Belief & Behaviour

I reviewed a lot of literature over the past few days and took a hard critical look at the debate which seems to be raging on the subject of Belief, Knowledge, Truth and Behaviour. The story is very different when I look at these areas through the lens of philosophy, versus psychology; and these are different again from those who seek to profit from their expertise (as executive coaches) in applying the still shifting theoretical framework in the business world.

So where do I stand?

I quickly ran into a major problem with the idea of TRUTH. It is subjectively defined and a wide range of data may be accepted as "evidence". Let me briefly run through the key concepts I've encountered:

• We have, via natural selection, developed into a species that seeks information to better survive, and exploit to our own advantage, the environments we find ourselves in.
• We are social animals, and as such, are to some degree dependent on the continued goodwill of those we live and work with. Therefore the beliefs and opinions of my family, neighbours and co-workers will have an impact on the decisions I make. How much of an impact they may have on my behaviour, and to what degree they impact my own beliefs will vary depending on how much importance I ascribe to a particular social relationship. I will likely place a great deal more importance on the beliefs and expectations of a spouse, than I would on those of a distant relative I see only once every few years.
• We have adapted to a reality that a few false positives are less detrimental to our well-being than the odd catastrophic false negative. (ex: Is that a threat to me or my resources? If I act as if it IS a threat, whether it really is or not, I'll feel more secure about the well being of myself and my stuff. If I decide that I don't really KNOW that's a threat, and behave accordingly, I may be wrong -- with disasterous results.)
• Some perspectives, like that expressed by Neale Walsh in The New Revelations (Hodder Mobius, 2002), say that humans tend to believe that doing something will make things better, when in fact we should be looking at beliefs - rather than behaviours.
  "You can take whatever action you want to take to alter someone else's behaviour or to stop it, but unless you alter the beliefs that produced such behaviour, you will alter nothing and stop nothing. You can alter belief in 2 ways. Either by enlarging upon it, or by changing it completely. But you must do one or the other or you will not alter behaviour. You will merely interrupt it."
• The Theory of Reasoned Action as put forward by Miller (2005), and Ajzen's expansion of the model into the Theory of Planned Behaviour; both propose that the most utilitarian theoretical models incorporate belief(attitudes), social implications (subjective norms), and behaviour (behavioural intentions). In it's simplest form, Reasoned Action or Planned Behaviour can be expressed as a mathematical formula (Hale, 2003):

BI = (AB)W1+(SN)W2

BI = behavioural intention

(AB) = one's attidude toward performing the behaviour (attitude = sum of all beliefs related to the subject)

W = Empirically derived weights

SN = one's subjective norms related to performing the behaviour (influence of the attitudes of significant others in my life towards the behaviour)

The science looks good but it has to make some sense to me on a gut level--I need to see this in action to believe it! I realize our gut response is sometimes wrong but I cannot bring myself to ignore common sense, either. I can certainly grasp the the value of mis-belief (believing things that aren't true) as being utilitarian on an individual level. It's like the expression to "err on the side of caution". We get plenty of this in safety awareness education - "what to do if...." is supposed to help us avoid harm or damage in high risk situations.

People aren't dumb. They will find their own methods to express this in a variety of ways. Right off I'm thinking of how mothers will manipulate belief in their children to protect them from perceived harm "Don't stand in the boat dear, or you'll slip and drown". "Don't stick your finger in the socket -- it bites!" The concerned parent doesn't care whether the belief they are instilling in the child is true or not -- what matters is the safer behaviour that results from holding this belief.

Ok, I'm convinced this is a useful model for exploring how we choose what to do. Next, I want to consider applications for knowledge workers -- esp when our choices will have a real impact on the safety or wellbeing of our fellow humans.

My Knowledge: creating, sharing & applying

I've been attempting to wrap my brain around some of the challenges which continue to plague the knowledge workers in my workplace. I think much of the problem lies in the difficulty some of our decision-makers have in grasping the nature of knowledge, sharing it effectively and applying it in context. Each one may be very knowledgable indeed in their own area -- but cannot seem to communicate the information effectively with others who must then translate it into meaningful knowledge which can then be effectively applied. (Yikes! It even sounds complicated!)

There is a real NEED to build an individual and a collaborative approach to address knowledge gaps and the potential applications of new information. An article that explores this need can be found at:

http://www.roell.net/publikationen/distributedkm.shtml


As I continue to keep my field notes (of course I look at knowledge from the perspective of an Ethnographer / knowledge worker) and continue to analyse the behaviour patterns I've observed surrounding the creation and sharing of knowledge - I become increasingly convinced that the toughest problems CAN indeed be resolved with effective knowledge sharing.

What IS knowledge sharing?

> It's personal. Each individual has their own method of extrapolating meaning from information, then translating it into effective actions.

> It's collaborative. In discussion with others, the data is appropriately contextualized thus allowing the discussion members to check and balance the meanings extrapolated by individuals with regard potential applications.

What is NOT knowledge sharing?

> It's NOT a series of commandments. This is just information of a black/white nature -- there is no application or value here. (Consider "Ethical Guidelines" which are essentially a list of do's and don'ts -- none of which may be particularly helpful in the plethora of contexts not covered in the list).

> It's NOT "re-programming" people with a new process. People are not computers!! A computer will "think" what you tell it to think -- a human exposed to the same commands and data sets will choose to accept/reject or qualify the information in their own unique way. (Consider the plurality of biblical interpretations - one data set with infinite possiblities for interpretation and application -- including complete rejection of the whole set)

> It's NOT even the old carrot/stick approach to behaviour modification. With all due regard to the Watson/Skinner crowd, humans do not respond the same as pigeons! Humans often know when they are being manipulated, or they may be powerfully influenced by their suspicions of hidden agendas. We are selective in choosing which carrots or sticks we are willing to pay attention to. (Consider the underground economy, smoking, or high risk investing)

What happens when we are exposed to new information?

With the sum of all human knowledge doubling every 2.5 years, and the need for life-long learning increasingly critical at the individual level; knowing how to construct personal knowledge is an essential skill - both for individuals and groups. The construction of knowledge, like the construction of a building, must begin with an evaluation of the materials available. Think of the three little pigs: which house would YOU take refuge in? Straw, sticks or bricks?

Scenario:

I must choose a service provider. The service is one that I personally perceive as essential. The competition is fierce among potential suppliers - each of whom bombard me with "information" to enhance my "knowledge" of the services they offer. Some will attempt to discredit the competition with assurances that I'll never suffer the inconvenience of "X" as most customers do with other service providers. (Think of the recent commercial: "Sorry ma'm, looks like you've got bankers")

How do I choose? How do I sculpt bare data into applicable knowledge? How do I evaluate the material presented to me?

Being a of an introverted nature - I talk to myself as I shuffle through the information presented. I ask questions, gather information to cover the gaps, survey the experiences of others, and always, always read the fine print with a critical eye. I don't like surprises! I don't like being pressured to make a decision when critical information is vague or missing. I immediately distrust and reject some data, and readily accept and embrace others. (If I've received trustworthy information from a source in the past, I'm more likely to believe them next time. Whereas, if I've heard inconsistent, false or deliberately misleading information from a source, I'm more likely to reject what they have to say in the future.) This is part of the personal process of extrapolating meaning from presented information.

By surveying the experiences of others, I can reduce the time consuming process of accruing personal experience. This is the collaborative aspect of knowledge-sharing. I do not have the time, money or desire to experience the service of each provider first hand. However, if I speak with those who are willing to candidly share their own first hand experience, then I quickly and cheaply get to benefit from their experience.

The greater the risk I'm about to undertake, the more intently I will examine and question the material available to me. If I catch a whiff of anything I don't like - I'll dig deeper to get my information from more reliable sources and may change or modify the criteria required for "success" based on what I believe to be true.

... To be continued in: Knowledge, Belief and Truth

Let it Snow!

I'm finally moved into my new place! I have the trees up, presents bought and wrapped, and almost all the unpacking is done. I'm astonished at how much space there is in the new place (didn't seem that much bigger). But now I really don't care how cold it is outside or how frightful the weather -- I need only trundle through the pedway to reach work! I don't have to go outside at all unless it's to go to a store not represented in Scotia Square Mall. I love it! I can dash home for anything I forgot and be back in 5 min! No more waiting in the freezing cold for the bus that may -- or may not -- arrive.

The new place even has indoor and outdoor pools, saunas, weight room, gym, convenience store and pub all in the building. With all the pedways, I can even go to the bank, or for a good brisk walk without going outside. Hey, it's not that I hate winter -- I just hate being cold and wasting my time in transit. This move has allowed me to claw back 2 hours per work day. That means more sleep and more human contact - Whoo hoo!

This year we (read: me) didn't have the time to create a theme and make the ornaments for our holiday trees. One year we had a "Piratical Xmas"; and once a "Fabulous, Flying Machines" theme for decorations & gifts. This year there are just white mini lights on the tallest of the 3 trees. It looks pretty. I at least can look forward to having some time off for the holidays! First time in a while!

Cheers to all & Happy Festivus : )

Deva

Holy men and Morris the cat

Most of us don't like to say anything to believers because we understand the futility of reason in the face of faith. As far as I can tell, people can convince themselves of almost anything. Some very intelligent people like to keep the concept of divinity alive in their daily lives, even if they have lost their faith (sort of like a cat - doesn't really DO anything but makes life seem more comfy and familiar) That's nice.
As for me, I think we fabricate gods to give credence to what we want to believe is true, right and worthy. Over time, as a population's understanding of truth and rightness shifts further and further away from what their ancestors believed; so new gods, messiahs and prophets have to be manufactured to house and promote the new truths. I'm not saying all these figures were complete fictions. There may actually have been real people who had divinity thrust upon them - with or without their knowledge or consent. Others may have simply seen the opportunity play an enticing role, and seized it. Some of these divine beings, like Jesus, may have been completely fictitious constructs employed to make new ideas more convincing or appealing to a broader audience.
Normally believers sputter and protest against the possibility that their gods are little more than a narrative device or a marketing mascot. They can't imagine why anyone would do such a thing. Well, likely the choice to create these holy men were made then for the same reason advertisers create spokespeople today. Take Morris the cat who acted as the spokescritter for a cat food company. Was there a REAL cat? Yes, there were actually several real cats who played this same role. But AND THIS IS IMPORTANT - none of them could really talk.

Can't wait for this year!

Easter 2005 - Shubenacadie Park

Change the view

Wacky Words

These are some of the vocabulary enjoyed in our house. You won't find these definitions in Websters!

Tetrafied: Comination of Petrified & Terrified. (scared stiff)
Cowarding: Combination of Coward & Cowering (quivering in hiding spot)
Perficul: Combination of Perfect and Wonderful (answer to "hey, how ya doin?")
Jacked: To successfully accomplish a task while very drunk (better than you could when sober). Ex: Wow, I really Jacked that painting!
Pythonic: Signifying a similarity with "Monty python"-like humour.
Sidewinding: A form of feline affection wherein the cat throws it's body on floor and locomotes a happy dance on it's side.
Red buttony: An ambiguous situation. Refers to the plot device of a mysterious red button where no one knows what it will do if pressed.
Gargoyle: To loom and observe distainfully from a high place. (cats do this to each other)
Flustrated: A state of great frustration brought on by panic and hurry. Combines the meanings of Flustered and Frustrated.
Foozy: A flea, fly or other compelling insectoid irritant. When kitty pursues something invisible, we say "Get the foozy!".

Nightmoods

Scitter scitter, Jump and jitter
Nerves alive and Thoughts a twitter

What’s that noise?
Who are you?
Where am I now?
What do I do?

Mad scramble Hurried haste
Wild dash -- No time to waste!

I passed a mirror but all I could see
Was a dark stranger looking back at me

Who are you?
What do you want?
(Silent eyes show no sign of life
Only lingering ghosts of strife)

Stop asking questions!
Stop rattling doors!
Stop opening windows and
Scouring floors!

There’s nothing here but shadows
No one comes when I call
There are no fires to warm me
And this house gives no shelter at all

BBQs Birthdays and Backshift

On June/2 I had the pleasure of celebrating Niko’s 35th birthday with her sister and niece from BC. It was a real treat to meet some of her family and find we have so much in common. Selena and Ryan (MY Ryan) hit it off quite well and chattered happily in one another’s company while they tended the BBQ. We watched Pirates of the Carribean 3 and loved every minute of it. Because of all the extra time off I had that week, I was even able to make a gluten-free chocolate cake, an egg-free chocolate cake and obtain a regular chocolate cake—all 3 with frosting! So everybody was able to enjoy cake after the BBQ.

I have been working the backshift supporting the outage/emergency line – grid sittin’. I like it a lot because it gives me time to read, learn, write, sketch, handsew, and try new things. It also gives me a lot more time off (because I work 12 hour shifts instead of 7) and every once in awhile I get a whole week off! Most important to me is the sweet silence. The call centre can be pretty hectic, loud and busy and I find it grating on the nerves.
* sigh * 2 more hours to this shift and then off til Wed!

Wolfville - Ah! Sweet Dreamland of the east

Had a blast yesterday on a raod trip to Wolfville. I had to show off my alma mater and favourite town in the east to my roomie, Niko (from BC). We drove down on a day so perfect it sparkled. The lovely views of mudflats and blomidon cliffs were a treat. We stopped at Eos --greatest little health food store ever -- lots of neat baskets and kitchen trinkets as well as a grandma's pantry of herbs and spices. We had to get tea! I picked up "spicy orange" and she found some wonderful "jasmine green" tea.
After loading up on teas, spices, soap and fresh bread; we toddled next door to The Odd Book. I find books in here that cannot be found anywhere else. I found several used (and much loved) reprints of key primary texts in the area of ancient and far eastern religions, dolls and anthropology. I feel a paper coming on.
I also bumped into Dr. Paula Chegwidden (retired!) who said the Soc Dept at Acadia has changed dramatically since I left. Jeanette Auger and Diane Looker have both retired. Ann-Marie is still there!
*Sigh* It felt good to dally in dappled green sunlight again.

In the Beginning was the Word....

I think this would be a good place to begin. As most of us are already quite familiar with the Genesis version, let’s start with a slightly different perspective, specifically as found in “On the Origin of the World”(aka. “The Untitled Text”) as translated by Bethge and Layton. This document is one of several recovered with the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library.

What I find most exciting about these recovered documents, is the opportunity to get a different perspective on the kinds of issues our ancestors grappled with. Where did we come from? How did this great, wide, complex world around me come into being? What drives us humans to do the incomprehensible things we do? As a human being and as a social scientist, I have struggled to find meaningful answers to these same questions. I’m well aware of evolutionary theory and its supporting evidence. This is quite sufficient to satisfy my need to understand how human came to exist, but it was clearly unknown to ancient authors.

Ancient authors of the Nag Hammadi texts, scriptures, and learned works outlined several explanations which seemed plausible to them based on the knowledge and beliefs of their contemporaries. Reading the texts from a 21st century perspective may understandably leave the modern reader scratching their head over how anyone could ever have believed any of the narratives presented. Furthermore, we may ask ourselves what any of it has to do with us today. Quite a bit, I think.

Today, on the secular side of life, we are more comfortable using physics to understand the cosmic forces of creation & destruction. Back in the days before the laws of physics were sufficiently fleshed out to provide the cognitive structure we needed, ancient metaphysicians had their own grasp of how things come into being or are destroyed. In this text, the author expounds on precisely how Faith and Wisdom (from the Greek: Pistis and Sophia) came to be the primary forces of creation. Wisdom is here understood as the expression of the will of Faith. This is an important idea because this very force is what is described as accountable for dividing the human realm from the realm of the divine/perfect immortals (above) and the infinite chaos of the abyss (below). The author spent considerable effort on detailing the order of events (what came first and why) as well as how that order impacted the will and faith of subsequent creations.

“And when Pistis Sophia desired to cause the thing that had no spirit to be formed into a likeness and to rule over matter and over all her forces, there
appeared for the first time a ruler, out of the waters, lion-like in appearance, androgynous, having great authority within him, and ignorant of whence he had
come into being. Now when Pistis Sophia saw him moving about in the depth
of the waters, she said to him, “Child, pass through to here,” whose equivalent
is ‘yalda baoth’. Since that day, there appeared the principle of verbal expression, which reached the gods and angels and mankind. And what came into being as a result of verbal expression, the gods and the angels and mankind finished.”

From: James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, rev. ed. Harper Collins, San Francisco, 1990.

In 21st century terms, we can understand that verbal expression is here proposed to be a force of creation accessible to some degree by gods, angels and humans. Like much of ancient writing, including the events portrayed in the bible, these bizarre and unsubstantiated descriptions of unseen realms and events are vigorously expounded as the truth. This ancient author is clearly well educated, and refers with comfortable familiarity to several other scholarly works throughout his opus. Why does the scholar seem to believe these things?

Like most conclusions which can only be reached through deductive reasoning, we will want to examine the assumptions which provided the foundation for the author’s logic. We understand the author believed that verbal expression gives humans the power to create. We know that very few people were literate – thus only these educated elite would be able to create or receive this form of verbal & visual communication. Therefore, whatever the author wants to be true, real, and of material substance; s/he has only to express it verbally as a deliberate act of will and faith, and it will be so. It’s an important concept. It implies whatever anyone of us consciously calls into being by word and deed is literally born into reality as a physical manifestation of the Faith-Will creative force. What these authors never mention, of course, is that these “creations” are completely arbitrary constructions.

This assumption has been with us for a very, very long time. Think for a moment of the earliest cave paintings. The hungry hunter wants to catch a nice juicy deer, so he enters a womb-like environment (cave) to speak the magic words, and paint the image on the wall. Sure enough, when next he goes hunting (or eventually) he does indeed find the very deer he had magically created in the cave! The ultimate Life Imitating Art! This assumption is at the very core of several world religions and belief systems.

In Tibetan Buddhism, the verbal expression of the mantra “om mani padme hum” in combination with the contemplation of its full meaning, is the source of power which transforms a normal person into an enlightened (god-like) being.

“Thus the six syllables, om mani padme hum, mean that in dependence on the
practice of a path which is an indivisible union of method and wisdom, you can
transform your impure body, speech, and mind into the pure exalted body, speech,
and mind of a Buddha. It is said that you should not seek for Buddhahood outside
of yourself; the substances for the achievement of Buddhahood are within."

From: http://www.tibet.com/Buddhism/om-mantra.html

If we speak and act like god – we become god-like in our ability to transform
ourselves and our environment. Amulets, spells, charms, and the entire field
of alchemy are rooted in the directed expression of faith and will.
Can anyone think of other examples in magic or religion

De-coding Christianity (an Atheist perspective)

What’s my Bias?
I’ve been an atheist for over 20 years. Before that, I lived in a fundamentalist christian family (So fundamentalist some of them formed their own branch). I have read the bible several times (once as a “believer” and several times since as a scholar). I have 9 years of post secondary education in the areas of social psychology, anthropology and heritage ethnography. I am at peace with my own spiritual journey.

What am I trying to accomplish?
After my rage against the church had subsided to embers, and I felt safe enough to speak my mind, I realized there were some interesting insights to be gained from the bible and other sources of ancient spiritual literature. The insights often had nothing to do with the “good news” believers are so anxious to impart. What I found useful were the bits used to justify and “sanctify” some of the worst atrocities committed by the church. Finding the source of this convoluted logic was a challenge I needed to tackle because it helps me better understand where some of the really frustrating stuff in our culture came from. As the bible has been edited and re-edited so many times, it was important I pull together a more complete picture by drawing on contemporary (new testament era) primary sources as well as the rich body of ancient literature which pre-dated any form of the bible we would be acquainted with today.

What did I read?
Translated editions of the Nag Hammadi Library
The bible – both protestant and catholic versions
The pseudographia, apocrypha and omitted gospels
Other ancient writings (the bibliography is under construction)
Competing ideologies & early Christianity

Questions asked & Areas investigated

Women & their curious ways
You know that bit in Genesis 6:2 where we have a few brief verses about angels breeding with human women? I could never figure that bit out! And why was it put so close to “In the beginning”? Why does the church get so antsy about what women are and are not permitted to do? Why were Eve and Pandora punished so harshly for being curious? Why is knowledge so strictly guarded? Why didn’t anyone mention that witches are women who ignored god’s rank and obtained knowledge from “unauthorized” sources? Why would anyone want a god that denies its supplicants knowledge? I found some interesting stuff on the subject….

Heathens, heathens everywhere!
The christian church gets it’s panties in a twist over heathens more than any other religion I’ve come across. A heathen is simply someone who doesn’t share the same faith as you. If you are a Pagan – then I’m a heathen. If you are a Christian – then I’m a heathen. If you are an atheist – then I’m your buddy and the Christians and Pagans are the heathens. See how it works? Most religions have a fairly tolerant view of outsiders – but not Christianity! Where did the fanaticism come from?

Wisdom
I like the idea of wisdom. I love reading wisdom literature – from the Vedas, rabbinical texts, the bible, Greek philosophy, an assortment of Egyptian and Persian gnostic writings as well as the very earliest written records on the subject. What I noticed as I read through all these is the startling variety of assumptions which act as the foundation for each author’s claim to wisdom. What is wise? Why do we think that? What did our ancestors think was wise and why did they think that? Is there any wisdom that has stood the test of time? Is there any wisdom that instructs usefully outside the context in which it was created?

Creation, Control and the power of Words.
Heavy stuff, eh? Not only all that, but we can toss in the roots of sympathetic and contagion magic, hierarchy and authority. It’s all there to be found in early sacred literature. The more I understand where this stuff comes from, the better I am able to identify and refute it when encountered today. Why are some counter-productive behaviours valued so highly? How much of this still influences how North Americans organize themselves at work and in politics?