BAA snow team ready for action

This press release from BAA is too funny (see here).

As their airports come to a massive stand still, I cannot believe they still have the gaul to keep this press release on their home page. It goes like this:

TITLE: Heathrow's army of snow ploughs stretch their wings as snow bites
DATE: 29 November 2010

The cold snap may have only just bitten but Heathrow's snow team has been working for months to ensure the UK's hub airport will once again be prepared for the onset of winter.

With an extra half a million pounds invested in equipment this year, Heathrow’s airside department run constant checks of runway and taxiway areas, applying de-icing and of course clearing any snow and debris away.

Heathrow's specialist teams - which includes 50 highly trained staff and more than 60 hi-tech vehicles - have been preparing since the end of last winter to do everything they can to minimise delays in the face of wintry conditions.

The airport employs a fleet of snow ploughs and de-icing vehicles to clear and prepare runways and taxiways at the airport's specialist snow base which sits in between the two runways. Heathrow's airside operations teams have spent the summer refreshing their training with plans being discussed with airlines, baggage handlers and air traffic control to ensure a coordinated response.

While London may have run out of grit last winter, Heathrow is determined that it doesn't run out of the highly concentrated de-icing fluid it uses on the runways (grit is not used as this could get into engines). That's why the airport now has an innovative computer system that remotely measures how much de-icer is left - to ensure restocking can take place when required. To minimise the impact on the surrounding greenery, the chemical bi-product - glycol - is also recovered by a host of new recovery vehicles, ensuring more waste de-icing liquid can be removed effectively from the airport.

To ensure it has the most up-to-date weather predictions, Heathrow uses the Met Office’s OpenRunway system which offers 24 hour access to measurements including air and runway temperatures, wind and visibility, all vital in determining the right time to apply anti or de-icer.

Key Heathrow snow facts:

•Heathrow was the only major airport in the UK to not close last winter

•There are over 60 vehicles and 50 staff keeping the runways clear

•An extra £500,000 has been invested this year in snow-fighting technology

•Heathrow has storage for 500,000 litres of de-icing fluid

•Each de-icing vehicle can hold a massive 60,000 litres and it takes around 25 mins to de-ice each runway

•Liquid de-icer used on the runway and taxiways is effective for longer and ensures that grit doesn't cause damage to engines.

Colin Wood, Director of Airside, said: "As the world’s busiest international airport it's absolutely vital we are well prepared and our team do an excellent job often in quite severe conditions. While we stayed open last winter, we won’t rest on our laurels and promise that we'll be ready, waiting and doing everything we can to make every journey better for our passengers."

Snow wars - where is the military?

In case you have missed it, the UK has come to a halt due to the snow (see here). I am fine with the fact that we only get ‘hit’ by bad weather for two or three weeks a year and therefore should not invest too heavily to counteract the impact of bad weather. We are economically constrained and I would rather my tax be spent on education, police and other critical public services. But I would have expected some pre-emptive measures. Did you know that modern science actually allows us to observe and predict weather patterns – I fear this is news to the government. I would also like to know why the army are not out with shovels at the major airports, helping to move snow and why they are not also providing the essential man-power and resources to support the thousands of people who are stranded. Surely they are well skilled for dealing with situations like these? Why has no one thought to ask for their help...or the MoD mandated it? Surely I cannot be the first person to think about involving the military? Would they not do this in North America under similar circumstances? Did I miss something?

The RMT: a bunch of idiots causing another tube strike

The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (The RMT) who represent workers of the London Underground have decided to cause more disruption to the Capital by ordering another tube strike (see here). These people are idiots. It all comes down to plans by TFL to cut 800 kiosk job. Basically, in the modern era (today) people tend to buy and renew their tickets at machines...technology rules! And as a result, fewer staff are needed to serve customers. The RMT say that a reduction in kiosk staff will lead to safety issues at stations. This may or may not be true but...

1) At a time when job cuts and 'austerity measures' are a part of everyday life
2) Technology has been shown countless times to replace the need for human participation
3) The tube is a poorly managed and badly functioning service

...I have no sympathy or respect for anyone remotely involved in the strike. If taking the tube was a pleasant experience and the system 'worked' - no delays, no over crouding, no line closures - I would have sympathy. As things stand, and I think I speak for all 9+ million Londoners - the RMT can go fuck themselves.

To leave you with an anecdote, a kiosk staff at my local tube station was working on Sunday and said she was extremely (and unusually) busy. She actually told me that normally on Sundays she has nothing to do! If I were a properly run, commercially sensitive, customer focussed business, I would make her redundant - and all the other people in a similar position. Simple economic sense. More profit means more to invest to improve service... That woman could work as a bus driver or behind a till in McDonalds.

Gross National Happiness - in the UK

The UK Government intends to measure the happiness of its citizens. From April 2011, the Office of National Statistics will start taking measurements and publish its results in 2012 (see here). It is not just Bhutan that sees the importance of measuring happiness. In fact, wealth is linked to National levels of happiness (see the World Values Survey). I have talked about happiness previously - see my post here where Nancy Etcoff talks about the science of happiness. Believe it or not, there are economic benefits to being happy!

Tuition fees protest

The people who caused the violence at the protest about tuition fees (see here) have demonstrated that they do not have the intellect or personality to deserve a state subsidised education. You earn the right through your intelligent use of actions to claim support and passage through life. Education is about intelligence. Intelligence makes use of discussion, reason and empathy to seek its ends. Not violence which is the art of the cave man.

Animal rights, human wrongs

Animal testing is contentious. Responsible practices are essential and animal cruelty is disgusting. But true animal testing, the use of animal models to test medical treatments in development that could help mankind, is essential. How else would the average lifespan of people in Europe be 70 plus years? Treatments for the world’s most prevalent diseases have all had, at some stage of their development, tests in animals and animal cells. Fact.

It is therefore delightful to see the news that five callous, sadistic and malicious animal rights campaigners have been jailed (see here). The group intimidated individuals from Huntingdon Life Sciences by delivering false letter bombs, amongst other disgraceful activities. Hopefully time in prison will allow them to reflect and develop a more balanced view of the world. Hopefully they will have a headache and take an aspirin.

Psychiatry behind the holocaust. Seriously?

The Church of Scientology - spiritually grounded religion or money sucking cult? As an open minded athiest living outside the great ol' US or A it doesn't really affect me. However, the rapid proliferation of religion, new religions which have a mantle of cultishness and are highly publicised through affiliation with world-famous followers, requires some attention and some thought. So my question is this: is there substance to Scientology?

The 'Citizens Commisson on Human Rights' is a division of the 'Church' which positions itself as a "nonprofit mental health watchdog". The CCHR set up a museum in Hollwood in 2005 with the title of the exhibition: Psychiatry: An Industry of Death. The amazing thing is that the museum makes the claim that psychiatry is responsible for the Holocaust. See the link to the tour of the museum (see here). Here is the page from wikipedia (see here).

So I'm happy to be open minded but this all sounds stupid. In life, if someone wants to be taken seriously, they act seriously. Dedicating a museum to the theme that psychiatry caused the holocaust is stupid. I am left with one opinion of Scientology.

I prefer the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (see here).

To anyone interested, here is a link to Anonymous, the Scientology protest group (see here). For the record, I'm not a member or an active protester. I just think that Scientology is stupid and potentially harmful - in many many ways.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi on flow

Great insight. Understand. Bring this into your life. Once you have watched this, watch Martin Seligman (see here).

New Scientist uses neuromarketing

I have talked about neuromarketing before (see here). New Scientist, the fantastic international (British) magazine that shares news stories from the world of science, recently undertook its own neuromarketing experiment. They took three options for covers for a single issue, hooked up 19 customers to an EEG machine and asked which cover was the best. They went with the winner and the result was a 12% rise in sales (see here). Here is an article from the NY Times that describes the 'experiment' in more detail (see here). While there is a definite element of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle at play - there is no control in the real world for comparison - it is another case in point where the application of neuromarketing has yielded an increase in sales.

Musical intervention

Scientists at Glasgow Caledonian University are using a mixture of psychology and audio engineering to see how music can prompt certain responses. See here. Emotions and moods can be influenced by outside forces. This study aims to identify the components that influence specific responses. One application will be to compile personalised packages of musical components to help improve people's wellbeing.

There's nothing new about music therapy. This study is the first to try and model specific components to specific responses. The commercial applications will also be interesting. The retail environment could capitalise on the research to influence shoppers' buying decisions or define new ways of communicating brand empathy. It could also form part of the optimisation of advertisements and assessed by neuromarketing techniques. The opportunities are endless.

I have spoken about the use of scents in influencing human behaviour (see here). Now music.

When losing is winning

He that fights and runs away, may turn and fight another day; but he that is in battle slain, will never rise to fight again.
-Tacitus

Watch 'Surrogates' streaming

Here is a movie which shows how our understanding of brain functioning can manifest itself. Watch, think and enjoy.

Double click so it pops up into a new window.

Controlling our brains

Here's a great video from TED that demonstrates how we can read our brainwaves in real time and learn to control ourselves (our experiences, emotions etc) by modulating our own brain chemistry.

Human-computer interaction

Human–computer interaction (HCI) is the study of interaction between people (users) and computers. A brain–computer interface (BCI), sometimes called a direct neural interface or a brain–machine interface, is a direct communication pathway between a brain and an external device.

The future is here. Take a look at these two videos from TED showcasing recent and amazing advances.

Rules

This is something I have been thinking about recently. People who follow rules to the letter do not understand what they (themselves or the rules) are there to achieve.

Synthetic life

I've talked about synthetic biology before (see here). This video from TED comes straight from the pioneer who created the first synthetic lifeform. The science is amazing, the ethics are profound and it puts a whole new spin on the concept of creationism (yes, as an atheist, I am being ironic). This, no doubt, opens up a new era in science which needs to be dealt with responsibly.

Selective attention

The human brain is excellent at eliminating background information which allows us to focus on the task at hand. We blank out white noise so that we can hold conversations. We block registration of background scents so that we can enjoy the smell of dinner cooking. This was demonstrated brilliantly by Chabris and Simons in 1999. Watch the video to find out more...

Scent Bomb

Have you ever walked past Lush? That's the shop you can smell 200 meters away that makes smelly bathroom products. It has been around for a long time and everyone knows it as the shop that smells. Well it is not the only one. Lots of businesses are starting to develop their own scent brand - the view is that it helps make a distinct emotional connection with the consumer. Is this a new fad or something for the long term? Is this ethical? How much work goes on behind the scenes to get the right scent? Is it a form of air pollution? The questions go on...

In a recent article in Business Week, the latest ambition is to plant a scent bomb into a low income housing development in New York in an attempt to make the residents happier. Smell does affect mood - we don't need scientists to tell us that. So the concept is sound. And if there are ways of helping people then lets do it. I just hope it is used responsibly and does not turn our high streets into an overwhelming and unpleasant experience. There is something nice and comforting with consistency - even if it is the consistent smell of background pollution.

Currency of community

I have talked previously about the currency of favours (see here). Recently, the Mosaic Church in Coventry announced the launch of its Grout system - essentially a currency that can be acquired and spent within a community. Grouts are transacted for giving time or something more tangible. This is a true community currency and slightly different to the principle I mentioned which relies on the trading of actions without the need for a transactional, quantifiable currency. Nonetheless, as schemes like these appear and evolve (and they are excellent), I hope to see them move away from the reliance on a currency with guaranteed returns and mature to one that relies on passive confidence that acts of good will be reciprocated as I describe here.

Genetically modified crops, nanotechnology and synthetic biology

I have talked previously about fashion issues - issues which are at the front of society's mind then fade away as the next issue takes centre stage (see here). One of the issues I mentioned was genetically modified crops. If you go back a decade, there was a global outcry at the prospect of breeding GM crops for human consumption. Monsanto pulled out of the UK market and research grants for plant science declined. This was largely due to negative public sentiment - governments had to respond. The science was sound but the companies who were pioneering the research did an awful job of explaining the science and bringing comfort to the public. Fortunately, research did continue and Europe continues to invest in and mature the science. However, a variety of maize that has been banned by the EU, was accidentally sown in Germany (see here). This is a mistake. The interesting thing is that this never made front page news and the public seem uninterested. Greenpeace made a statement and the German government is taking action to remove the planted seed before it flowers. However, research continues, government have policy and EU member states have ageed to two GM varieties which can be grown commercially. This is progress. And I believe it is partly possible because the populace are not interested... Just another fashion issue.

Remember nanotechnology and grey goo, made popular by Prince Charles in 2004? The scientists learned from the GM crop problems and played a fantastic game of PR - offering seminars, co-chaired with government officials, wooing the media. The public were not interested and any controversy related to nanotechnology was quietly retired.

Synthetic biology is the latest controversy (see here for a definition). Perhaps the name is a little contentious as it does sound a bit like 'playing god'. However, it is more like experiments in engineering than creating Eve from Adam's rib. Recently, for example, a synthetic cell was made from generating DNA fragments artificially and transplanting it into another cell which was able to reproduce (see here). The bits required to propagate the cell lineage existed already in the recipient cell although the DNA was made artificially. So it is more about augmentation than creation. The production of non-native proteins in cells has been happening for decades so Synthetic Biology, in this case, is only a step forward to offer a new method for producing desired proteins in a 'foreign' bacterium.

Franken-cell? Should we really be so afraid? The answer is in the application and we have seen this all before. Providing the science is responsible, a set of ethical standards are developed and adhered to within the research community (public and private sector) and governments take an early interest...not to mention some good PR...the benefits to humanity should be clear for all to see.

Watch Idiocracy streaming

A great movie from 2006. It's all too true. What are we doing as a species? How is it that we have failed to value intelligence, knowledge and wisdom? It is our responsibility to safeguard the future of the planet and this starts with valuing and preserving the basics.

Buying without buying

In a recent study published in the Journal of Neuroscience, it was demonstrated that purchasing behaviour is predictable and not dependent upon the level of attention paid to specific products (see here). This is an important piece of scientific research to support Fred Dretske's research around epistemology, specifically Perception without Awareness.

Here is a video where Dretske describes his work. Fascinating.

Brain scans as lie detectors

I have talked about the use of technology that reads brain patterns - and the applications that we are starting to see (see here). This technology is new and experimental. As in all cases, the robustness of the theory is yet to be fully corroborated through rigorous field testing. While the potential uses are unquestionable, the reliability of the application will take time to validate. This week, experts warned that measures are needed to stop brain scans being misused by courts, insurers and employers (see here) as evidence of people lying.

Clearly the technology, in this case imaging technology (not EEG), is courting attention - a welcome indicator of the sign of things to come. But anticipate this boom in commercialising bioscience, with neuromarketing being another application, to be enveloped in ethical debate and government policy.

The paradox of choice

I have talked about the anxiety we feel through being overwhelmed by too much choice (see here). The last decade, driven from consumers' needs for instant gratification, on demand services and personalised products, has created a culture of anxiety full of ephemeral relationships with people and brands. Finally the corporate world has woken up and taking a stand against the world of excess.

Wal-Mart in Canada has started to drop the number of product lines it holds on its shelves. Sales of these product lines has not been affected ie. people still buy the product and and are less wedded to the brand than we may think (see here). Duncan Mac Naughton, chief merchandising officer at Wal-Mart in Mississauga says, “Folks can get overwhelmed with too much variety. With too many choices, they actually don’t buy.”

Regardless of the intent, the outcome clearly does not impact the corporate bottom line. What, though, is the impact on the shoppers' experience? Are they grateful for less choice, are they less anxious or do they feel defeated that their preferred brand is not present so they have to go for brand x? The main thing is that the customer is not always right...and it takes someone brave to put that knowledge into action.

So what does this mean? I believe that we have entered a period of reconcilliation, rationalisation and retrenchment to meet basic needs. We are living in a period of personal responsibility. It is the responsibility of the corporate world to remove choice to help the psychology of society.

Watch 'Pay It Forward' Streaming

I've talked about "Cooperative behaviour cascades in human social networks". For those that don't know, "Pay it Forward" is an outstanding movie from 2000 that sees the theme in practice.

Here is the movie. Click on the red arrow - when it turns green, click on the green arrow. Then click on the screen and it will open in a new window so you can enjoy the full screen. The video, as posted here, is too wide for the posting space.



Here's a link to the movie on Tudou: http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/KfuiMUDLv4s/

Neuromarketing

Neuromarketing is a new field of marketing that studies consumers' sensorimotor, cognitive, and affective response to marketing stimuli. Researchers use technologies such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure changes in activity in parts of the brain, electroencephalography (EEG) to measure activity in specific regional spectra of the brain response, and/or sensors to measure changes in one's physiological state (heart rate, respiratory rate, galvanic skin response) to learn why consumers make the decisions they do, and what part of the brain is telling them to do it. Marketing analysts will use neuromarketing to better measure a consumer's preference, as the verbal response given to the question, "Do you like this product?" may not always be the true answer due to cognitive bias. This knowledge will help marketers create products and services designed more effectively and marketing campaigns focused more on the brain's response. This makes neuromarketing and its applied results potentially subliminal. Neuromarketing will tell the marketer what the consumer reacts to, whether it was the color of the packaging, the sound the box makes when shaken, or the idea that they will have something their co-consumers do not.

Here is a video on the subject (you have to wait for the advert to pass - sorry but I can't do anything about it).






Beyond subliminal advertising, Darpa (the Pentagon's innovation department) has invested $4m in an attempt to help soldiers communicate by telepathy. See this link: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/pentagon-preps-soldier-telepathy-push/

This truly is mad science but the ideas are sound. Using EEG, if a device can collect, transmit, receive and translate brain waves, soldiers will be able to communicate by telepathy.

Judge me on my intent

I previously raised the question of judging someone based on their actions or intent. It seems that scientists have taken us one step towards answering this question. When we are faced with a simple task, scientists are able to predict our actions by analysing our brain activity in real time. These simple tasks can be adding or subtracting two numbers. By scanning our brains, scientists can predict our intent before we are consciously aware.

Here is an article from New Scientist that describes the work.

This form of mind reading leads to a philosophical and ethical consideration. If our intent is a true and unconscious reflection of our belief system, do our actions always mirror our intent? The answer has to be 'no'. We have a conscious filter that stops us acting on gut instinct, that forces us to behave appropriately in polite situations. If someone were to commit a crime would they be guilty if their intent was never to take part - perhaps they had been coerced, or felt obliged for some reason?

As we learn more about the brain, society will need to hold these debates. As we, individually, learn more about the brain, we have a responsibility to increase our self awareness and be 1) mindful of our intent 2) conscious of our actions.

Money and happiness

Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke addressed graduates of the University of South Carolina with a simple message: having a well paid job doesn't mean you will be happy. Here is the link to the report (click here).

Now I don't think there's anything new in this. I've talked about the science of happiness and the data says it all - there is no correlation between money and happiness.

So why is Bernanke making these statements? Is it because this message needs to be reiterated year after year as students prepare to enter the workforce? Is it our responsibility to help guide students towards making 'correct' decisions for their long term happiness. Or is it something else? Is he preparing society for a harder, less prosperous future? Is it a prelude to how the traditional high earning careers will be constrained through regulatory reform? Is it all of the above?

Danish eco-hotel

A hotel in Copenhagen is offering free meals to guests who sit on a cycle to generate electricity. Here's the link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8621038.stm

The Crowne Plaza Hotel is giving people a food voucher worth 26 Euro for 15 minutes on a bike. Another example of the currency of favours that are emerging. It helps keep the travelling business contingent trim (assuming they eat sensibly with the voucher) and reduces the cost of electricity to the hotel. Good news all round. 882EJ3G2HC4V

Global cooling

With all the attention on global warming, are we about to be saved by the sun's inactivity? In a recent article published in Environmental Research Letters from Mike Lockwood at the University of Reading, it looks like we're entering into an historic low in solar activity which is resulting in cooler, drier winters. This is a trend seen every few hundred years. So as the world is heating up (maybe), as the atmosphere is becoming polluted with greenhouse gasses (maybe) and politicians and scientists can't agree on a way forward...are we about to be saved by mother nature?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8615789.stm

Le Chatelier's principle is: if a dynamic equilibrium is disturbed by changing the conditions, the position of equilibrium moves to counteract the change. This is similar to the Gaia principle in which the climatic and biogeochemical conditions on Earth maintain a preferential homeostasis. In other words, systems have a way of correcting themselves. Perhaps humanity is about to have a lucky break.

Politically illiterate

Global problem

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill

Some people, who have the power to vote, seem to know nothing about politics yet have a voice that is heard and a vote that can have drastic implications on the future of the planet. Too many people vote for ‘fashion’ politics in the West. Some women do not even know the difference between Left and Right (and women died for the right to vote). Too many people are too ignorant and too lazy to care. If we are forced, at a young age, to know the basics of politics and the significance of our votes, future generations may become more aware and more conscious of their place in the world.


Global solution

Teach and assess 15 year olds on the simple and currently relevant tenets of politics across three basic streams. 1) Political ideologies (Left / Right), 2) current world leaders of major economies (USA, UK, BRIC, Middle East) and 3) major political structures (democracy / autocracy) – this is not intended as a history lesson so communism is out, except in the case of China. Teenagers should be assessed by a simple multiple choice exam (30 mins, no more) and given a certificate if they pass. They should then be able to vote in local and National elections. And the ballot boxes should be at schools so teens get used to the process of voting. The actual vote will still be influenced by the usual factors (family, peer group etc) and teens will not necessarily have a strong opinion on the major issues underlying party policy. But a vote is as much about an ideological stand point as it is about policy.

By passing the exam and holding the certificate it demonstrates a fundamental understanding of current world politics and will give people this background for the rest of their lives as well as imparting the significance of this knowledge down the generations. This certificate will remove any form of alienation as there will be a consistent, Nationally mandated syllabus and exam – all people will have equal knowledge and be assessed on an equal basis. This will help prepare teens for the substantial exams they face later in their lives through being assessed and coping under pressure. This will give teens a Nationally recognised qualification to support applications to jobs and universities. This will force teens to become knowledgeable about things that do affect everyday life in our communities, our countries and across the world.

Generational issues

Are there some world issues that are right to be forgotten but others that need a cross-generational reminder?

Remember the campaign against the fur trade in the 1980s? It did its job: the number of Mink farms in the USA decreased from 1,221 in 1974 to 274 in 2008 and retail fur sales declined by nearly 50% between 1985 and 1990 . While numbers peaked again in the mid 2000s (then dipped), legislation had been introduced to ensure that the fur business was ethical. The double peak represents two things. The first is fashion. People like to wear animal fur. The second is public opinion. People like to wear animal fur when it’s socially acceptable. The important point is that activists in the 1980s made their statement, politicians responded and business adapted. So is the issue of animal cruelty in the fur trade still relevant?

Remember CND, founded in 1958 to ‘rid the world of nuclear weapons’? In the 1980s, at a time of public discontent and when tensions were high between West and East, CND organised major protests and was under the surveillance of British Intelligence. Now, following the fall of communism and a general increase in prosperity, CND only pops up in the public psyche at times of war. Is it still as relevant as is used to be? If it doesn’t carry the weight to organise protests of hundreds of thousands of people, then people are probably not that concerned. If people are not that concerned, the threat of nuclear weapons are probably not that important. The ‘War on Terror’ is real but, unlike during the Cold War, Nations do not have nuclear weapons permanently aimed at each other.

But what about water? HIV/AIDS? Starvation in the Developing World? Gender inequality? These issues are as pertinent as ever yet people born after 1990 will not have witnessed the severity and public unity behind the warnings during the 1980s and early 1990s. Yet these issues are still as relevant today, so too is an awareness for their impact on our future.

Today is World Water Day, an initiative that grew out of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro. As the global population expands, more emphasis is needed to provide clean water for consumption and sanitation. As Peter Brabeck-Letmanthe, Chairman of Nestle comments, “Global water requirements ... will be 40% greater than what can currently be sustainably supplied”. Why are people not concerned? Have people forgotten the significance of water to our wellbeing, a clear priority in 1992?

HIV / AIDS currently affects about 33 million people. In 1990 the number was about 9 million. The global growth has reached a plateau since the mid 2000s but 67% of people with HIV are in Africa – does this make HIV irrelevant to the West? In the UK, 27% of people infected with HIV are unaware and, since 1999, the largest group of people transmitting the disease are heterosexual partners. Clearly the levels of awareness around the transmission and severity of the disease has declined since the UK Government’s ‘tombstone’ advert in 1987.

Without drawing on other examples, the cases above point quite clearly to the fact that some global issues are dealt with and naturally come to a conclusion. But another set of issues, that span generations, continue to exist but are passed to the side as new global issues become the vogue. It is critical that the protracted global issues are reinforced for every generation to ensure ignorance is averted and the knowledge of our actions can be understood. This is the role of activists, politicians, the media, schools and ourselves. Where the public are currently concerned with ‘green’ we must maintain a balanced view on the top issues we are facing as a planet. These Generational Issues should not be prioritised but discussed, prevented and remediated in equal measure.

Fashion issues

Do we still care about HIV / AIDS, tigers, ivory, fair trade or genetically engineered crops? Do we still want to ‘make poverty history’? Aren’t the most pressing issues of today climate change, clean fuels, carbon emissions and controlling the banks? My point is that nothing goes away, all these issues are relevant and important. But what we think of as important changes and this is often down to media coverage and therefore fashion. Take the environment as an example. There has been a lot of publicity about the Copenhagen summit since December 2009, most notably a consensus in the media that it was a limp affair. Nonetheless, it is ‘front of mind’ with most people as a ‘global’ issue. But how much do people actually care?

In the USA, global warming is considered a low priority when it comes to setting National policy (see here). Increasing numbers also think that the rate and problems associated with global warming are exaggerated (see here). The UK Government recently undertook a campaign to raise awareness about Climate Change, but two of the TV adverts were banned because the claims went beyond “mainstream scientific consensus” (see here). This is a clear admission that the actual importance placed on climate change by the populace is lower than we might think, and likely similar to the USA. So it seems that people recognise climate change is an important global issue but it’s one that someone else will resolve.

So back to the point of fashion issues – are we on the cusp of the next set of global issues? Has the green / environment / climate debate been done to death? Are we weary of debates on carbon? Are we ready for a new set of global issues? Maybe not quite yet but in the next couple of years we will inevitably see the environment relegated to the back seat, along with health, poverty and hunger.

Unreciprocated favours

I talked about the currency of favours previously where people contribute their time in exchange for a personal benefit of some type. I recently came across a piece or research from the University of St Andrews that demonstrated this characteristic in orangutans (see here for the article). So in short, and cynically, humans are no different to monkeys.

Is there such a thing as selflessness in human conduct? The Machiavellians would say no. The Daoists would say yes. I would say ‘I hope so’ (then I have also raised the debate about altruism which is something similar). One principal difference between these ideologies is that of active calculation. The Machiavellians undertake certain actions in the knowledge of the immediate consequences to their benefit. The Daoists undertake certain actions according to the belief that nature takes its course and the consequences will be what they are – by forcing nothing, nature yields to the will of the inevitable and nature inherently exists to benefit (or enlighten) people who follow ‘the Way’. The end result yields personal benefits but the means of achieving these benefits is very different – as is the underlying set of personal values.

I have also talked about our cultural transition from ‘knowledge’ to ‘wisdom’ (see here) and how we must evolve our attitudes towards society from one of fact and solution to one of insight and responsibility. So the currency of favours is nothing new: Machiavelli wrote The Prince in the early 16th Century and the Dao De Jing was written in 500 BCE (give or take). So the question is whether we are happy to share the characteristics of monkeys in a quantitative, calculated Machiavellian approach to engaging in societal endeavours or embrace our responsibility to give selfless, unrequited favours with courage and vindication for the greater benefit of our communities.

As Barack Obama said, we are entering an era of personal responsibility. As the Buddhists say, everything is cyclical. I propose that the time for Machiavellian thinking is over and it’s time to embrace the tenets of the selfless philosophies. So let the currency of favours be implicit not explicit. Let the intent behind favours be unrequited, safe in the knowledge that nature deals in a currency that will see personal investment repaid. So let the expectation of repayment be passive and let the will to help others be active and selfless. Let us be humans not monkeys.

One Young World: Summit Highlights

I talked about One Young World previously. The organisation held its first summit in February 2010 which gave young people, from across the globe, the chance to debate the top issues facing the future of the planet, move our thinking forward and develop actionable plans to help change the world. Here is a video of the highlights.



They are planning their next summit for 2011. It will be interesting to see if they review (and recognise) the actions taken at the summit this year - can you see an opportunity for the youth action oscars based on videos of success stories? One Young Oscar?

Are people inherently good?

The Bible, Confucius, Sharia law and the Constitution of the United States of America are all historical examples of guidelines that set out the proper behaviour of people. This begs the question: if people are inherently good, altruistic may be a better word, and act for the greater good of their communities why have certain behaviours been mandated again and again through thousands of years of history? Agreed they all have their nuances. But fundamentally they all state a series of rules, rituals, principles or laws that are to be followed without question. There are, of course, cases where the rules have evolved – the best example in Western culture is the evolution and reinterpretation of Jewish law by the Christians and even differences have evolved between different Jewish and Christian groups.

If we look at the Bible, after the great flood that eliminated human kind, with the exception of Noah and his family, Genesis Chapter 20 verse 21 states “...I (God) will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth..”. Confucius wrote his Analects at a time when China was in the throes of civil war and the country was in desperate need of cohesion. I could go on.

Perhaps Richard Dawkins (or in fact, Charles Darwin) is the most enlightened of all the great thinkers of the last few thousand years. The Selfish Gene, published in 1976, depicts the biological phenomenon that genes work towards a state of stable expression through their passive or inherent (but not conscious) propagation until such time that they are dominant in a given community (gene pool). Altruism in this case, states that sacrifice is a necessary part of the process to propagate the genes. Altruism is therefore a critical part of selfishness ie. The unprecedented expression of the gene to as high a level of frequency as possible until it is consistently and stably present throughout the gene pool.

If this form of selfishness is indeed our inherent behaviour, law and order exists to counteract our biological imperative. So are we inherently good? In terms of propagating successful or ‘fit’ genes – and I am talking about humans here – we are built with the nature to propagate and advance our species. You could argue that the great works of philosophy and religion spanning more than 5 thousand years have developed as a means of controlling mankind – this statement in itself is one that has been debated for years. But to take it a level further, you could argue that religious and philosophical texts of spiritual means actually exist to oppose human nature. Is our view on whether we are inherently ‘good’ skewed by the filters that these texts place on our apparently open minds? Is our nature, our biological imperative, constrained through the social constructs of religion, law and spirituality? If the human heart is evil and evil is the norm, can you argue that evil is actually good because it is the nature of the populous? As Shakespeare says, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” (Hamlet Act 2, Scene 2). Democracy exists to represent the thoughts of the masses on proportional basis (at least that is the intent). Therefore I propose that evil hearts are the norm and evil is good and laws exist to prevent society and the human species from progressing towards its full potential.

Then, as Isiah Berlin famously wrote, "few new truths have ever won their way against the resistance of established ideas save by being overstated". I am an atheist who believes that we have responsibility for our actions and that our actions must safeguard our communities and the future of the planet. Still, an interesting debate and one that I hope we can all enjoy.

Be a 'good' leader

A recent study by James Fowler, at the University of California, demonstrates that a single good action is amplified through our networks of friends and colleagues - in fact, everyone we encounter. The article "Cooperative behaviour cascades in human social networks" was published this month in a leading academic journal. He demonstrates something intuitively obvious - if we do something 'good' to someone they are more inclined to do something 'good' to other people with whom they interact...and so the web of positivity is cast.

Here is his website: http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu/

We are responsible for our actions and always have a choice. So the key lesson from Fowler's paper is that we can, individually, play a role in benefiting our communities. We must all take responsibility for our value systems and these are manifested through our actions. We must all be leaders and demonstrate our beliefs through our actions at every opportunity. We must all respond to challenges through actions that are balanced, just, inclusive and benefit our communities. We must remove our egos and selfishness to ensure that our actions exist with the single objective of benefiting our communities. Fowler's paper demonstrates that we, as individuals, can help change the world for the better. We must all be 'good' leaders.

The wisdom economy

This week, the RSA talked about the transition from the 'knowledge economy' to the 'wisdom economy'. Intuitively, this sounds great. Words like 'consideration', 'thoughtfulness', 'insight' and 'consequence' come to mind. The basic premise is that knowledge and skills have been the differentiator for Western economies but we are seeing that the emerging markets are as intelligent, innovative and creative as the west. More importantly, the emerging markets are able to provide services and produce 'things' at a fraction of the cost as the western markets.

So what can differentiate the mature western markets? What is the next stage of maturity or evolution? The proposal is wisdom. The article states:

"A wisdom economy doesn’t ignore knowledge, but recognises that value is attached to the ethical and social framework within which that knowledge is used. Wisdom recognises that values and value-judgements are implicit in the way we live and that we need to be open about them. The knowledge economy is innovative. The wisdom economy is reflective. Reflection doesn’t displace innovation: but it asks what the purpose and end of the innovation will be. It stops to consider the consequences, and will sometimes place a higher value on inaction than on action as a result."

Here is the link to the article:

http://comment.rsablogs.org.uk/2010/03/03/knowledge-economy-wisdom-economy/

These types of idea are appearing more and more in conventional thinking. If wisdom is the next development of how we live together and operate, the time is right to sharpen our self awareness and review our values.

Earth hour

Earth Hour started in 2007 in Sydney, Australia when 2.2 million homes and businesses turned their lights off for one hour to make their stand against climate change. In March 2009, hundreds of millions of people in over 4000 cities in 88 countries switched off their lights to pledge their support for the planet, making Earth Hour 2009 the world’s largest global climate change initiative.

Here's the link for more information.

http://www.earthhour.org

Earth Hour 2010 takes place on Saturday 27 March at 8.30pm (local time) and is a global call to action to every individual, every business and every community throughout the world. It is a call to stand up, to take responsibility, to get involved and lead the way towards a sustainable future.

God for the weekend

Ever wanted to try god for a no-purchase-necessary, no-strings-attached weekend? Well, now you can. In Austria, a monastery is offering men the chance to be a monk for a weekend - for absolutely free! It's part of a recruitment drive to offer up a 'try before you buy' opportunity to people interested in monkism.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8525741.stm

Absolutely brilliant! It's putting religion up there with Easy Jet, Starbucks and McDonalds. I'm not religious but I say BOGOF. Do the monks get loyalty points or bonus prayer time if they recommend a friend?

Becomming a monk - a pretty fundamental life changing event - should really be handled more responsibly. Think of all the depressed people looking for meaning in their lifes - a quick weekend introduction to god in a peaceful, calm sanctuary will naturally appeal. These people could be making impulsive, life changing decisions while in a weakened mental state. This seems more like a tactic used by a religious cult than one of the major, venerable, global religions. It also seems a bit desperate. A quick, accessible fix.

If a religion wants to earn respect and include the 'right' people into its community, there has to be a more responsible way. This is the blatant commoditisation of god.

21 hour working week (New Economics Foundation: NEF)

The New Economics Foundation (NEF) has just released a paper stating that a 21 hour working week is 'set to become the new norm'. According to the NEF "...so many of us live to work, work to earn, and earn to consume. And our consumption habits are squandering the earth’s natural resources... Spending less time in paid work could help us to break this pattern. We’d have more time to be better parents, better citizens, better carers and better neighbours. And we could even become better employees: less stressed, more in control, happier in our jobs and more productive. It is time to break the power of the old industrial clock, take back our lives and work for a sustainable future.”

http://neweconomics.org/press-releases/shorter-working-week-soon-inevitable-forecasts-think-tank130210

This is inspirational. That said, Isiah Berlin famously wrote "few new truths have ever won their way against the resistance of established ideas save by being overstated". Perhaps the paper by the NEF is trying to do something along these lines. I don't know many people who could handle a 50% pay cut - but then the principle is that wealth is spread and individual people are given the chance to focus on the pressing the matters stated above. The benefit is to society as a whole.

The important point is that an influential Think Tank has taken a stance on something (strangely) controversial that, if followed, could have major ramifications. I admire the principle and will follow the ensuing discussions with interest.

Freedom of speech

"How absurd men are! They never use the liberties they have, they demand those they do not have. They have freedom of thought, they demand freedom of speech."

Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) is regarded as the Father of Existentialism. In this quote he talks about our lack of self awareness and inability to use what we have to hand - on both practical and profound levels. Interestingly, he talks about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is something that the democratic Nations laud as a defining feature of their governance. Yet are we not often constrained when faced with disagreement? Politically, in the work place, in all forms of relationship? The internet has helped give a billion people a voice but still we are constrained.

So how can freedom of thought be turned into actionable outcomes that change our surroundings? Do we have a responsibility to notice situations where speaking is not proper then take action in an appropriate way? Should we always mitigate our language and style? Alternatively, should we search for an outlet where we are joined by people with a common understanding, where our speech - the articulation of our thoughts - is acceptable and catalyses progressive thinking?

Sadly, Kierkegaard's edict is all too intrinsic to human nature and the structures that confine acceptable behaviour. But we have a responsibility to ourselves - to take a stance and be consistent to our beliefs. His declaration relates to people oppressed by a situation yet modern idealism teaches us to express ourselves. We therefore have a choice and it seems that it comes down to our desire for freedom. If we remain in our boxes, the air will fester and we will suffocate. If we are brave we will be free but we must be prepared to take responsibility for our actions and the consequences thereof. Maybe bravery is absurd. Then sensible is inert.

Racist? Sexist?

Are we really as balanced and considered as we like to think? Is our thinking process truly rational? Do we have valid defences to our reasoning?

Project Implicit uses the Implicit Association Test to scientifically demonstrate our unconscious prejudiced associations. Gender, race, religion etc.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

It is controversial - the data says what it says. We exist in a society of 'equal opportunities' but is this how our minds really work.

Take the tests and challenge your thinking.

One young world

One Young World is an organization that aims to be the voice of young people around the world on critical international issues such as the environment, health and interfaith engagement. Next week they are holding their inaugural summit in London and are expecting 1500 delegates from 192 countries to attend and debate the major socio-political issues we face today. The counsellors include Kofi Annan, Bob Geldof and Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

As people say, if you want to know what tomorrow will be like, ask kids. Now, more than ever, everyone can have a voice - next week, One Young World will be the forum for collaboration and unhindered creativity, the place to debate world issues and move our thinking one step forward. This is about bringing people together who are passionate about the world, under the auspices of established world leaders, who are interested in the thoughts and opinions of those closest to the volatile changes that underpin the way society works – on a global scale.

http://www.oneyoungworld.com/

By the end of February, 1500 people will have helped to influence the future direction for the world and will continue to do so through their evolving thoughts and actions.

This is a truly remarkable organisation.

Positive psychology

Why settle for 'ok' when you can have 'great'?

Martin Seligman was the President of the American Psychological Association in 1998 and made the theme of positive psychology the basis for his tenure. Positive psychology is the study of optimal human functioning and challenges psychology's historical emphasis on the study of mental illness rather than on mental wellness. Traditionally, psychologists worked according to the disease model eg. curing schizophrenia. But what about nurturing genius and talent?

There are three features to the positive psychology model. These are 1) enjoyment 2) engagement and 3) affiliation. By understanding these three components, it gives us the opportunity to see how they are currently relevant to our lives. It also allows us to see how we can adapt our lives to achieve a 'positive psychology' state. We owe it to ourselves to understand this model and take responsibility for our own mental wellness. This way, we get the most out of life and are happier. This way we each play our role in building a happier community.

Guns and alcohol

A new law has been passed to allow people in Arizona to bring their guns into bars and restaurants. The new law is supported, as you would expect, by the NRA.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33074414/ns/us_news-life/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31683427/ns/us_news-life/

While people carrying guns are not allowed to drink alcohol in these bars, there is surely something wrong here?

The American attitude to guns is what it is - people demand the right to carry / own a gun to protect themselves. This is a cultural thing, most prominent in certain areas - and whether you agree or disagree, it's a fact - much like the English like to play cricket and lose and the French like to write philosophy and be depressed. American politicians will naturally support the right to carry guns because they, as American citizens, will also share the desire. OK - agree or disagree it's a fact. But surely allowing guns to be carried in places where the social facilitator leads, in excess, to bad judgement, emotional inconsistency and physical impairment, this new law is surely insane.

I believe in the right to choose but politicians are there to help ensure our choices fall within a responsible framework. Do these politicians know nothing? Have these politicians not seen Bowling for Columbine?

Be like water

Here is a quote from the Daodejing (Edmund Ryden translation). In the spirit of this wonderful philosophy, I will make no comment and leave that to your interpretation...



Chapter 8

The highest goodness is like water:
Water benefits the myriad things and rests in the places everybody detests.

Therefore,
It is close to the Way.

Dwelling aims to be earth-bound;
Thinking aims to be profound;
Giving aims to be like heaven;
Speaking aims to be trustworthy;
Governing aims to be correct;
Accomplishing aims to be capable;
Undertaking aims to be timely.

Only through not competing will there be no disaster.

Can we have too much choice?

A few years old now and we still haven't learned anything... In this video psychologist Barry Schwartz says we have all become so anxious due to the amount of choice we have now. In the old days, there was coffee or tea... Now, well, there's no such thing... Because of this, we have no idea what we want anymore so we become disoriented, frustrated, unsettled, perplexed and, most importantly, anxious. We have a responsibility to make things simple for people. Simplicity leads to understanding whereas complexity leads to confusion.

Our responsibility: Obama

Barack Obama talks about responsibility. After a decade of personalisation, the need for instant gratification and the falsely instilled belief that our actions are always right, it was refreshing when Obama raised these thoughts on responsibility. A little bit of introspection can go a long way. Slow down, think, ask what you can do to make your immediate world a better place. How can you change your ways? This is your responsibility. By making changes to your life, you can help change the world.

Brick walls

"Brick walls are there for a reason. They let us prove how badly we want things."

This is a quote from Randy Pausch. While diagnosed with terminal cancer, he gave a thoughtful and uplifting talk on chasing your childhood dreams. Here is the link:



There are so many inspiring insights in this talk. But I really like the Brick Wall quote. I use the brick wall as a filter for everything I want. If it fails the 'Randy' test then I don't mind if I'm blocked. If it passes the 'Randy' test then I do what it takes (patiently, and sometimes passively waiting for the planets to align) to climb over the wall.

Currency of favours

This is fantastic - if you commit 4 hours of your time to a community project, you are given a ticket to a specially organised concert.

http://www.orangerockcorps.co.uk/

Young people taking action to improve their community and gaining rewards for doing so.

It is a transaction which means the benefits are quantifiable and involvement is unemotional towards the cause. There are clear benefits to any associated corporate brand. That said, it raises the importance of community involvement and is a talking point for kids.

All credit to the founders. By providing the opportunity, kids have an experience. With the experience, kids can start to think about how they need to engage with each other, their family and their community.

Science of happiness

In this video, Nancy Etcoff talks about the scientific basis of happiness.

She covers the hormonal basis for addiction, reward, attachment; me vs. we; intragenerational value shifts; facial expressions etc. Whether it is social 'soft' or neurological / biological 'hard' science, this video is facinating.

By understanding the science and being aware of the physical changes in our bodies, we are in a better position to understand why we feel as we do. By understanding the basis for our emotions, we can control and change our emotional state. We can understand the stimuli that cause us to feel as we do. That way we can take action to ensure that we maintain a positive emotional experience and uninvolve ourselves in activities that don't make us feel happy.

Actions or intent?

Should we judge people based on their actions or their intent?

Should we judge ourselves based on our actions or our intent?

First time, this time

'We think first' - what does this mean to you?

To me, it means that we must thoroughly consider the ramifications of our actions before we do anything. Politicians are consistently faced with 'impossible' decisions but their actions are sometimes reactive or lean towards an agenda. So by thinking first and understanding the implications of our actions, we can 'do the right thing' more conistently.

It is our responsibility - every person's - to make informed decisions that enhance the welfare of Earth's inhabitants and safeguard the future of our planet. By taking responsibility for thinking first, we will make informed and considered actions.

Of course this all depends on the moral code that underpins our own decision making...