Inflation hit 8.5% in March - the fastest annual rise since 1981. Unfortunately, between the war in Ukraine, labor shortages, and an overheated economy, the steep rise in prices will likely continue for at least another year. And so we have yet another reason to work at home as much as possible: to save money. Check it out:…
Keep in mind that intellectual humility is central to the scientific mindset. That’s why scientists often hedge their claims with disclaimers to the effect that “the evidence suggests that such-and-such is the case but more research is needed.” If scientists allow themselves the possibility of being wrong, why should we banish all doubt about their guidance?
“What's Putin's problem with NATO? For Russia's leader the West's 30-member defensive military alliance has one aim - to split society in Russia and ultimately destroy it…Ahead of the war, he demanded that NATO turn the clock back to 1997 and reverse its eastward expansion, removing its forces and military infrastructure from member states that joined the alliance from 1997 and not deploying ‘strike weapons near Russia's borders’. That means Central Europe, Eastern Europe and the Baltics.” Why has Russia invaded Ukraine and what does Putin want? By Paul Kirby/BBC News April 14, 2022
The US drop in CO2 emissions is almost entirely due to trends in electric power, mostly improvements in energy efficiency and the growth of renewable energy. Emissions in the transportation, industrial, residential and commercial sectors are either flat or going up - and the price of oil appears to make little difference in projections for the next 30 years. Makes me doubt the efficacy of a carbon tax in changing people’s behavior, unless of course it’s a huge carbon tax. But a huge carbon tax is likely to backfire.
Roughly 1 in 4 Americans worked primarily at home in 2021. So what would be the reductions in CO2 emissions if, post-pandemic, a quarter of American workers continued to work at home - say, an average of 2 days a week?
Around 31.2 million tonnes a year give-or-take, I think. Here’s how I arrived at that figure:
“At an April 1st summit between China and the European Union, China demanded that the EU and members stop supporting multinational, coordinated statements about Chinese rights abuses in such global forums as the UN Human Rights Council.” - The war makes China uncomfortable. European leaders don’t care/The Economist April 2, 2022
According to John Zaller and Stanley Feldman in A Simple Theory of the Survey Response: Answering Questions versus Revealing Preferences, people normally don’t have a “single, fixed, and firm attitude on issues but instead have many, potentially opposing considerations”. That is, most people have mixed feelings about policies and political issues - not counting ideologues and political activists, who tend to view ambivalence as a weakness easily exploited by one’s adversaries.
In other words, Americans stayed home much more than normal in 2020. As a consequence, the potential victim pool shrank for burglars, robbers and thieves. But people aren’t just potential victims of crime; they are also potential witnesses and a lack of witnesses emboldens criminals. So even though most crimes went down in 2020, individuals who left the relative safety of their homes for the relatively empty streets (to and from bars, restaurants, work, parties, etc.) may have been more at risk of criminal victimhood than in prior years. At least in some areas, and especially in the evenings.
Affordances are properties of an environment that encourage particular behaviors. Affordances range from simple objects (e.g., glass of water) to complex social cues (e.g., come-hither look). They invite action (drink me! come over here!) but the invitation may be turned down or not even noticed. No surprise there: people enter situations with certain inclinations, desires, and expectations, which sensitizes them to some affordances and not others. Not everyone acts on a help-wanted sign, unguarded purse, or unfriendly comment. And those inclined to act may not behave the same way to the same affordance. A glass of water is generally for drinking but sometimes it’s for throwing in anger. An unguarded purse may be an invitation to grab some cash or turn it in to the lost-and-found office.
A skeptical attitude subjects truth claims to standards of evidence and scientific process: What is the evidence? How was it measured? Are there alternative interpretations of the evidence? Is the claim falsifiable? And so on.
Per the above table, states that prohibited vaccination mandates had a much higher Covid mortality rate from July 2021 to March 2022 than states without bans. The difference in mortality rates doesn’t appear linked to state-level prevalence of obesity or diabetes. Adult vaccination rates were somewhat higher in states without mandate bans, but the vaccination differences aren’t that great. Plus, it’s hard to disentangle the effects of mandate bans and popular resistance to getting vaccinated. One thing is clear, however…
Ok, the Covid mortality rate for states without a mask mandate was almost twice as high as for states with a mandate. Simple cause-and-effect? Unlikely, although mask mandates probably played a role. But that’s just my opinion, not a result of hard-core research and not taking into account possible confounders, like the people’s compliance with state mandates and social distancing recommendations.
Why would so many Democrats, women, young adults, and Blacks be unwilling to stay and fight the Russians in case of an invasion? Here are a few possibilities: the U.S. doesn’t deserve to be saved; one doesn’t truly belong to this country (feeling like an outsider); family safety more important; anti-war or anti-nationalist sentiments; feeling no special affinity for America or enthusiasm for the American project; lack of fellow-feeling or common purpose with other Americans; nihilism or relativism to the point that no country or system of government is worth dying for.
Experts are fallible. Experts often disagree with each other. How, then, does one go about trusting experts? And how do we figure out which experts to trust, or not? Take, for instance, medical doctors…
Emotional trust is the feeling we can count on someone, because they are fundamentally good and will not harm us. However, emotional trust doesn’t require that we agree with their opinions or follow their advice. Cognitive trust means we are confident of another’s competence in a some knowledge or skill area. We might even follow their guidance if we trust them on an emotional level as well.
Which got me to thinking…If all households were provided free home test-kits, without having to request them, and were advised to test themselves whenever they had symptoms or had been exposed to infected individuals…wouldn’t that alone slash Covid case rates? Add in better treatments, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Covid case and mortality rates quickly dropped to flu-like levels. My reasoning is as follows…
When you have strong opinions, you may be wrong. When you have weak opinions, you may be wrong. When you think it's all too complicated to have an opinion, you may be wrong. If you keep having the same kinds of opinions (strong, weak, oppositional), you're probably over-relying on heuristics and not thinking hard enough.
Homeostatic balance is a perfectly respectable concept meaning a condition of equilibrium. But my interest is in the “use value” of the word ‘balance’: what it is meant to evoke and accomplish in discursive communities…Balance is often coupled with “delicate” (over 3 million results on Google!). Delicate balance implies fragility, vulnerability, and lurking danger. Hence, reference to a “delicate balance” as a call to action, often evoked in perceived threats to biological systems, especially from outsiders – whether those outsiders are unnatural chemicals or invasive species.
…the ideal of ending poverty, facilitating economic mobility, and making sure everyone has access to the basics – healthcare, education, and family services – doesn’t have to pit Most of Us against a Despised Other (or at least an Undeserving Other). In Denmark, it’s more We’re All in This Together for the Long Haul.
Minimalist synopsis of the Milgram and Stanford Prison Experiments: subjects were willing to hurt others if they thought this was what authority figures wanted from them. Both studies serve as cautionary tales of how easily humans can be manipulated by authority figures into committing atrocious acts against their fellows. For me, the main lesson of these studies is a bit different – it is the danger of living in totalitarian environments. By “totalitarian”, I mean a social environment where there are no dissenting views expressed.