Pic Of A Warts When Is Dying

Day

I would not want to miss this day without writing something, in spite of that means that blogging from the U.S. and as a partner fills out a form should be filled by me as well. in order.

I would think the blog as a great resort. So as I see the blog is how we as individuals can express opinions, make analysis and just wander. The thing is that blog is an instance where any person have the option to communicate. Now, that might be good and bad: The good news is that there is no discrimination, all have equal right to express themselves. The trouble is that many views can become offensive, or just plain littering engage others. The

one that is good looking, but I think it is a problem of the blog but the internet in general, is that one may well "be yourself" (in the sense of identity, give my name Arturo Perez) or one can be an anonymous which is totally legitimate as long as we do not transform into a obnoxious trolls.

Something can be very good blog is the fact that publishing what we think of a way of life requires coherence, since the actions are a reinforcement of what one writes, but also control act social will be present (but if you hear you say such a thing in your blog ")

On another point, to one of my favorites, which is amazing in the blog is the ability to receive feedback, often immediately, and that one could be responsible for responding opinions replys. can also just say "well!, I love what you do", that is of great value to us bloggers.

Well, I leave up here because I'm very scattered.
one final comment: the blog is a great example of what you are looking for modern man, his individuality. but we can not let these instances of individual expression calm down and forget that we also exist in a social sphere where individual problems that may appear are more of a public nature.

that! a big hello to my bloggers, especially at Alvaro , Paul and Third Culture .

PD: A link to a post of thanks to my readers.

Whiplash And Pregnancy

blogger, but what is a bias?

There is a problem that I had not taken over. I had never addressed how we define what bias is, only I had turned to the task of spreading the idea that we are more limited than it appears and you have to have us a little less confident. Anyway. Now I'll try. Limitations

processing
As Maturana would say:
"living beings can only do what they are biologically possible"
In this way, a man will not be able to fly on their own (in any way we will develop wings and muscles needed to move and get up the floor again), and so we do not have an unlimited capacity for processing, information processing is an infinite task and our "processor" is of limited capacity. Examples are limitations in attentional capacity (Vásques quoted Broadbent, Treisman and Kahneman-who leave a text in one of the last entries-)

Difference between Error and Bias
Define
reality is a complicated matter, but in this instance defined as:
1-The perceptual reality (the colors I see, things I feel, the sounds I hear)
2-interpretative reality (this is subject to a greater degree of uncertainty as regards spheres "intangibles" such as questions about whether I'm happy, if Juan angry, etc)

Having defined this, we can now say that a distortion or an error are necessary 2 things, the first being a standard or benchmark against which performance is tested, the second objective would be a deviation (which can be viewed by more than one observer)
In this way we may classify error in processing the information when someone hears things that are not present. It should be out of context to note that laboratory and severe mental illness, it is difficult when there is really a failure or not.

The bias other hand it is a response tendency consistently maintained in virtually any situation, unlike errors which tend to be more casual.

None of the latter necessarily lead to problems of adjustment or adaptation to reality, such as illusory correlation bias, more specifically I mean the principle of co-variation (if A then B varies, then many-to-B) is a very recurrent bias but that is of great adaptive value (if we had not learned to correlate with certain predators may sound nor would the living).
So why do we have biases? This brings us back to what I wrote at first, given our limited processing capacity we had to develop mechanisms to provide us with information processing though often because of them make mistakes (although they are more successful than we would like to believe)

and that is what I have to say.
I leave before I left a TED talk that talks about our natural tendency to look for patterns.

Brazillian Wax With Hemorrhoids

not far away ...

This is the Itaipu Dam the second largest in the world but the one that occurs. As you can see his Wikipedia page in 2008 was a record in energy production.

On this side we have the Iguazu Falls, a true natural wonder that I do not need any man to become what even today is.

seems funny that these two impressive wonders are just a short trip on a bus.

make me think of those who hate Hydroelectric power (I'm thinking about the situation of Chile ), say that ruin the natural heritage (cultural and sometimes it's just a matter of thinking about of China Three Gorges ) and that under no circumstances should be done. And they are right, do not think it fair to destroy the wealth of our planet to do business only.
But that is not all that matters: What if we run out of energy sources? Perhaps would not continue to exploit the environment causing the loss is greater in this case? Also think about the energy of large dams is more environmentally sustainable. Stop, I've heard that plants shed certain harmful chemicals. But central energy creates jobs and is ultimately cheaper than that produced by fossil fuels which are also endangered.
So how is that some are so confident in their decisions in this area? I do not know.
comes to my mind the hypothesis confirmation bias (the second last entry): You have good things does not mean one of two positions this good, one bad.
So far as I see it is not a position of the other, consider that one is good and the other evil merely prolong the discussion.
What do I propose? Dudar
a little more ... think, reflect and talk. Then decide. I do not say reach consensus because I believe it is a somewhat meretricious and poorly understood. If we were always looking for consensus should not debate or good ideas that come out of the frames of reference. What I think to look for is to learn to listen and understand what the other poses, only then can reach a better solution.

Greetings and thanks to all who read!

PS wondered why talk about these two. I was in Paraguay visiting a friend who began his Novitiate (enter the seminary to become a priest lol)

Female Wrestling Session

Some mental shortcuts

Hi all, I'm back.
During the holidays I heard that really struck: We all know that we have a blind spot , but rarely do we wonder why do not walk with a "hole" in our vision. Our head somehow fill that space and so we walk through life without thinking about it we do not.
also have blind spots in our way of judging situations, thinking about the probability of something, and as our friend would say Spiderman (the movie) sometimes our mind plays tricks us.
What I have wanted to do today is to tell of some who call me particular attention, hope you like:

Availability: claims that we use the ease with which we can think of examples or cases [of a situation] the judge as more or less likely. Depending on how available (How "at hand") have something in our mind what we judge as more probable. Availability is an imperfect indicator because recent events are remembered more easily, the media shows us every day deaths of people assaulted and walk more frightened of assaults being that, for example, more young people die in traffic accidents that assaulted. Then you should be in great regard for political candidates for any office implementing good preventive measures in this field. Anyway.

Hypothesis Testing: usually serve only to information that proves our hypothesis. This not only validated our hypothesis is that they also ignore the information that validates an alternative hypothesis. Otherwise "typical" is presented that is the time to ask questions that have to do with the hypothesis: \u0026lt;\u0026lt;[...] tend to generate and select questions compatible with the hypothesis.>> Questions that are compatible with the hypothesis for the way in which they are drafted make it more likely to respond positively. Moreover, the affirmative answer to questions related to the hypothesis itself does not make the alternative hypotheses are wrong.


regression effect the average: phenomenon whereby if someone gets too extreme a result, tend to get a less extreme and closer to the average post-event. This is very common (at least for me), the funny thing is that often when someone has gone very well and then things go wrong we tend to blame the regression to the mean "could not go so well yéndole" .

Simulation: We judge the probability or likelihood of an event based on the difficulty or ease with which the mind can construct scenarios that occur. Many times I have seen: We thought that something is very difficult or not going to be but when we visualize the possible positive scenario we relax.

I leave it up to here but not without prior reflection: in many psychology courses it comes to these biases and leave them as the bad guys, but I do not think that is the intention of the teachers. Without these Heuristics could not act in the world and our ability to process information is limited and these shortcuts of the mind simplify everything so that the infinity of possibilities overwhelm us. The trouble is that these shortcuts often lie to us hahaha. so that's why I put them here.
Another thing: this is all too summary, if you're interested read more about it. Do not take it as truth absolute and now they know this is not thinking that the rest walk thought wrong and now you think about it. The truth is that getting rid of the mental shortcuts is quite difficult.

My source to vary is the book "Social Psychology of the Americas" The main theory of this is Kahneman and Tversky (1982), which is known as "bounded rationality", here a lot longer text for those interested the subject. Thanks for Claudio Fuentes (Professor UDP) to provide students this document:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2WCZRXOF

I say goodbye and send him a greeting to friends' blogs: Third Culture and Social Synapses .