JOe: Fair enough -- however, as a social scientist, what you can "predict" re: Trump is just what you can see and, needless to say under these circumstances, that is only what CNN/MSNBC/NYT/WaPO &c want you to see . . . !! Many who actually know Trump (including some who I know personally) have repeatedly said that the "actual" person has little in common with the "public persona" now on display. As I recall, your ToK lecture discussed the various "filters" we use for our different "faces." In most cases, it is only a TELEVISION "personality" (or in Trump's case an "anti-television" persona) that is available for this purpose when dealing with figures like this and as has been recently shown for many others -- like Charlie Rose, who I have spent time with -- they often behave in "private" very differently than they do in "public." It would seem to me that any discussion of Trump needs to take this into account, along with his "public" situation and how he thinks he needs to act under those circumstances. Just sayin' . . . <g> Mark Quoting Joseph Michalski <[log in to unmask]>: > Dear Mark et al: > > > Mark writes: " 'Trump' and 'Algorithms' have *nothing* to do with > what is going on in the world today (which, alas, it is my job to > understand.)" And, I'll go out on a limb, to guess that you believe > you do a pretty good job of that and would defend your positions > accordingly. But you're not alone. > > > That's precisely what most of us do who have spent our lives as > social scientists, i.e., we search for explanations of human > behaviour and focus on trying to understand "what's going on in the > world". We propose ideas and conduct research to evaluate the > quality of those ideas. As with any human endeavor, there's > tremendous variability in the range of the quality of the > theorizing, as well as the quality of the research that a diverse > group of practitioners undertake. > > > Gregg's algorithm, for example, proposes to explain Trump's > behavior. I got sidetracked from sending out an email earlier > suggesting that the algorithm could be viewed as a type of > predictive hypothesis that can then be weighed again the evidence, > past-present-future. In Trump's case, the predictive validity is > almost 100%. As Gregg indicated, I'd be shocked if he did something > different (and that's a good thing, or I'd be out of a job: people > are largely predictable, including us!). Then I read that Trump was > commenting on his administration's job with respect to Puerto Rico > and the loss of life there. I used Gregg's algorithm and predicted > with 100% accuracy his behaviour. > > > That's the job of social science: to propose theories and test their > validity accordingly. That's what we do. I think the APA's concern > has to do with doing clinical assessments of people's psychological > fitness, or the normative aspects of "armchair psychologizing" and > making public pronouncements about mental stability, etc. I don't > see that as what Gregg was doing. But I hope you're not implying, > Mark, that Gregg as a social scientist should not be trying to > explain & predict human behaviour. I think that's a foundational > aspect of the job - and Gregg and many others do a great job of that > in their various fields. > > > As a sociologist, I certainly do not focus nearly as much attention > on explaining "individual behaviour" and, instead, locate > individuals in broader historical and cultural contexts. Thus my > "explanations" tend to be of a different form than those of my > psychology colleagues. And I certainly agree that, in some important > ways, Trump's a "symptom" of much broader forces, etc. (but that's a > much larger discussion). That said, what's especially remarkable > about Trump - and a great many people - is how consistently he fits > the predictive patterns. > > > Finally, the experts I "know" (er, and I guess, for once, I actually > include myself in that category!) are well aware that we belong to > an incredibly diverse species, culturally-linguistically-and > otherwise, so I don't see anything controversial about your premise > in that regard. Most of us figured out early on that the whole "We > Are the World" concept was hardly an accurate description of > humanity or the current stage of our evolutionary development. > > > Anyway, like you Mark, I too predicted the Trump victory in advance > of election day - based on the evidence at the more granular level > of the battleground states. The main difference from your prediction > was simply that I expected there to be a large turnout, based on > behavioral/motivational indicators, whereas you anticipated a sharp > decline. But it was the largest turnout ever in terms of total > votes, although proportionately not the largest obviously. Where I > strongly agree with you, however, is with respect to the enormity of > the impact of the digital world in shaping human behaviour and the > long-term implications and impacts (which we're already seeing in > various measurable ways, including neurally, psychologically, and > culturally). But there's more than enough work to go around in > trying to "understand the world" (even as we enter increasingly into > a post-work stage of history!). Best, -joe > > > > > Dr. Joseph H. Michalski > > Associate Academic Dean > > King’s University College at Western University > > 266 Epworth Avenue > > London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3 > > Tel: (519) 433-3491 > > Fax: (519) 963-1263 > > Email: [log in to unmask] > > ______________________ > eiπ + 1 = 0 > > > ________________________________ > From: tree of knowledge system discussion > <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Mark Stahlman > <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 12:42 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: draft blog on Trump Algorithm > > Gregg: > > As you know, the APA has a rule against "analyzing" anyone without > actually taking them on as a "client." I know it's tempting to > imagine that you know enough about a person based on how they are > portrayed on television but I suspect that is not how you think > clinical psychology should actually work in real life . . <g> > > More importantly, since this is a world leader you're talking about -- > who has been the target of relentless 24/7 attacks -- I can tell you > that "Trump" and "Algorithms" have *nothing* to do with what is going > on in the world today (which, alas, it is my job to understand.) > > "Racism" is a *meme* that is being deployed by the TELEVISION paradigm > because it is desperately trying to hold-on, even though obviously it > has become totally obsolete now that we are DIGITAL. None of the memes > make any sense anymore. Nike's "Just Do It!" has now turned into a > boycott against them. > > As we wrote more than a year ago, we are living with the "end of > memes." As it turns out, yesterday the EU actually passed a law > against them (or what most in the Internet think they are). > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__medium.com_rally-2Dpoint-2Dperspectives_the-2Dend-2Dof-2Dmemes-2Dor-2Dmcluhan-2D101-2D2095ae3cad02&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=rG9ldyCLY_blxNmVNHkATP3u_ZUsQRv_uFOxF8AU5NM&s=yeRR2HMCB-3DGCJbBeJqJ9PR8pL738sMyV2a7pSq5IA&e= > [https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__cdn-2Dimages-2D1.medium.com_max_1200_1-2Av9S1BTDD1DCh6eeGwBuyuQ.png&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ui70xS8SHJOAQL2qOgwE0n8kCnPLvdEe29bjUEPZiQQ&s=jy-WPp8K1lMBzEo3Cby_8UNEH4u56BKyPNg3i_nMwp0&e=]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__medium.com_rally-2Dpoint-2Dperspectives_the-2Dend-2Dof-2Dmemes-2Dor-2Dmcluhan-2D101-2D2095ae3cad02&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=rG9ldyCLY_blxNmVNHkATP3u_ZUsQRv_uFOxF8AU5NM&s=yeRR2HMCB-3DGCJbBeJqJ9PR8pL738sMyV2a7pSq5IA&e=> > > The End of Memes or McLuhan 101 – Rally Point Perspectives – > Medium<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__medium.com_rally-2Dpoint-2Dperspectives_the-2Dend-2Dof-2Dmemes-2Dor-2Dmcluhan-2D101-2D2095ae3cad02&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=rG9ldyCLY_blxNmVNHkATP3u_ZUsQRv_uFOxF8AU5NM&s=yeRR2HMCB-3DGCJbBeJqJ9PR8pL738sMyV2a7pSq5IA&e=> > urldefense.proofpoint.com > by Mark Stahlman, President, Center for the Study of Digital Life, > with Deborah Newman, Doc Searls, Peter Berkman, Ben Stolz, Jeff… > > > > > TELEVISION tried to convince us that there is a "Family of Man," as > the ideology behind its "globalist" ambitions. None of that makes any > sense any more. Hopefully my posts about China have been helpful to > illustrate this "new" reality. > > Brexit. Italy. Hungary. And now Sweden &c. Trump is only the > "symptom" of something much larger. This is a world-wide phenomenon > and has little to do with Trump or anyone else's "personality" (or > presumed "stage of development.") > > Welcome to the future (which isn't at all like most people thought it > would be) . . . !! > > Mark > > Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>: > >> Hi List, >> >> Hope this finds everyone doing well. >> >> Yesterday I did a very quick blog on why it is important that we >> are clear about the two meanings of the word >> racism<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201809_racism-2Dtwo-2Dvery-2Ddifferent-2Dmeanings-2Dthe-2Dword&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=rG9ldyCLY_blxNmVNHkATP3u_ZUsQRv_uFOxF8AU5NM&s=tE-Ingd_BGoxaTBCY7DW5kKdSgdo1LsmG-2SIZaduI4&e=>. >> >> Today, I woke up and found myself sketching out a draft of a blog >> on “The Trump Algorithm.” It is attached. >> >> Would welcome feedback on it if you have it. Will likely post on >> Saturday, assuming Trump’s character structure remains in place for >> the next two days 😊. >> >> Best, >> Gregg >> >> ############################ >> >> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: >> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >> or click the following link: >> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: > write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > or click the following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: > write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > or click the following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1