As social animals we are heavily influenced by how the people around us behave, and the quality of our own internal decision making varies widely depending on the environment we currently are in. Try to write a haiku poem while standing in an elevator with 15 opera singers screaming 15 different operas, in 15 different languages, in falsetto, directly at you vs. That said, the more homogeneous a group of people are in their thinking, the narrower the range of ideas that the group will openly consider.
Some teams of people look to focus groups, consultancies, and research methods to bring in outside ideas, but this rarely improves the quality of thinking in the group itself. Those outside ideas, however bold or original, are at the mercy of the diversity of thought within the group itself.
Focus groups or other outside sources of information can not give a team, or its leaders, a soul. A bland homogeneous team of people has no real opinions, because it consists of people with same backgrounds, outlooks, and experiences who will only feel comfortable discussing the safe ideas that fit into those constraints.
If you want your smart people to be as smart as possible, seek a diversity of ideas. Find people with different experiences, opinions, backgrounds, weights, heights, races, facial hair styles, colors, past-times, favorite items of clothing, philosophies, and beliefs. Unify them around the results you want, not the means or approaches they are expected to use. On your own, avoid homogenous books, films, music, food, sex, media and people.
Be in the moment and be open to it. Until recently in human history, life was much less predictable and we were forced to encounter things not always of our own choosing. We are capable of more interesting and creative lives than our modern cultures often provide for us. If you go out of your way to find diverse experiences it will become impossible for you to miss ideas simply because your homogenous outlook filtered them out.
At any moment on any project there are an infinite number of levels of problem solving. Part of being a truly smart person is to know which level is the right one at a given time. But as ridiculous as this scenario sounds, it happens all the time. Some call this difference in skill wisdom, in that the wise know what to be thinking about, where as the merely intelligent only know how to think. The de-emphasis of wisdom is an east vs.
Other examples include people that always worry about money despite how much they have, people who struggle with relationships but invest their energy only in improving their appearance instead of in therapy or other emotional exploration , or anyone that wants to solve problem X but only ever seems to do things that solve problem Y.
The primary point is that no amount of intelligence can help an individual who is diligently working at the wrong level of the problem. The survival of living creatures, for most of the history of our planet, has been a short term game. Only if you can out-run your predators, and catch your prey, do you have the luxury of worrying about tomorrow. It follows then that we tend to be better at worrying about and solving short term issues than long term issues.
Once distracted, we rarely return to the long term issues we were drawn away from. A common justification for abuse of short term thinking is the fake perspective defense. People say similar things all the time in defense of the free market economy, democracy, and mating strategies. But if you were in that broken down Winnebago up to your ankles in gasoline from a leaking tank, smoking a cigarette in each hand, you could say the same thing.
You might just need a few more data points for the law of averages to catch up, and put a permanent end to your short term thinking. How many data points you need to feel comfortable continuing a behavior is entirely a matter of personal philosophy.
The wise and skeptical know that even an infinite number of data points in the past may only have limited bearing on the future. Our data from the past, no matter how big a pile of data it is, may very well be entirely irrelevant. Some find this lack of predictive ability of the future quite frustrating, while others see it as the primary reason to stick around for a few more years.
Anyway, my point is not that Winnebagos or free market economies are bad. Always remember that humans, given our evolution, are very bad at seeing the cumulative effects of behavior, and underestimate how things like compound interest or that one cigarette a day, can in the long term, have surprisingly large impacts despite clearly low short term effects.
I spent my freshman year at a small college in NJ called Drew University. I had a fun time, ingested many tasty alcoholic beverages, and went to lots of great parties the result of which of course was that I basically failed out and had to move back to Queens with my parents.
You see, the truth is that this essay is really a public service announcement paid for by my parents — I was a smart person that did some stupid things. But the reason I mention all this is because I learned a great bit of philosophy from many hours of playing pool in the college student center. The lesson is this: I chose speed and power over control, and I usually lost.
So like pool, when it comes to defusing smart people who are defending bad ideas, you have to find ways to slow things down. The reason for this is simple. Smart people, or at least those whose brains have good first gears, use their speed in thought to overpower others. So your best defense starts by breaking an argument down into pieces. For me to follow I need to break this down into pieces. First, nothing is obvious. If it were obvious there would be no need to say so.
What are the assumptions the other guy is glossing over that are worth spending time on? There may be 3 or 4 different valid assumptions that need to be discussed one at a time before any kind of decision can be considered. Take each one in turn, and lay out the basic questions: What alternatives to solving it are there?
What are the tradeoffs in each alternative? By breaking it down and asking questions you expose more thinking to light, make it possible for others to ask questions, and make it more difficult for anyone to defend a bad idea. No one can ever take away your right to think things over, especially if the decision at hand is important.
If your mind works best in 3rd or 4th gear, find ways to give yourself the time needed to get there. Ask if the decision is an important one. If they say yes, then you should be completely justified in asking for more time to think it over and ask questions.
Some situations require outside help. Instead of taking a person on directly, get a third party that you both respect, and continue the discussion in their presence. This can be a superior, or simply someone smart enough that the other person might possibly concede points to them. It follows that if your team manager is wise and reasonable, smart people who might ordinarily defend bad ideas will have a hard time doing so.
But sadly if your team manager is neither wise nor reasonable, smart, arrogant people may convince others to follow their misguided ways more often than not. Given the wondrous multitude of ways the universe has granted humans to be smart and dumb at the same time, there are many more reasons why smart people behave in stupid ways. I think it is relatively simple why smart people defend bad ideas. I read two books fairly recently. Neither of these books made much sence alone; however together they led to the following conclusion:.
We are all brainwashed or have brainwashed ourselves and that is particularily true if one has been brainwashed into a profession. So the first question we must answer is: How brainwashed am I? What and whose bullshit do I believe? Your comments are very interesting but I find your article a bit to long for me to read it all I would like to comment on myself.
I am not smart but I love to be an egghead. I believe in learning and in all the intellectual ideas of the world as history, geography, math, astronomy and especially phillosophy. I suffered thru school not knowing I had a learning disabillity.
I have always tried to tackle the toughest branches of learning especially philosophy. I was thrown out of grammar schoo for being a bad kid and also highschool. I received a Ged diploma and went from there to a lot of reading. Most of which I do not understand but I have the need to convince people I am smart. On the contrary I very easlly admit I am wrong but I find others I talk to unable to do so. I have the bad habit of picking odd unusual things to tell peope.
I guess I show people I am smart. For example I might say to someone that american indians never saw a horse until the europians brought them or that syphillis was given to europeans by the native american indians.
These comments inevitally cause arguements. I am not very nice when I have discussions with people and it leads to furious argumentation.
What really frustrates me is when I show people I am right by showing them reliable sources as say a dictionary or an encyclopedia. So I think I am different in that I am not smart but just like to pretend I am. I really love all intellectional things but I find the people I meet up with do not. Any mispellings or grammatical are do to my poor education.
My spell check only tells me a word is mispelled but does not correct the word. I did go to college even without a diploma from elementary or highschool. My major was philosophy. Of course I never made a nickel from it but I loved it and I am proud that I accompished this.
I will go back and read your article in full. Allan, you are smarter than you think. Next step, keep reading and expanding your knowledge, and focus on reducing your need to defend arguments.
People who know how to listen and ask questions are truly some of the smartest and best at making decisions. Just be patient with yourself, and know that a lot of people myself included have felt the same way you describe at times. How did all the professionals schooled in business and finance not see these coming.
Your thinking is beyond confused, and your writing skills are even worse. Your understanding of science and how it works is as bad as your syntax. What assumptions and what, pray tell, makes you think the big bang theory is rubbish? Your ideas are very poorly formed. It took almost entire life for me to gain power of independent thinking in true sense. Even though I hate conventional scientific theories nowadays, I love science and technologies.
The problem is to have balanced idea or opinion about a fact one must have different explanations. The great tragic of collective stupidity in human society is educational system is designed to dumb down humans. If I give you serious scientific papers and books written by scientists and engineers, will you personally spend your spare time and energy to study alternative theory?
For example all text books and journals that public can access on the net or buy in book stores only represent theories and information for mainstream science. Black Holes do exist. As an average Joe like me believe in as truth because the scientists say so.
Matter can not travel faster than the speed of light. For instance Big Bang theory assumes our universe is close system that has start and end. How they know our universe is close or open system? To ask this question one has to understand two fundamental approaches for attacking physical problem in sciences: Looking at an engine as close system which is completely isolated from external environment probably reasonable.
The engine burns fuel and convert part of its energy into mechanical force. Then applying same principal to unimaginably big entity, which is our universe, is simply stupid or intellectual masturbation of bad scientists. Our solar system travels extremely fast in space. Changing conditions of space also affect every thing in solar system. Then there is our galaxy, galaxy cluster, super galaxy cluster, on and on.
All laws in physics built upon basic assumptions of its inventors. In mathematics it calls as Axiom. Public education do not offer any space to discuss possible or inherited flaws of these Axioms. Why do we have to depend on fossil fuels? It only exists inside static matter. To extract energy matter — fossil fuel, oil or Uranium or whatever — has to be destroyed. To exercise free will and make own decision one needs to have choices.
In science different theories do exist. Do you know who Nicola Tesla was? Nicola Tesla demonstrated how to extract energy in atmosphere even space, which gave a clue alternative perspective how our universe exists. Your entire post smacks of typical anti-intellectual conspiracy nonsense. As I said, you do not seem to really understand how science works, and your words seem to confirm this.
This is such nonsensical thinking. Science is imperfect but it is the best we have, and it is self-correcting because of its peer-reviewed nature. I wholeheartedly reject your conspiracy position as it lacks any basis in reality. Next, what you appear to be doing is to confuse issues. Simply because someone cannot tell you why matter cannot accelerate past the speed of light does not mean that it is less true.
If so then you are committing the fallacy of equivocation. I do not doubt that there have been examples of certain scientific theories being initially rejected but proved later. Indeed, vindication for these scientists but it proves that science works. Theories and information are altered as new information arises. Most alternative theories are just that—alternative.
I caution you to be careful as your thinking is bordering on conspiratorial and paranoid…. He sounds like one of those insulters from the article. Practice this sincerely and maybe it might improve out prospective. I think however that logic never changes.
Our measurements of things become more accurate over a period of years due to improving devices however logic of sentences never change. At least I think so. My sentences may not live up to the above but I try. When a new scientific law comes it of course comes from observation and previous know theories but just what makes them accepted as true. How many opinions or even observations do we need to determine a scientific rule?
A further explanation might go something like this. If we observed a volkswagon car smashed up on every corner we might conclude that they were a poor product but just how many smashed up cars would we need to convince us that the volkswagons were no good One, ten , How many scientific observations do we need to present it as an eternal truth?
Ok I know there are many thousand topics to be discussed so lets get on with it Allan. I follow what is said here, but my friend tries to use rather large words and speak over me. How do i get out of this situation without creating a fight? Scott Berkun gently points out in everyday language some of the most common logical errors. Many here have attacked him for his information on how, not why, they do this. I do not see this essay as anti-intellectual , but rather that the intellect needs to be combined with wisdom knowledge, experience, understanding, common sense, and insight.
I think that the reference to Issac Newton was only to show that smart people, do in fact, defend bad ideas. The only reference to politics was the economy. I can not let this go without comment. Steve , theories are not proven. That does not mean that ALL science is theory and therefore , without proof. There is no alternative theory for proven science. Like you, I cannot let your inane commentary go without.
I think perhaps you need to grasp what has been said: It is rather ironic that you have entered into this conversation without fully grasping what has been said. Your last statement is entirely meaningless. It is clear to me that you, like most Americans, have little to no understanding of science or the scientific method.
Reread the entire post and then get back to us. Never responsible for being wrong. Nothing but fraud coming out of the intellecutals, scientists, university researchers. Someone else posted separating intelligence and wisdom. Unfortunately the populace has this predudice against themselves as individuals and they always assume the high IQ and the PhD is smarter than they are, so they keep deferring to these idiots.
The reality is the auto mechanic who sees the world knows knows infiintely more than these isolated intellectuals. The infiltration of this secular humanism everywhere has put us in a precarious dystopia. Completely fogged and spreading the fog to others as you go. I was kind of responding to Steve Thomas with the rest of my comment.
My point is that Steve and others are trying to turn this essay a personally held view of the author into an argument or debate. Everyone is trying to be right by abandoning the original point and confounding the discussion with points of contention.
This essay is about why people, who you know are intelligent, support bad by any definition ideas, often against their own best interest. Steve, i posted a correction to my first post. I am not trying to pick a fight and i have read all of the posts here and i know what a theory is.
Did that make sense? Also it bothers me that we use tradition to promote and accept , unacceptable positions. All that nonsense about alternate theories was from Hughe and i was telling him that there is no alternative to the proven truth.
I appreciate that much of what you wrote was directed toward Hughe. Where these ordinary teens find their acquaintances is in high school. It is where friends are made and hold a substantial role in the students' lives. High school students choose their friends for various reasons, and some of their choices may re. A friendship that is healthy should contain respect, where both people respect each other in a somewhat equal fashion.
The two should also care about the fate of the other, and may also care about the emotional and physical wellbeing of the other. A friendship may also include acts, be they of kindness. Does Jealousy Destroy Friendships? Will someone lose their friend because they wish they had something that their friend had? Well, jealousy is a form of insecurity and can definitely destroy friendships. When two people are jealous of each other they become competitive with each other.
Jealousy can also make someone feel insecure. If someone is jealous of their friend they might start to. The person who keeps me sane when my family is driving me crazy, or the person who will stay up with me all night to support me when I have a last minute paper due in a class; I don't know where I would be without that support.
I found this support in my best friend, my sister from another father, Regina. Regina is an eccentric, overbearing, lo. Friendships developed ultimately and required to be maintained with care. Men can't live without friend and real friendship could be a great support for one's life. Friendship is simply a divine relationship based on feelings and understanding.
It's not ordinary social or official affair between people but a divine feelings and. Moreover, nowadays, we can even profess to have many friends. The social networking tools that are available to us made it easier for us to keep in touch and connect to our friends as well as to get to know many new friends around the world without even the need to meet them face to face in real life.
A good friend will at most times know you better than yourself.
The goal of writing a persuasive essay is to persuade or convince the reader to believe something. Writers do this through the use of logical arguments and emotional appeals. While there is no one correct way to write these essays, this page will show you some good practices to consider when learning how to write a persuasive essay.. Here is a brief overview of the contents on this page.
This page is a collection of over persuasive speech topic ideas for college students. Use this list as a last resort: you are much more likely to be successful when you choose a topic that genuinely interests you, rather than merely picking one from a list.
Expert Reviewed. How to Write a Persuasive Essay. Five Parts: Writing Persuasively Laying the Groundwork Drafting Your Essay Polishing Your Essay Sample Persuasive Essays Community Q&A A persuasive essay is an essay used to convince a reader about . Try Our Friends At: The Essay Store. Free English School Essays. We have lots of essays in our essay database, so please check back here frequently to see the newest additions.
Persuasive essays are a bit like argument essays, but they tend to be a little kinder and kekaromese.mlnt essays require you to discuss and to attack an alternate view, while persuasive essays are attempts to convince the reader that you have a believable argument. Imaginative recount. Applies factual knowledge to an imaginary role in order to interpret and recount events e.g. A Day in the Life of a German soldier, How I manned the first mission to the moon.