Optimism - Pessimism c/o Baggini & Macaro

INDIVIDUAL

|

 INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               

HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      

SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL 

|

GROUP

Cognitive flaws, or psychological adaptations? 'Van der Lugt: "reality confound" ... Optimists believe they have more control over what happens than they actually do.'   Dunning-Kruger Effect:  people tend to overestimate their own expertise. Baumeister:  "The negativity effect"   Norem: "defensive pessimism"	Optimism and Pessimism are independent scales. 'Age also makes a difference, for the simple reason that life and its potential future vary accordingly.' 'Designated Cassandra'^ Rotation of role. 'When your prospects are bleak, a gloomy outlook is realism, not pessimism.'
'... how optimistic we feel depends not just on us, but on our life circumstances.  Think about how race, class and social inequality have real impacts on life chances.'	'In western culture, optimism is valorised more than pessimism.' 'To suggest that people struggling in an unequal system should simply adopt a more positive attitude is to turn social and economic problems into psychological ones.'

^With apologies.

Source: J. Baggini, A. Macaro. In defence of pessimism. Or. why optimism is not quite a prerequisite for achieving a valued goal. FT Weekend Magazine, 1131: June 28, 2025, pp.18-20.
https://www.julianbaggini.com/in-defence-of-pessimism/

Books noted in the above article:

Sharot, T. (2011). The optimism bias: A tour of the irrationally positive brain. Pantheon/Random House.

Tierney, J., & Baumeister, R.F. (2019). The power of bad: How the negativity effect rules us — and how we can rule it. New York: Penguin.

Van der Lugt, M. (2025). Hopeful Pessimism. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.17707125

See also:

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323

Communication - "See what I mean?"

"Lasswell (1948) claimed that an act of communication was adequately explained only when every aspect of his famous question had been answered:

who - says what - in which channel - to whom - with what effect?"

Lasswell, H.D. (1948) The Structure and Function of Communication in Society. In Bryson, (ed.), The Communication of Ideas, Harper & Brs.

 INDIVIDUAL
|
INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES             
HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC     
SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL
|
GROUP

who	says what in which channel
to whom	with what effect?

My source: 

Morgan, John. & Welton, Peter.  (1992).  See what I mean? An introduction to visual communication. London :  Edward Arnold. pp.2-3.  http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0638/92229403-t.html

See also - the concept of information remains an interest here:

Jones, P. (1996) Humans, Information, and Science, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24(3),591-598.

Jones, P. (1996) An overarching theory of health communication? Health Informatics Journal,2,1,28-34.

Progress in Transdisciplinary Times

For about a decade I think ... hold on please! ...

Since October 2011 in fact, and an issue of -

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Volume 17, Issue 5

Special Issue: Philosophy of Evidence Based Medicine

- I've carried the concept of 'progress' in my head. I think I picked up this issue somewhere and still have some of its key papers. 

 

Progress is always there in the media, in its obvious forms, technical, education, scientific, social, political, economic, medical; whether or not we agree on the pace, realisation, ethics, extent and contribution to overall well-being. Now, we can also add Earth as the foundational element.

Simon Kuper's 'Opening Shot' in the FT Magazine, 11-12 December 2021 wrote about 'progress' and Thomas Midgley Jr; "often described as the most disastrous peaceable human who ever lived." Responsible for the progressive, at the time, innovations of lead in petrol (to reduce "knocking" in petrol engines), and chlorofluorocarbons - you'll understand that one I think. Kuper notes how:

"Midgley's story illustrates the damage that one brilliant, ambitious, out-of-the-box thinker can do."

Since the early 20th century, we have nuclear fission, biolabs, genetic technology, artificial intelligence, climate change and other 'inventions'. The 'progress' of climate change is catching up with us. Ironic, how the question, after all those millennia remains - can I/We outrun this threat? The problems we face now, we are told, call for transdisciplinary solutions - adding yet more complexity.

Clearly, we need to equip people with the cognitive, conceptual tools to work alternately, in-and-out of the boxes. And, whatever our belief system consider progress in spiritual terms too.

 INDIVIDUAL

|

 INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               

HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      

SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL 

|

GROUP

progress	progress
progress	PROGRESS

Another thing to return to!

Simon Kuper, Opening Shot, When too much progress is a bad thing. FT Weekend, Magazine, December 11-12, 2021, p.8.

Previously on W2tQ: progress

AI Governance & (Old) Chestnuts - When Healthcare is a Silo

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ----------------------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group - population

intelligence SMART bias safety explainability *(effect)?	artificielle [ ;-) ] V s E i R t T u I a C t A i L o    n    s Healthcare and Energy (Sectors) bias, safety, explainability unintended consequences ZERO emissions
"There are areas where we need to do the research before we know  what are the right kinds of  approaches to take". Sundai Pichai *(effect)?	REGULATION Governance Blanket vetting or Sector-by-Sector rules? anti-competitive privacy infringement Advertising* (cause) *(effect)? Google AI principles

Source:
Bradshaw, T. (2019) Google chief urges regulators not to rush into AI crackdown, FT Weekend, 21-22 September, p. 15.

Is Hodges' model a selection machine?

Sober (1984) Child's toy

"It is gratifying to find these biological ideas already enshrined in the ordinary meaning of 'selection for' and 'selection of'. My young son has a toy which takes all the mystery out of this distinction. Plastic discs with circles cut out of them are stacked with spaces in between in a closed cylinder. Top-most disc contains very big holes, and the holes decrease in size as one moves down from disc to disc. At the top of the cylinder are found balls of different sizes. A good shaking will distribute the balls to their respective levels. The smallest balls end up arrayed at the bottom. The next smallest sized balls settle at the next level up, and so on. It happens that the balls of the same size also happen to have the same color. Shaking sends the black balls to the bottom, the pink to the next level up, and so on. The whole cylinder (plus paternal administered shaking) is a selection machine. The device selects for small balls (these are the ones which pass to the bottom). It does not select for black balls (even though these are the ones that pass to the bottom). But when we ask after a shaking what was selected, it is equally correct to say that the black balls were selected and that the small ones were. 'Selection for' focuses on causes; 'selection of' picks out effects." p.50-51.

Sober, E. Force and disposition in evolutionary theory. In. Hookway, C. (ed.) (1984). Minds, Machines And Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.43-61.

Image adapted from figure 4 within "Is art an adaptation? Prospects for an evolutionary perspective on aesthetic emotions" http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~sousa/artfunction/art.htm

See also: slide 35/47  http://slideplayer.com/slide/9735486/