| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Art10

This version was saved 15 years, 4 months ago View current version     Page history
Saved by Stella
on December 2, 2008 at 7:00:54 pm
 

A new Model of the Mind

 

this model is a real-life, very successful application of the permaculture principle of "learning from nature".

 

it asks (and answers!) profound questions about how on earth Nature could design something as (apparently) defective as the human mind.

 

Implicit in our "learning from nature" principle, is the belief that Nature does not make mistakes ... yet practically all models of the mind in existence today (echoed by all of popular culture) imply that "there is something wrong" with human nature (meaning our minds or 'spirits').

 

This model is revolutionary in that it firmly states that there isn´t anything wrong with the human mind .. we just took a very early 'wrong turn' in learning how to operate it to it´s full potential, and this early mistake was passed down the generations, with disastrous consequences (much like our culture's 'wrong turn' in stripping soil of its mulch, and pretending that it still function at its - nature-designed - optimum)

 

But each new generation is still born with all systems fully operational, we just have to re-learn to notice and use them correctly .. and at the very least help not dis-able them in our youngsters.

 

A very good summary of the theory can be found here (on an ecological agriculture site!): http://eap.mcgill.ca/Publications/EAP15.htm

 

Micheline Mason's illustrated introduction can be downloaded here >  rc3-1.pdf

and this is her personal story of what RC did to her life:

 

"I have always hated counselling, therapy, and do-gooders. As a disabled person it has made me angry when non-disabled people have implied that we are miserable because of the impairments themselves and not because of the way we are treated by the oppressive society. However, when I read ‘The Human Side of Human Beings’ by Harvey Jackins, and then met the man and saw him in action, I knew this was something different. To put it bluntly, it gave me an explanation of why people are so intelligent one minute, and so fucking barmy the next." ... continue reading on MichelineMason.com

 

 

And the full 'official' theory can be studied here:

 

RC Theory - http://www.rc.org/theory/index.html

 

and these are the individual chapters for reference and quick-linking:

 

1) About - http://www.rc.org/theory/about.html

2) Human Nature - http://www.rc.org/theory/inherent.html

3) Intelligence - http://www.rc.org/theory/intelligence.html

4) Distress/Hurts - http://www.rc.org/theory/distress.html

5) Human Irrationality - http://www.rc.org/theory/irrationality.html

6) Recovery from Distress - http://www.rc.org/theory/recovery.html

7) On Reality - http://www.rc.org/theory/recovery.html

8) Feelings - http://www.rc.org/theory/feelings.html

9) Freedom of Choice - http://www.rc.org/theory/freedom.html

10) Communication - http://www.rc.org/theory/communication.html

11) Learning - http://www.rc.org/theory/learning.html

12) Human Relationships - http://www.rc.org/theory/relationships.html

13) Leadership - http://www.rc.org/theory/leadership.html

14) Theory and Policy - http://www.rc.org/theory/theory.html

15) Organization - http://www.rc.org/theory/organization.html

16) Human Societies - http://www.rc.org/theory/societies.html

17) Oppression - http://www.rc.org/theory/oppression.html

18) Human Liberation - http://www.rc.org/theory/liberation.html

19) Social Change - http://www.rc.org/theory/change.html

 

 


 

 

A mind-change?

 

Being clear about what model of how the mind works we are operating from (our basic assumptions) is a logical first step in figuring out how to change minds, something that is clearly needed in order to change society.   

 

 

These are some other resources in which the issues of mind-change are explored (coming from different mind models than the one above - that fail to explain some of the observations they have noted):

 

 

 

Audio - Why you can´t understand 20th Century politics with an 18th Century mind

 

A researcher describes his insights after decades of studying how people think, which turns out to be quite different from how most people think they think. Important stuff which could help us communicate the message of permaculture to a world which is increasingly ready to listen. How to help people break out of old patterns of thought?

http://aud1.kpfa.org//data/20080917-Wed1300.mp3"> http://aud1.kpfa.org//data/20080917-Wed1300.mp3

 

 


 

 

Article - Why It's Hard to Change People's Minds

By Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet. Posted October 7, 2008.

A new study shows that after being exposed to information contradicting their ideas, most people still cling to their prejudices.
 
A long time ago, Mark Twain told us: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

Entwined in Twain's train of thought, is an implicit -- and important -- distinction: the difference between being uninformed and being misinformed.

 

Today, there's scholarship to back up Twain's theory that being ignorant isn't as troublesome as being certain about something that "just ain't so."

Ignorance can be educated. But what's the antidote to misinformation? Correct information?

 

Not exactly -- according to political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler, co-authors of one of the few academic studies on the subject, "When Corrections Fail: The persistence of political misperceptions."

 

While it may seem like common sense to think misinformation can be countered by giving people the real 411, Nyhan and Reifler's research indicates that correct information often fails to reduce misperceptions among the ideologically-committed, particularly doctrinaire conservatives.

 

That's something many readers of this column understand intuitively after having seen false claims like Obama-is-a-Muslim refuted over and over again and yet, unbelievably, somehow manages to persist.

 

There's lots of research on citizen ignorance but there's only a handful of studies that focus on misinformation and the effect it has on political opinions. Nyhan and Reifler's work adds to what Yale University political scientist Robert Bullock has found: it's possible to correct and change misinformed political opinions, but the truth (small 't') ain't enough.

 

In Bullock's experimental study, participants were shown the transcript for an ad created by a pro-choice group opposing the Supreme Court nomination of John Roberts. The ad falsely accused Roberts of "supporting violent fringe groups and a convicted clinic bomber."

 

What Bullock found was that 56 percent of the Democratic participants disapproved of Roberts before hearing the misinformation. After seeing the attack ad, it jumped to 80 percent.

 

When they were shown an ad that refuted the misinformation and were also told the pro-choice group had withdrawn the original ad, the disapproval rating didn't drop back down to 56 percent but to 72 percent.

 

Nyhan and Reifler conducted a series of studies where subjects were presented with mock news articles on "hot button" issues that included demonstrably false assertions like: Iraq possessed WMD immediately before the U.S. invasion. Tax cuts lead to economic growth. Bush banned stem cell research, as Sens. Kerry and Kennedy claimed during the 2004 presidential campaign.

 

With the Iraq-possessed-WMD-immediately-before-the-invasion assertion, participants were shown mock news articles supporting the unfounded Bush administration claim and then provided the refutation by way of the Duelfer Report, which authoritatively details the documented lack of WMD, or even an active production program, in Iraq just before the invasion.

 

But instead of changing the minds of ideologically-committed war-backers, Nyhan and Reifler found a "backfire effect," in which Iraq invasion-supporters only slightly modified their view without letting go of the misinformation by saying "Saddam Hussein was able to hide or destroy these weapons right before U.S. forces arrived." Sigh.

Nyhan and Reifler attribute that kind of "thinking" to the affects of "motivated reasoning," which can distort how people process information.

 

"As a result (of motivated reasoning), the corrections fail to reduce misperceptions for the most committed participants. Even worse, they actually strengthen misperceptions among ideological subgroups."

 

Now you know why those back-and-forth on-line debates so often prove to be fruitless. Unfortunately, neither Bullock, Nyhan, or Reifler suggest a way to successfully counter misinformation clung to by those who hold their political opinions with an air of certitude.

 

Washington Post columnist Shankar Vedantam suggests wrapping refutations in language that enhances the self-esteem of the misinformed.

Whatever you do, just don't forget Twain's timeless advice: "tell the truth or trump -- but get the trick."

 

Sean Gonsalves is a syndicated columnist and news editor with the Cape Cod Times.

 

 


 

 

If you are interested in dialoguing about this with other permaculture designers, visit here:

 

http://permacultureinstitute.pbwiki.com/PermPsych

 

 

 


.

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.