You are looking at all articles with the topic "Philosophy". We found 178 matches.

Hint: To view all topics, click here. Too see the most popular topics, click here instead.

🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Logic 🔗 Business 🔗 Politics 🔗 Psychology 🔗 Politics/Corporatism

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Cohesiveness, or the desire for cohesiveness, in a group may produce a tendency among its members to agree at all costs. This causes the group to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation.

Groupthink requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates its own abilities in decision-making and significantly underrates the abilities of its opponents (the "outgroup"). Furthermore, groupthink can produce dehumanizing actions against the "outgroup". Members of a group can often feel peer pressure to "go along with the crowd" in fear of rocking the boat or of what them speaking up will do to the overall to how their teammates perceive them. Group interactions tend to favor, clear and harmonious agreements and it can be a cause for concern when little to no new innovations or arguments for better policies, outcomes and structures are called to question. (McLeod). Groupthink can often be referred to as a group of “yes men” because group activities and group projects in general make it extremely easy to pass on not offering constructive opinions.

Some methods that have been used to counteract group think in the past is selecting teams from more diverse backgrounds, and even mixing men and women for groups (Kamalnath). Groupthink can be considered by many to be a detriment to companies, organizations and in any work situations. Most positions that are senior level need individuals to be independent in their thinking. There is a positive correlation found between outstanding executives and decisiveness (Kelman). Groupthink also prohibits an organization from moving forward and innovating if no one ever speaks up and says something could be done differently.

Antecedent factors such as group cohesiveness, faulty group structure, and situational context (e.g., community panic) play into the likelihood of whether or not groupthink will impact the decision-making process.

Groupthink is a construct of social psychology, but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory, as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour.

Groupthink is sometimes stated to occur (more broadly) within natural groups within the community, for example to explain the lifelong different mindsets of those with differing political views (such as "conservatism" and "liberalism" in the U.S. political context ) or the purported benefits of team work vs. work conducted in solitude. However, this conformity of viewpoints within a group does not mainly involve deliberate group decision-making, and might be better explained by the collective confirmation bias of the individual members of the group.

Most of the initial research on groupthink was conducted by Irving Janis, a research psychologist from Yale University. Janis published an influential book in 1972, which was revised in 1982. Janis used the Bay of Pigs disaster (the failed invasion of Castro's Cuba in 1961) and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 as his two prime case studies. Later studies have evaluated and reformulated his groupthink model.

🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Philosophy of mind

The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining why and how sentient organisms have qualia or phenomenal experiences—how and why it is that some internal states are subjective, felt states, such as heat or pain, rather than merely nonsubjective, unfelt states, as in a thermostat or a toaster. The philosopher David Chalmers, who introduced the term "hard problem" of consciousness, contrasts this with the "easy problems" of explaining the ability to discriminate, integrate information, report mental states, focus attention, and so forth. Easy problems are (relatively) easy because all that is required for their solution is to specify a mechanism that can perform the function. That is, regardless of how complex or poorly understood the phenomena of the easy problems may be, they can eventually be understood by relying entirely on standard scientific methodologies. Chalmers claims that the problem of experience is distinct from this set and will "persist even when the performance of all the relevant functions is explained".

The existence of a "hard problem" is controversial. It has been accepted by philosophers of mind such as Joseph Levine, Colin McGinn, and Ned Block and cognitive neuroscientists such as Francisco Varela, Giulio Tononi, and Christof Koch. However, its existence is disputed by philosophers of mind such as Daniel Dennett, Massimo Pigliucci, and Keith Frankish and cognitive neuroscientists such as Stanislas Dehaene and Bernard Baars.

🔗 United States 🔗 Human rights 🔗 History 🔗 Military history 🔗 Military history/North American military history 🔗 Military history/United States military history 🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Business 🔗 Politics 🔗 Philosophy/Social and political philosophy 🔗 Alternative Views 🔗 Sociology 🔗 Discrimination 🔗 Politics/American politics 🔗 United States/U.S. history

The Business Plot was a political conspiracy in 1933 in the United States. Retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler revealed that wealthy businessmen were plotting to create a fascist veterans' organization with Butler as its leader and use it in a coup d'état to overthrow President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1934, Butler testified before the United States House of Representatives Special Committee on Un-American Activities (the "McCormack–Dickstein Committee") on these revelations. No one was prosecuted.

At the time of the incidents, news media dismissed the plot, with a New York Times editorial characterizing it as a "gigantic hoax". While historians have not accepted the notion of a plot, they agree that Butler described one.

🔗 Biography 🔗 Internet 🔗 Computing 🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Biography/science and academia 🔗 Philosophy/Philosophers 🔗 Sociology 🔗 University of Oxford

Theodor Holm Nelson (born June 17, 1937) is an American pioneer of information technology, philosopher and sociologist. He coined the terms hypertext and hypermedia in 1963 and published them in 1965. Nelson coined the terms transclusion, virtuality, and intertwingularity (in Literary Machines), and teledildonics. According to a 1997 Forbes profile, Nelson "sees himself as a literary romantic, like a Cyrano de Bergerac, or 'the Orson Welles of software.'"

🔗 International relations 🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Psychology 🔗 Philosophy/Ethics 🔗 Holidays 🔗 International relations/United Nations

The International Day of Happiness is celebrated worldwide every year on 20 March, and was originally conceptualized and founded in 2006 by Jayme Illien, CEO of the United Nations New World Order project, to advance happiness as a fundamental human right for all human beings, and happytalism, as new economic system, theory, and philosophy, which achieves the United Nations global goals, and the happiness, well-being, and freedom of all life on earth.

The next international day of happiness is March 20, 2021.

The 2020 International Day of Happiness campaign theme is ‘Happiness For All, Together'”. To celebrate, UNIDOHappiness, the UN secretariat for the International Day Of Happiness, is calling on all 7.8 billion people and all 206 nations and territories, to take the "Ten Steps to Global Happiness" challenge and call to action. The ten steps to global happiness are "ten easy steps any individual, organization, or country, can take on the international day of happiness, and throughout happiness week, to celebrate the international day of happiness, while also advancing the happiness, wellbeing, and freedom of all life on earth by 2050, when the United Nations forecasts global population to reach 10 billion". The first step is “Tell Everyone", which is designed "spread the word" to increase global awareness about the very existence of the international day of happiness, and the UN's unanimous recognition of happiness as a human right, as well as happiness as an approach to sustainable economic and human development.

The 2006 origin and inspiration for creating the international day of happiness initially came from founder Jayme Illien's belief that the happiness, wellbeing, and freedom of all life on earth is the ultimate purpose of every human being, nation, and society. Illien developed his vision for global happiness as humanity's ultimate purpose, through a life spent on the frontlines saving orphaned and abandoned children fleeing war, genocide, and extreme poverty, and theorizing about solutions to the human condition, and the great challenges facing humankind, after he himself was abandoned as an orphan, and rescued from a roadside in India in 1980, by missionaries of Mother Teresa, who first named him Adam, and sent him to live in America.

In 2006, Illien first presented the new economic theory, "happytalism", as a new economic system for the 21st century and beyond, to replace old world economic systems (from 5th to 20th century) such as capitalism, communism, socialism, mercantilism, colonialism, feudalism, racism, and sexism, among others - all created more than 150-1000 years ago. In 2006, Illien successfully demonstrated to prominent economists, academics, political scientists, philosophers, presidents, prime ministers, and heads of state, all in a position to advance happytalism as a solution to the great challenges facing humankind, that the new economic theory was the solution to the world's most pressing and greatest human development challenges and opportunities. However, despite Illien's successful proof of happytalism as a new economic system to replace capitalism and other old world, archaic, obsolete economic systems and models, this eminent multidisciplinary group of experts rejected the idea, and refused to further evaluate or consider the new economic theory due to what Illien, and co founder, Ndaba Mandela, believed were "old world and obsolete tyranny of the status quo, entrenched racist and sexist bias, mindset, incompetence, failed intelligence and intellectual vitality, and an archaic, potentially criminal world view that is a gross violation of global ethical norms, and implicit fiduciary responsibility to all humanity, incapable of seeing and doing what is right and necessary to advance humanity forward".

In 2008, in response to the rejection of Illien's concept of "happytalism" as a new economic theory, and convinced of happytalism as the solution to humanity's great challenges and opportunities in the 21st century and beyond, Illien launched the United Nations New World Order project with co founder Ndaba Mandela, grandson of Nelson Mandela, former president of South Africa, who led the revolution and movement that ended apartheid, and "gave birth to a new nation, a new political party, and a new era of democratic governance in South Africa, and the African Continent.". The United Nations New World Order Project launched in 2008 envisioned, among several UN based policy initiatives, the creation of a United Nations sanctioned "international day of happiness", as a global day of awareness that commemorates and recognizes happiness as a human right, and a fundamental, universal human goal, and calls for a new happiness centric human development paradigm which achieves the happiness, wellbeing, and freedom of all life on earth.

Illien drew inspiration for the idea of establishing the international day of happiness from the founders of the United States of America, and authors of the US Declaration of Independence, as well as, the founders of the United Nations, and UN Day, and the authors of the United Nations Charter. Illien believed that an "international day of happiness", established with, and recognized by, a new UN resolution, with the support of all 193 UN member countries, would provide the essential, unique, and broad-based, wide-ranging democratic support, international credibility, and worldwide legal legitimacy, for a new global day of happiness for humanity, which in turn, would enable future generations to eventually, objectively consider the concept of happytalism as a new economic system to solve to the great challenges facing humanity, thereby placing the fate and future of happytalism directly in the hands of the people and future generations.

In 2012, the United Nations General Assembly adopted UN resolution 66 281: International Day of Happiness with the unanimous consensus of all 193 Member States, and the support of then UN Secretary General Ban Ki moon, declaring March 20 as the international day of happiness. Illien chose 20 March for its significance as the March equinox, a universal phenomenon felt simultaneously by all of humankind.

In 2012, the United Nations also hosted the first high level meeting on Happiness and Well-being: Defining A New Economic Paradigm, at which UN Secretary General Ban Ki moon declared:

Later in 2012, then UN Secretary General Ban Ki moon stated in his closing remarks to the 66th session of the UN General Assembly:

On January 22, 2013, then UN Secretary General Ban Ki moon stated in an address to the UN General Assembly:

On March 20, 2013, the first ever international day of happiness was celebrated with the launch of UNIDOHappiness, and the "Ten Steps to Global Happiness" campaign theme, which has since become an annual tradition.

Every 20 March since 2013, the International Day of Happiness is celebrated in 193 UN Member states, 2 observer states, and 11 territories.

On the 3rd ever international day of happiness, UN Secretary Ban Ki moon said,

🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Politics 🔗 Psychology 🔗 Marketing & Advertising 🔗 Philosophy/Philosophy of science 🔗 Philosophy/Epistemology 🔗 Sociology 🔗 Education

Social facilitation is defined as improvement or decrease in individual performance when working with other people rather than alone.

In addition to working together with other people, social facilitation also occurs in the mere presence of other people. Previous research has found that individual performance is improved by coaction, performing a task in the presence of others who are performing a similar task, and having an audience while performing a certain task. An example of coaction triggering social facilitation can be seen in instances where a cyclist's performance is improved when cycling along with other cyclists as compared to cycling alone. An instance where having an audience triggers social facilitation can be observed where a weightlifter lifts heavier weight in the presence of an audience. Social facilitation has occasionally been attributed to the fact that certain people are more susceptible to social influence, with the argument that personality factors can make these people more aware of evaluation.

The Yerkes-Dodson law, when applied to social facilitation, states that "the mere presence of other people will enhance the performance in speed and accuracy of well-practiced tasks, but will degrade in the performance of less familiar tasks." Compared to their performance when alone, when in the presence of others they tend to perform better on simple or well-rehearsed tasks and worse on complex or new ones.

The audience effect attempts to explain psychologically why the presence of an audience leads to people performing tasks better in some cases and worse in others. This idea was further explored when some studies showed that the presence of a passive audience facilitated the better performance of a simple task, while other studies showed that the presence of a passive audience inhibited the performance of a more difficult task or one that was not well practiced, possibly due to psychological pressure or stress. (See Yerkes–Dodson law.)

🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Ancient philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Ethics

The Tetrapharmakos (τετραφάρμακος) "four-part remedy" is a summary of the first four of the Κύριαι Δόξαι (Kuriai Doxai, the forty Epicurean Principal Doctrines given by Diogenes Laërtius in his Life of Epicurus) in Epicureanism, a recipe for leading the happiest possible life. They are recommendations to avoid anxiety or existential dread.

The "tetrapharmakos" was originally a compound of four drugs (wax, tallow, pitch and resin); the word has been used metaphorically by Roman-era Epicureans. to refer to the four remedies for healing the soul.

🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Contemporary philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Ethics

The trolley problem is a thought experiment in ethics. It is generally considered to represent a classic clash between two schools of moral thought, utilitarianism and deontological ethics. The general form of the problem is this:

There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two options:

1. Do nothing and allow the trolley to kill the five people on the main track.
2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.

Which is the more ethical option? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do?

Philippa Foot introduced this modern form of the problem in 1967. Judith Thomson, Frances Kamm, and Peter Unger have also analysed the dilemma extensively.

Earlier forms of the problem predated Foot's publication. Frank Chapman Sharp included a version in a moral questionnaire given to undergraduates at the University of Wisconsin in 1905. In this variation, the railway's switchman controlled the switch, and the lone individual to be sacrificed (or not) was the switchman's child. The German legal scholar Hans Welzel discussed a similar problem in 1951. In his commentary on the Talmud, published long before his death in 1953, Avrohom Yeshaya Karelitz discussed the similar question of whether it is ethical to deflect a projectile from a larger crowd toward a smaller one.

Beginning in 2001, the trolley problem and its variants have been used extensively in empirical research on moral psychology. Trolley problems have also been a topic of popular books. The problem arises in discussing the ethics of autonomous vehicle design, which may require programming to choose whom or what to strike when a collision appears to be unavoidable.

🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Philosophy/Logic 🔗 Business 🔗 Politics 🔗 Psychology 🔗 Marketing & Advertising

Serial-position effect is the tendency of a person to recall the first and last items in a series best, and the middle items worst. The term was coined by Hermann Ebbinghaus through studies he performed on himself, and refers to the finding that recall accuracy varies as a function of an item's position within a study list. When asked to recall a list of items in any order (free recall), people tend to begin recall with the end of the list, recalling those items best (the recency effect). Among earlier list items, the first few items are recalled more frequently than the middle items (the primacy effect).

One suggested reason for the primacy effect is that the initial items presented are most effectively stored in long-term memory because of the greater amount of processing devoted to them. (The first list item can be rehearsed by itself; the second must be rehearsed along with the first, the third along with the first and second, and so on.) The primacy effect is reduced when items are presented quickly and is enhanced when presented slowly (factors that reduce and enhance processing of each item and thus permanent storage). Longer presentation lists have been found to reduce the primacy effect.

One theorised reason for the recency effect is that these items are still present in working memory when recall is solicited. Items that benefit from neither (the middle items) are recalled most poorly. An additional explanation for the recency effect is related to temporal context: if tested immediately after rehearsal, the current temporal context can serve as a retrieval cue, which would predict more recent items to have a higher likelihood of recall than items that were studied in a different temporal context (earlier in the list). The recency effect is reduced when an interfering task is given. Intervening tasks involve working memory, as the distractor activity, if exceeding 15 to 30 seconds in duration, can cancel out the recency effect. Additionally, if recall comes immediately after the test, the recency effect is consistent regardless of the length of the studied list, or presentation rate.

Amnesiacs with poor ability to form permanent long-term memories do not show a primacy effect, but do show a recency effect if recall comes immediately after study. People with Alzheimer's disease exhibit a reduced primacy effect but do not produce a recency effect in recall.

🔗 Computer science 🔗 Disaster management 🔗 Philosophy 🔗 Cognitive science 🔗 Futures studies 🔗 Effective Altruism

Effective accelerationism, often abbreviated as "e/acc", is a 21st-century philosophical movement advocating an explicit pro-technology stance. Its proponents believe that artificial intelligence-driven progress is a great social equalizer which should be pushed forward. They see themselves as a counterweight to the cautious view that AI is highly unpredictable and needs to be regulated, often giving their opponents the derogatory labels of "doomers" or "decels" (short for deceleration).

Central to effective accelerationism is the belief that propelling technological progress at any cost is the only ethically justifiable course of action. The movement carries utopian undertones and argues that humans need to develop and build faster to ensure their survival and propagate consciousness throughout the universe.

Although effective accelerationism has been described as a fringe movement, it has gained mainstream visibility. A number of high-profile Silicon Valley figures, including investors Marc Andreessen and Garry Tan, explicitly endorsed the movement by adding "e/acc" to their public social media profiles. Yann LeCun and Andrew Ng are seen as further supporters, as they have argued for less restrictive AI regulation.