Maxims, rules of thumb and other observations on human cognition and sociocultural affectations

This will be added to on an irregular basis...
  • What is said to humans directly is received with skepticism and considered with dubiousness while that which is heard in passing, especially that which most conforms to their mentality or prejudices, is readily believed.
  • Humans have a certain cognitive latency between exposure to new information or experiences and the ability to think dispassionately and intellectually about it.
  • Humans have a certain cognitive spectrum starting with the moment of exposure to new information or experiences and ending with some point at which the thing is effectively "in the past" for them.
  • This cognitive spectrum is linked to the emotional process often referred to as shock, anger, denial and acceptance.
  • The more and faster information or experiences are presented to people and the closer the quarters and the lesser the distance between people, the more their early reactions in the passionate emotional stage are reflected back to them in the manner of responses to those reactions from others in light of those responses.
  • The more outrages which are suffered without sufficient time to allow emotional bleed-off, the farther the bar for subsequent reaction and outrage are pushed, and the more further events must progress before reaction and outrage.
  • It is possible for serious detriments to eventually sit below this threshold for long enough for their damaging effects to build and multiply until their entire society undergoes some reactive convulsion.
Bookmark and Share

Friday, December 05, 2008

Left to medical professionals: morals and ethics are conditional...

Broader medical refusal rule may go far beyond abortion - Los Angeles Times

The outgoing Bush administration is planning to announce a broad new "right of conscience" rule permitting medical facilities, doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other healthcare workers to refuse to participate in any procedure they find morally objectionable, including abortion and possibly even artificial insemination and birth control.

Of course, the usual expected tripe...

Critics of the rule say it will sacrifice patients' health to the religious beliefs of providers.


"It's unconscionable that the Bush administration, while promising a smooth transition, would take a final opportunity to politicize women's health," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood.

Right... Because... why? Because doctors should be forced to provide services they have personal objections to? Why not force kosher butchers to carry non-kosher meat? Why not force toy store owners who are against war toys to carry toy guns? Why not force Playboy to have centerfolds of men?

Everything has its nature and this does not change for your political beliefs. A kosher butcher carries kosher meat. Playboy has naked women, not men. A conscientious objector objects based on his or her conscience. You remember conscience don't you?

Don't you? That little voice inside that tells right from wrong?


How sad.

Meanwhile, most of the usual suspects up in arms over this in the coming days will of course still believe that someone who conscientiously objects to serving in the military should have the right to go AWOL at any time or choose where and how they serve and not obey orders just like they did during Viet Nam.

Conditional ethics and morals. Freedom for me, not for thee. Hypocrisy.

As usual.