >> > limited outcomes as fact. There may, indeed, be a correlation between
> > > >> > creativity and ethics, but I suspect it is more inclusive and requires
> > > >> > examination without the limits designed to define results. I keep going back
> > > >> > to the model of spiral dynamics, one that allows and understands that we all
> > > >> > move up and down and between memes during our lives given the circumstances
> > > >> > of our experience. Someone who does not have enough money for food may
> > > >> > cheat in this experiment more than someone who has never known financial
> > > >> > stress or hunger. Here is a pretty good explanation of the original Graves
> > > >> > material, although I've seen better, its the best I could find online this
> > > >> > morning.http://www.edumar.cl/documentos/SD_version_for_constellation5.pdf
>
> > > >> > On Monday, December 24, 2012 5:58:21 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote:
>
> > > >> >> A free paper with the ideas is at
> > > >> >>http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/11-064.pdf
> > > >> >> I was interested because I find professional ethics and religious
> > > >> >> morality collapse under circumstances of self-interest and become
> > > >> >> rationalisation. WE need creative solutions - but there is a dark
> > > >> >> side to creativity.
>
> > > >> >> On 24 Dec, 22:03, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> > "The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone —
> > > >> >> > Especially Ourselves" by Dan Ariely asks a seemingly simple question —
> > > >> >> > "is dishonesty largely restricted to a few bad apples, or is it a more
> > > >> >> > widespread problem?" — and goes on to reveal the surprising,
> > > >> >> > illuminating, often unsettling truths that underpin the uncomfortable
> > > >> >> > answer. Like cruelty, dishonesty turns out to be a remarkably
> > > >> >> > prevalent phenomenon better explained by circumstances and cognitive
> > > >> >> > processes than by concepts like character.
>
> > > >> >> > Work like this is challenging traditional economics - the genre is
> > > >> >> > 'behavioural economics'. My own take on this book and a lot of work
> > > >> >> > from brain science and history is that we are at a tipping point in
> > > >> >> > respect of the possibility of a human science. I'd like to see a
> > > >> >> > broader literature take up this challenge beyond current drivel on
> > > >> >> > black and white hats.
>
> > > >> >> > So what are you guys reading?
>
> > > >> > --
>
> > > >> --
> > > >> (
> > > >> )
> > > >> |_D Allan
>
> > > >> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
>
> > > >> Of course I talk to myself,
> > > >> Sometimes I need expert advice..- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > --
>
> > > --
> > > (
> > > )
> > > |_D Allan
>
> > > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
>
> > > Of course I talk to myself,
> > > Sometimes I need expert advice..- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Re: Mind's Eye Google+ Communities
Hard to say; they're certainly a force to be reckoned with.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 8:32 PM, archytas <nwterry@gmail.com> wrote:
New members would be good Chris - but could the cyber-world survive if
Gabby and her sister got together in the same space?
On 31 Dec, 00:51, Chris Jenkins <digitalprecip...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *laughing* No, not what I meant at all, but then, you knew that. ;)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 7:43 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:> > 2012/12/31 Chris Jenkins <digitalprecip...@gmail.com>
> > You mean, use the G+ community as an advertising channel? Good idea. Would
> > you want to write the promo texts? Anyone?
>
>
> >> As with Gravity, it would provide a path for additional conversations,
> >> and a path for new members to find their way here. But, if it's not
> >> something that anyone wants, don't bother. :D
>
> >> On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 7:18 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:> >>> 2012/12/30 Chris Jenkins <digitalprecip...@gmail.com>
>
> >>> Hi Chris, as I said, I reserved the name space, that's all. The
> >>> community thing is still going on here. No one seems interested in moving
> >>> and Google still allows to use the groups functionality, which is much
> >>> better suited for our purpose of discussing things. Or do we miss
> >>> something? Except you, of course. ;)
>
>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 12:46 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>> Gabs, what's the link to your community on G+?
>
>
> >>>>> Google+ Communities <http://www.google.com/+/learnmore/communities/>are out now.
>--
> >>>>> I've had a quick look around and wanted to inform you that I blocked
> >>>>> the community name "Minds Eye". I thought it might be useful if one day we
> >>>>> decide to move there - or, if we are made to move there. I doubt that
> >>>>> anyone of you would want to move there right now, everything is still very
> >>>>> chaotic over there. But before we get too exclusively bubblish we
> >>>>> might consider to keep that option in mind.
>
> >>>>> --
>
> >>>> --
>
> >>> --
>
> >> --
>
> > --
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)