Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘idiosyncrasies

Is your child “A Third Culture Kid”? And 31 Signs you’re a TCK

Posted on July 7, 2013

According to sociologist David C. Pollock:

Luchunyu via

Rega Jha posted on BuzzFeed this July 2, 2013:

But, of course, you knew that already.

Source: Ssuaphotos  /  via:

1. You can curse convincingly in at least five different languages.

You can curse convincingly in at least five different languages.

Source: GraphJam  /  via:

2. To everyone’s confusion, your accent changes depending on who you’re talking to.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


3. And you often slip foreign slang into your English by mistake, which makes you unintelligible to most people.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


4. You’re really good at calculating time differences, because you have to do it every time you call your parents.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


5. But you also have your computer programmed to help you out when your math fails.

But you also have your computer programmed to help you out when your math fails.

Image by Rega Jha/Buzzfeed

6. You start getting birthday wishes several hours before your birthday, from your friends farther east than you.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


7. Your passport looks like it’s been through hell and back.

Your passport looks like it's been through hell and back.

Or, more likely, your passports*, in the plural.Source: Charles Taylor  /  via:

8. You have a love-hate relationship with the question “Where are you from?”

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid

You have both a short and long answer ready, and you pick one depending on who’s asking.Source: Miramax Films/Paramount Vantage

9. You run into your elementary school friends in unlikely countries at unlikely times.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


10. You’ve spent an absurd and probably unhealthy amount of time on airplanes.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid

Source: Paramount Pictures

11. And you definitely know your way around jet-lag recovery.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


12. Your list of significant others’ nationalities reads like a soccer World Cup bracket.

In Arabic: UhebekVia:

13. And your circle of best friends is as politically, racially, and religiously diverse as the United Nations.

And your circle of best friends is as politically, racially, and religiously diverse as the United Nations.


14. Which is great, except that you “hang out” more online than in real life.

Which is great, except that you "hang out" more online than in real life.

Source: XKCD  /  via:

15. So when you do see your best friends, you lose it a little.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


16. You’ve had the most rigorous sensitivity training of all: real life.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid

Always take your shoes off in a Thai household, but never show the soles of your feet to an Arab.Via:

17. You get nervous whenever a form needs you to enter a “permanent address.”

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


18. You know that McDonald’s tastes drastically different from country to country.

You know that McDonald's tastes drastically different from country to country.

And you can rank them from best to worst.Via:

19. You’re a food snob because you’ve sampled the best and most authentic of every possible cuisine.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


20. You convert any price to two different currencies before making significant purchases.

You convert any price to two different currencies before making significant purchases.

Source: CVM  /  via:

21. You don’t call it “home.” You call it “passport country.”

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


22. You often find yourself singing along to songs in languages you don’t speak or understand.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


23. You miss BBM, but Viber and WhatsApp will do for now.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


24. You’re the token exotic friend in your non-TCK crew.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


25. Love it or hate it, you have a strong and well-informed opinion on the I.B. system.

Love it or hate it, you have a strong and well-informed opinion on the I.B. system.


26. The end of the school year was always bittersweet because so many people moved away.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


27. And, no matter how many you say, good-byes never get easier.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


28. But the constant flow of new friends more than made up for it.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


29. Now you feel incredibly lucky to have loved ones and memories scattered all over the globe.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


30. You know better than anyone else that “home” isn’t a place, it’s the people in it.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


31. And you can’t wait to see where your life adventure takes you next.

31 Signs You're A Third Culture Kid


Tidbits #96

If you agree with the notion that input will eventually equal output, then when you do more than you are paid for, eventually you’ll be paid for more than you do. The universal law: we reap what we sow and we get what we give.

The Agro food industries add around 30 kinds of additives. most of them are poisonous in high doses. A few of them contains nanoparticles, which means they can cross the intestines and flow with the blood and degrade many organs ( cancers). Eventually, these nano-ingredients will be banned and the multinational will be unable to contest the electronic microscopes (the power of technology). For example, the dioxyde of Titanium or additive E71, just to “whiten” the product. Several ingredients are mainly used to retain water, thus adding half of the weight in the sold products

Most of these chemical additives in food are pure poisons and supposedly are just used to satisfy the idiosyncrasies of clients in the look, the color and consistency of the food. I doubt the multinational food industries experiment on the specific idiosyncrasies of clients around the globe, just imposing the “palate”/taste and smell of the colonial powers idiosyncrasies. Obesity, diabetes and cancer causing ingredients… are Not labeled “Can kill you” as in cigarette boxes.

Lately, pressured by “Green Food” campaigns and alternative food preparations, many agro-businesses substitute a few ingredients with “Auxiliary technology” ingredient/products, which are Not required to be listed as ingredients, because these ingredients disappear after the food is cooked. Many of these Auxiliary technology ingredients are enzymes types and proteins, even those extracted from cow bloods.

Lately, the best way that I “know” that I did fall asleep is that I could recall “I had a dream”. Most of the dreams I cannot stand: I am being humiliated and cannot react accordingly. I respond with a half-waking sleep to cope with my lethargy to react, and then I force myself to wake up. And I spend a few hours watching lousy movies, feeling in a wretched diminished state.

In a lengthy documentary on Agro industries. the business could eliminate 20 out of the 30 ingredients for a healthy product and substitute many with “natural” ingredients.

Don’t dwell on this irrational harang: “Resist to your famine in the name of Nationalism“. At least 3 billion people are degraded to accept the misery of their “destiny” in order to satisfy imperialistic economy.

Mammalian scientists claim that it is the females that start the process of mating season. I cannot buy these one-way cause and effects. I conjecture that the males vastly contribute to this process with their cry of “distress” to mate. And the female respond by increasing the level of their pheromone , a catalyst to entice the mating.

I think many would like to die in their sleep, preferable while dreaming of a hot Sexy story in order to go straight to heaven and compare with the Houris

After 53 years, the verdict from The Hague Friday: The International Criminal Court has jurisdiction to investigate alleged war crimes committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. How many Israelis are feeling the heat?

The U.S is the only advanced nation that doesn’t guarantee paid vacation time to workersaccording to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

The US has the highest number of hospitalizations from preventable causes of illnesses and the highest rate of avoidable deaths relative to other wealthy nations, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

It is Not worth it to give your opinions on social medias if you are Not ready to open up your deep emotions and personal experiences. Better make sure you are at least paid for your faked opinions

If paying attention to your breathing for a couple of minutes is so hard, how getting curious of the level of addiction to smoking and consuming alcohol is a simple task? How the tastes and feels of addictive substances is tagged as a simpler task?

Many people climbed the highest mountains in their profession, only to discover they were climbing the wrong mountain that didn’t deliver on the proper emotions and desires.

If the schooling system denies you to learn patience, focus and comprehension, you’ll have to learn on your own these hardest attitudes.

Any which way you think of it, Life has no meaning in the end. The best way to sustain this foolish reality is to learn to be confident in the passion of the talent you are endowed with.

Most financial bubbles are often engineered by governments, especially powerful Nations that has the right to print money at wish. With plenty of cash money in the market, the government increase the interest rate for stocks that are issued, until the economic reality blow the faked wealth.

Are you aware of a few of your idiosyncrasies?

We behave according to the biases we accumulated from our environment. Idiosyncrasies are the norm in life. Even when we become conscious of a few of our biases, it is doubtful that we get the necessary stamina to change.

We’re all biased species. It becomes an unconscious behavior. Our experiences (and idee-fixe in our surrounding) shape who we are.

The perception of our race, ethnicity, gender, height, weight, sexual orientation, place of birth, and other factors impact the lens with which we view the world.

How can we recognize and acknowledge our own biases? Does identifying our kinds of biases (like affinity bias, halo bias, perception bias, and confirmation bias) make a difference in our daily decisions or change our viewpoints?

It is important to make a distinction between 3 broadly different approaches: objective, polemic, and deceptive. This distinction isn’t metaphysical. It’s a question of intent.

In order to discriminate among fake news, facts, objective statement, value judgment… we require vast general knowledge in many fields of study and apply our experimental mind on each subject matter. Otherwise, people will offer the excuse of “common sense” to absolve their laziness in the mind

It is Not an easy endeavor that should span a lifetime and be conducted with the passion of learning, credibility, fairness in treating readers…

Note: I usually edit any piece in my own style and add comments.

Biases All the Way Down, Some Biases are More Troublesome Than Others

danielwalldammit posted on

When I listen to people complaining about indoctrination in the schools or dismissing perfectly sound journalism by chanting the mantra “fake news,” I’m always struck by the hopelessness of trying to reason with them.

Phrases like “just the facts” spill from their mouths, their keyboards, and their keypads quite often, and not a few of them are happy to remind us that facts do not care about our feelings.

These phrases do not usually convey skepticism.

They do not challenge us to provide evidence or compelling reason. Instead, they signal an absolute barrier to any hope of meaningful communication.

These phrases did not become popular in the American political vocabulary because they help to explain the problem with erroneous or dishonest journalism.

Nor have these phrases been generally used to correct flawed textbooks or abusive teachers.

As they are commonly used in America today, these phrases consistently provide thoughtless people with a shield against unwelcome information.

As I listen to such folks talk, or read anything they write, I can’t help thinking those who find nothing but bias in academia or mainstream news are often the same folks who speak of objectivity in terms of the most naive realism.

They think Facticity is part of their cultural capital, they own it, and so they invoke it freely in encounters with others.

Ask these people what it means to do a good job as a teacher or a journalist, a documentary film-maker, etc. and they will describe an absolute devotion to facts coupled with a complete absence of subjectivity.

They have few thoughts as to how that works, but the goal seems pretty obvious to them.

If pressed, some might concede that such an account of any given subject never really happens, but they are likely to insist that it should be an ideal of sorts, a goal to which one ought to aspire.

They don’t understand that the ideal itself isn’t even coherent. You cannot describe a fact without injecting yourself into the description.

Even the facts you choose to relate reflect a choice and a value statement about what is and what is not important in a story. So, does the language you use to describe those facts, and of course the conclusions you draw from whatever you take to be the settled facts of a story also reflect all sorts of choices about what lessons might be worth learning from the world around us.

We never actually get a purely factual account of anything; we can’t even conceive of it in the abstract, because the most rigorous visions of evidence-based reasoning are themselves saturated with value judgements and personal biases.

If objectivity is meaningful at all, it is as a element in relation to subjectivity, (or perhaps inter-subjectivity), not as a pair of alternatives from which we choose. We can speak of an object only in relation to a subject. To imagine the one without the other is to indulge in fiction.

To those who suppose this fictional objectivity is reality, I suppose it is the rhetorical equivalent to reality television, a pretense to veracity offered with a smirk and wink even as any claims to meet that standard unravels unravels around us.

This naive realism goes hand in hand with a pan-partisanship in the consumption of information.

As nobody ever actually meets these impossible standards of objectivity, it provides a ready excuse to dismiss any information one doesn’t wish to hear.

You can always pick apart the choices other people make when they try to state facts. You can quibble over the language they use to express themselves or ask why they think this fact here is important and not that one there? Nobody meets the standard in actual practice, so each and every source of information comes ready-made with all manner of excuses for rejecting it. One has only to make exceptions for those one wishes to keep after all. If those exceptions seem selective, well then, by what standard would anyone presume to make such a judgement?

All of this leaves us with is a sense of bias which provides license for more of the same, and a way of talking about bias that reduces everyone and every approach to information to the level of open partisanship and nothing but partisanship.

All biases are equal in this mindset, because those adopting it do not really think about how one sorts a reasonable account of any given subject from a foolish one. They needn’t accept the authority (or the credibility) of a judge, or a scholar, or a journalist, because they can find evidence of a personal point of view in each.

This flattening of critical merit makes every controversy into a sort of intellectual playground, a range of possibilities all of which possess equal intellectual merit. It puts every couch-potato responding to a 3-minute news segment on Covid19 right on par with a scientist who has studied infectious diseases throughout her career. It empowers the Dunning-Krueger effect, in effect, by denying that there is any meaningful difference in knowledge to begin with.

I keep coming back to this, not because the problem is conceptually interesting, but because I find myself talking to so many people who seem to live in this mindset. They know what sources they like, and they know which sources they cannot be bothered with, but their own explanations boil down to a kind of unacknowledged voluntarism. Intellectual rigor of any kind simply does not enter into this mindset, because every actual stance is, for them rooted in pure personal bias.

A professional historian writing about World War II might as well be their friend Frank who told them about a thing he saw once in a movie. A journalist summarizing countless hours of research enjoys no more credibility than the first thought that jumps into their own head upon hearing the story.

A medical doctor talking about a global pandemic is easily trumped by a blog post detailing an elaborate conspiracy theory. These same people are happy to sing the praises of objectivity, and in particular to use high standards as a foil against their enemies, but in practice, their mental life is a playground of choices made on thin pretexts. That is all they hear from others; it is all they produce themselves.

I find myself struggling to produce a simple account of objectivity and bias, one which affirms neither this naive realism nor this practical pan-partisanship.

If I am thinking about bias in the presentation of information, and I am, I usually want to make a distinction between 3 broadly different approaches, objective, polemic, and deceptive. This distinction isn’t metaphysical. It’s a question of intent.

When I refer to an account as objective, I do not mean to suggest that its author has achieved some miraculous account devoid of any personal bias. What I mean in such cases, is that the author has made an effort to express the relevant facts of the story, and perhaps to provide an account of the different positions others have taken on the subject.

I will still have questions about the author’s specific choices, the accuracy of their descriptions, and if I know something about the subject, I am likely to sense bias creeping into their narratives. When I call it ‘objective’, it is because I can still see a few objective information creeping through the haze of personal bias, and because I perceive the author’s goal as being rooted in the objective features of the story. Whatever their personal views, there is something about the facts of the matter that has their interest. If they are doing their job right, it will have mine as well.

If I am ever tempted to dismiss the prospect of an objective account as a result of the many subjectivities that always seem to accompany them, I have only to consider some of the alternatives.

There is a world of difference between someone who is trying to tell a story based on the facts as they understand them, and someone for whom a story is solely an instrument of their own personal agenda. While bias might count as failure in the former case, in the latter, that bias is precisely the point.

If ever we forget the merits of an objective account, their absence is certainly noticed whenever we encounter polemic work.

An author or speaker whose primary goal is the advancement of a partisan view tells a very different story than one who is trying to give us an objective account. The facts they elect to provide are not merely shaded by personal bias, they are explicitly chosen on that basis.

One literally doesn’t get any information that doesn’t help the polemicist build his case. His language too is chosen for the purpose of expressing a clear stance on the subject in question. We don’t expect of such writers that they will spend a lot of time on things that don’t facilitate their own argument. To do so would be setting ourselves up for disappointment.

Let’s take for example the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan at the end of WWII. I have plenty of textbooks that provide a basic and brief account of this event. One of the major controversies of this story is the question of whether or not doing so was necessary and/or justified in any sense by the circumstances facing the allies near the end of that war.

Any author trying to tell me that story will normally provide some account of the reasons for dropping the bomb, and in doing so, they are likely to show some sense of their own take on that controversial subject They will cover the facts most relevant to their position on the subject, and they will likely describe them in language that suggests some degree of their own sense as to whether or not the decision was sound.

Some authors try to address the controversy by providing an account of the controversy itself, telling us what different people have said about the question over the years. In such cases, it would not be unreasonable to expect they will do a better job of accounting for those positions they agree with than the ones they do not agree with.

All of which is very different from reading a text in which an author takes a stand on that very question. You can find such readings. You can find people who will tell you the decision was absolutely appropriate, and they will make the case as to why.

Others will describe it as an atrocity, and they too will provide an argument as to why that is the case.

In neither of these instances would one expect the polemicist to spend a great deal of time covering facts which don’t help their case. If they do, it will only be to show how their position deals with these facts after all, and so their account of these seemingly neutral features of the story will of course be largely an exercise in stretching a specific viewpoint to cover the facts in question.

None of this is a terrible thing. There is a place for polemics in human communication. My point is simply that a polemic is very different from an attempt at an objective account.

If bias is a bug in the former; it is a feature of the latter, a genuine benefit. If polemic writing is well done, it leaves us with a clear vision of the viewpoint expressed within it. It is a good thing, but it is a different kind of than we get from those trying to write a more thorough and objective account.

(How about the US didn’t want Stalin to occupy all of Korea before Japan ceasefire? Japan had to surrender and stop Russia advances)

Whatever the goals of a writer or a speaker, whether it be polemic or objective, we can also distinguish between those who show a certain respect for truth and reason and those who are consciously deceptive about such matters.

Even the most strident of polemicists is perfectly capable of telling the truth as she understands it and using reasoning that is at least plausible rather than fallacious.

On the other hand, some people are just bad actors: Not only do they make a conscious choice to advance a single point of view; they are willing to deceive to us in the service of that point of view. Their account of the facts will contain not mere errors but conscious lies, and their reasoning will include deliberate cases of misdirection.

Such people are not merely influenced by personal values and personal agendas; they operate free of any moral or intellectual restraint. Lest we forget that objectivity matters, or give up on it altogether, an encounter with such a deceitful soul ought to remind us that facts matter after all, and so does sound reasoning.

I really do not mean to advocate some naive objective metaphysics, but I am sure some folks will say the way I have tried to qualify my use of the term here is inadequate, but this post isn’t really meant to outline an epistemological theory.

This post is mean to describe some differences in communicative practice. The need to do so is motivated less by abstract philosophical questions than a general sense that it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain any standards of honesty or intellectual rigor in public discourse.

The problem isn’t just that some people cannot tell the difference between sound journalism and internet gossip; it is that such people increasingly dominate our public discourse and they are increasingly able to obscure such distinctions for purposes of public policy.

Much of their ability to do so lies in their ability to find personal or political bias in even the most professional of publications (whether scholarly or journalistic).

My point here is not to suggest that some people are above personal bias; it is calling attention to the different ways in which bias enters into the work of public media.

For some people bias is a problem they can never really seem to escape.

For others, bias is precisely the point.

For some, it is the only point.

This “Abduction field” that steals your “Free-Will behavior”?

Note: Re-edit of “Deterministic/free-will behavior: What is priming the “Thief Program”? October 31, 2011

Do you know that a few universities have opened courses in “experimental philosophy“?

This new field of study combine neurosciences research with theoretical philosophical concepts such as finding out whether people believe that their behaviors and actions are determined (or perceived as predetermined) or if the “free-will factor” is a working concept…

This field of study wants to associate reflective and elaborate concepts with experimental studies.

Last September, the John Templeton Foundation contributed $4.4 million to a 4-year program in interdisciplinary research projects among natural scientists, philosophers, and theologians…

Apparently, Joshua Knobe and Shaun Nichols are working on 3 domains:

One, using neurosciences tools to study cerebral activities of subjects confronted with philosophical problems;

Two, adopting questionnaires to clarify intuitions and modalities of everyday reasoning, and

Three, conducting field experiences for observing the manners individuals behave in particular circumstances and situations.

US philosopher Daniel Dennett who published “Theory of the evolution of liberty, (2004)” claims that we have tendency to dissociate the “I” from “my brain”.  For example, is there a specific zone in the brain exclusively reserved for the “I” or the “Cartesian theater of operations“?

The neuropsychology Benjamin Libet demonstrated that we become conscious of a decision half a second after our body gets prepared to react to a decision.

For example, the disparate “I” in our constitution and brain parts contribute to the decision.  It is sort every single muscle has an “I”, our genetic constitution has an “I”, every section and network of neurons has an “I”.

All our “I” have to reach a working consensus before the body react and a decision can be carried out.

Isn’t that how a skill is described?

Neuroscientist Patrick Haggard wrote: “When we talk of free-will, we mean the richness of the act, of our capacity of acting intelligently, of not reacting in the same manner to the same stimuli…”

Scientists, neuroscientists, neuropsychologists, philosophers, theologians, and the legal profession have to agree on baseline consensus principles before any reasonable set of experiments can be carried out for the purpose of resolving this critical question.

Firstoperational definitions of “what is free-will decision” and “what is understood by deterministic behavior” we are measuring?

For example, how can these concepts be measured and quantified in any experiment?

So far, neuroscientists consider an excitation of neurons in the brain as indication of a decision to act.  Their preferred measuring sticks are time of onset of the excitation and its duration…

Second, what kinds of excitations and their intensity level can be indicators of a particular decision? Sort of we need to agree on a taxonomy of decisions (weak decision, temporary one, routine decision, sub-decision...)

For example, pushing a button, decisions for submitting to a test, an exam…considering an opportunity, running for election, committing a crime…

Third, the legal institutions must be involved in the definition and operational decisions. For example, will the court accept the definition and findings of the neuroscientists as valid in court under the principle of “individual responsibility”? Otherwise, how pragmatic any results can contribute to better mankind existence?

Four, how to separate community moral and ethical standards (idiosyncrasies) from how the real world functions and how people actually have tendency to behave?

For example, experiments demonstrated that group of subjects who were induced to believe in a deterministic world tended to cheat significantly (statistically) more often than the compared groups… Does cheating an indicator of community culture or an individual moral value…?

In Jan. 23, 2010, I published an article titled “Abduction field” or a priori “stealing” program” behavior.

I coined the term “abduction field” to describe and explain how people manage to function in their daily routine. People move and act as if executing an “a priory program” a “primed program“:  They seem to mentally “pick up” objects and event as they go about. People seem to know in advance what they want to do.

Hazards can be categorized as just obstacles that the “abduction field” in the brain failed to adjust to, in a timely manner, to redesign the plan.

It might be a good idea to explain what abductive reasoning means before I venture into this topic, and I urge you to read note#1, before you resume reading.

People use the abduction reasoning technique as routine behavior to decide, move, or act. People have implicitly a priori (idea, plan, concept, hypothesis, path, or line of actions) before they get moving.

People move as if they already know what will happen next; they adjust their plan as frequently as obstacles occur. Thus, abductive reasoning is the rule instead of the exception in most commonly used strategies:  We either start our “conscious day” with a priming thief program or we opt for the default “Habit thief program” to carry on our daily decisions and activities.

The abduction field explains the contradictory feeling we have that our actions are frequently determined or occasionally following a free-will course of action.

For example, if we consciously start with a thief program that is pre-programmed to suit what we want today, we tend to steal objects, events, opportunities on our way.  Otherwise, the default value is the “habit thief program”, and we feel that the day is pretty much determined.

The individual “I” is spread all over our organism, physical, genetics, and mental (brain). Decisions are delayed until all the different varieties of “I” reach a working consensus, or a particular “I” or a set of “I” override the other I, depending on which thief program we launched at the start of the day, rejump it (re-edit it) during the day according to our circadian cycles.

For a set of “I” to be able to override the many other “I” it requires a conscious effort of training and awareness for a long time. That is why, we have the feeling that our behavior is pretty much determined because we allow the “conventional wisdom”, habit of convenience, comfort, and “common sense” attitude to take over our decision processes.

A good way to explaining the abduction field theory is by observing someone who is familiar with a particular supermarket.  The customer moves around and pick up items in a determined manner.

A few times, the customer stops and study particular varieties of the “same” items for prices, weight and chemical contents.  The supermarket guide the customer to pose and attend to special new items displayed on shelves. The customer might look as if he just woke up or is disoriented, but his action is kind of planned: he behaves pretty “sober” in his decisions.

People move and act within abduction fields of reasoning, otherwise, how can we imagine extending a step forward without advanced planning?

The initial schemas of abduction fields are Not that well oiled, and many errors and pitfalls occur during the abduction plans.  By the by, the human brain gets adjusted and trained to secure better fit in forecasting next steps and moves.

Highly intelligent people differ from normal intelligence in that, more frequently than not, they consciously apply deductive and inductive reasoning on their initiated abduction fields.  The implicit purpose is to optimize the “abductive field” performance by supporting it with better formal or coded laws among the working laws.

With conscious training and application of the other two reasoning methods, the individual acquire higher intelligence reasoning choices or diversified perspectives to view and resolve a problem.

Brainwashing is an application phenomenon of abduction field distortion.

Brainwashing is Not so much a process of feeding misinformation or disinformation as in ideologically and dogmatic State-controlled government.

Brainwashing is the process of altering the abduction field so that an individual lacks the objective flexibility to pick up the appropriate objects, tools, or events to place on his “abduction path”.

For example,  the individual is picking what is available on his path, including ready-made terminology and definitions, and not what his brain was more likely to select in normal conditions.  The more institutions restrict the freedom of choices, the more the citizen is expected to select what is available to him.

The citizen starts emulating the “ideology” or the opinions of what have been displayed to him (The Silent Majority).  Most State institutions control people in restricting the availability of choices and opportunities, regardless what names are given to them (communist, socialist, democratic, capitalist, theocratic…)

When we say “this guy is a one track-mind or one-dimensional mind”, we basically means that his abduction field has been restricted by habit: His brain ended up lacking the potential flexibility and versatility to train and develop his abduction field reasoning.

Note 1: It might be a good idea to explain what abduction reasoning means before I venture into this topic.  Human mind uses many reasoning methods such as deduction, induction, and abduction.

Deductive reasoning is a process that starts from a set of basic propositions (proved or considered the kind of non provable truths) and then prove the next propositions based on the previous set.  In general, a law, natural or social, or a theorem in mathematics guides the demonstration.  Practically, it is like using a function to find the appropriate pieces of data or information that are available on a well drawn path or trend.

Inductive reasoning is a process of selecting samples from a phenomenon or a basket of items and then studying the samples.  If the items are the “same” in each sample then the individual is prone to recognize that a law is guiding that phenomenon. The sample taker is ready to form a law, though he knows that logically, if in the future one sample is wrong, then the law is logically invalid. In the mean time, the sample taker can resume his life as if the law is valid, as long as it is working (more frequently than not).

We call a “paradigm shift” the period when accumulated samples or observations are showing to be “false” and that the law has to be dropped for a better performing law.  The process needs time before the scientific community reaches a consensus for a change in venue, simply because it was comfortable using well-known mental structures.  The paradigm shift period is shortened if a valid alternative is demonstrated to work far better, not just slightly better, than the previous theory.

Abduction reasoning is an “intuitive” process such as having a few facts or data and we manage to find a connection among these facts.  In a way, we got an idea that the facts follow a definite trend.

For example, the astronomer and mathematician Kepler started with the notion that planets move in circles around the sun; his observations of Mars detected two positions that didn’t coincide with any circle. Kepler selected another trajectory among those mathematically described in geometry that might be appropriate.  The elliptical shape accounted for the two observed positions of Mars.

Kepler got convinced that planet trajectories are elliptical, but he needed to convince the “scientific community”. Thus, Kepler worked for many years waiting for Mars to cross different positions that he knew would inevitably be on the ellipse anyway.

Note 2: I am under the impression that Spinoza had the same philosophical theory when he wrote: “The movements of our investigative spirit obey real laws”.  If we think well, we are bound to think according to rules that link things one to another.  Kant adopted this reasoning and offered the “a priori” dispositions of the mind.

Note 3: You may access

Note 4: I stumbled on this topic reading a piece in the French weekly “The International Courrier” #1095.

Notes and tidbits on FB and Twitter. Part 60

Man-made designs barely consider the idiosyncrasies of users and the environment of the community. And the designers lack the necessary knowledge, technically and the socio-psychological intricacies of the users and community.

The diversity of users and environments will easily pinpoint the deficiencies in any man-made system. The proper functioning of any system in the medium term relies solely on the acceptance of the idiosyncrasy of the community, regardless of the level of performance the system is delivering, particularly in health and safety usage and applications

The plot is thickening in Lebanon. The sectarian political system is Not ready for any reform of the election law. Any reform means giving leverage to the civil society that is growing and growling.

If we have to comprehend Lebanon on sectarian divide, it is more likely that the Shi3a constitute 45%, the Sunnis (including the Druse who never were Sunnis by any long shot in their history) 35% and all the Christian sects barely 25%.

How can an election law be tailor-made to offer the Christians 50% of the seats on their own voting potentials when they barely constitute 25% of society (according to the implicit agreement since its independence and Not by the Constitution)? It is Not feasible.

A leap of faith that the citizens have developed to adhere to a civil society is necessary from the Christian political parties.

The emotional labor of listening when we’d rather yell, of working with someone instead of firing him, of seeking out facts and insights that we don’t (yet) agree with. and of being prepared

The tiny “Arabic” Gulf States will solely pay the heavy price from any confrontation with Iran, military or economic, if Saudi Kingdom keeps up the confrontation. They will be drastically destabilized and investment will evaporate in no time.

“Arabic” Gulf States better stand fast against the onslaught of this crazy Saudi Kingdom geo-political orientation.

Historically, the so-called Arabic Empire was basically Islamic, where the Arabic language was adopted for doing sciences and philosophy. The Omayyad Empire was Syrian-based civilization, the Abbasid was Persian-based culture, the Fatimid was Maghreb-based customs implanted in Egypt and Andalusia was pretty much North African traditions. Saudi Kingdom is trying this illusion that it is renewing a dead Arabic dominion against Persia Iran.

One-time imitation learning: An algorithm allows for teaching a robot how to do something by first having a human being demonstrate it in a virtual reality setting. Developed by a team at OpenAI, backed by Elon Musk.

“Tu n’a pas encore appris á aimer que tu sais d’instinct l’amour qui exalte et ennoblit”

“C’est l âme qui désir les corps” sinon pourquoi tous nos efforts pour rester en bonne santé et apprendre á souffrire les petites malaises?

La justice est une fugitive du camps des vainqueurs.

Ces réfugiés Syriens, en quels camps de vainqueurs ont-ils été incarcerés?

La caste des privilégiés ne tarde jamais á se reconstruire dans tous les systémes politiques: Follow the money trail as source of this perpetual reconstruction

On peut toujours faire régner un peu plus de justice du pouvoir et l’argent. Les autres injustices peuvent être remedies, plus ou moins, par l’argent.

L’injustice nous suit dés le début: á nous de récupérer les brins de justice qui nous sont dues, si on refuse de n’être plus indifferent.

Il y a 2 sortes d’imbéciles: ceux qui croient aux progrés, et les pires imbéciles qui ne voient aucun progrés.

You own your level of freedom by the willful efforts you invest in retaining it, by continuing education and frequent active engagement in civil society

There’s nowt wrong with dialects, nothing broke ass about slang

Policing children’s language encourages them to think nonstandard English is substandard. Linguistic diversity should be celebrated, not banned

Language use is one of the last places where prejudice remains socially acceptable.

It can even have official approval, as we see in attempts to suppress slang and dialects at school. Most recently, Ongar Academy in Essex launched a project to discourage students from using words like ain’t, geezer, whatever, like, and literally.

We’ve been here before. Schools across the country have outlawed inoffensive words, with some asking parents to “correct” children at home.

Slang, regionalisms, and colloquialisms are typical usages objected to, with occasional spelling errors thrown in as though somehow equivalent. The only thing uniting them is that they’re not considered standard or sufficiently formal.

Banning words is not a sound educational strategy.

As Michael Rosen points out, schools have been trying this for more than 100 years to no avail.

Research shows that gradual transition towards standard English works better. But because dialect prejudice is so prevalent, this must be done in such a way that children understand there’s nothing inherently wrong with their natural expression.

Ongar Academy says it’s not banning words, but “evolving” its pupils’ speech – a description with classist implications.

The head teacher, David Grant, says that students’ dialect “may not favourably reflect on them when they attend college and job interviews”. This may seem a reasonable position, when even those who work in education are subject to linguistic intolerance.

But to assume that students who use slang – ie, most of them – will do so in interviews does them a disservice.

Native speakers of English are generally at least bidialectal.

We have the dialect we grew up using, with its idiosyncrasies of vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation, and we learn standard English at school and through media like books and radio.

As with any social behaviour, we pick up linguistic norms and learn to code-switch according to context. Just as we may wear a T-shirt and slippers at home, but a suit and shoes at work, so we adjust our language to fit the situation.

Play Video

Standard English is a prestige dialect of huge social value. It’s important that students learn it. But the common belief that nonstandard means substandard is not just false but damaging, because it fosters prejudice and hostility.

Young people can be taught formal English, and understand its great cultural utility, without being led to believe there’s something inferior or shameful about other varieties.

Grant says that in Shakespeare’s anniversary year, we should “ensure the way the pupils talk gives a positive impression”.

But Shakespeare’s plays abound in slang and informal language.

“Geezer” appears in books by HG Wells, Graham Greene, and Anthony Burgess. Charlotte Brontë, Charles Dickens and Vladimir Nabokov used non-literal literally. Rather than spurning such words, we can teach students when and why they are used. Learning different Englishes gives us command of different domains, a skill we can then put to creative and appropriate use. Facility with slang is a real advantage in some jobs.

James Sledd once wrote: “To use slang is to deny allegiance to the existing order … by refusing even the words which represent convention and signal status.” That is, slang lends covert prestige – however anathema to those in authority who prefer teenagers not to be teenagers.

It doesn’t help Grant’s cause that in a short radio interview, he put basically on the Bad List but used it himself several times.

Linguistic vetoes can be counterproductive pedagogically too.

Sociolinguist Julia Snell argues that “to learn and develop, children must participate actively in classroom discussion; they must think out loud, answer and ask questions”. When the focus is on the forms of speech instead of its content, she writes, “children may simply remain silent in order to avoid the shame of speaking ‘incorrectly’, and miss the interactions crucial to learning”. In light of this I can’t share Ongar Academy’s satisfaction that its students are now policing each other’s speech.

People feel strongly about correctness in language, but this strength of feeling isn’t always matched by knowledge and tolerance. And because children are sensitive to how they’re perceived, stigmatising their everyday speech can be harmful. By educating them about linguistic diversity instead of proscribing it, we can empower students and deter misguided pedantry.

There’s nowt wrong with regional dialects, nothing broke ass about slang. They’re part of our identities, connecting us to time, place, community, and self-image.

They needn’t be displaced by formal English – we can have both.

As David Almond wrote, in a wonderful response to one school’s linguistic crackdown: “Ye hav to knaa the words the world thinks is rite and ye have to knaa how to spel them rite an speek them rite … But ye neva hav to put the otha words away.”

Lives of Palestinians in pictures

If you are considering a visit to Palestine and had never traveled there before, you need not imagine that going there is quite dangerous.

In the mainstream media, images of conflict permeate, along with the tragedy that is expressed afterwards.

While it may be interpreted as a melancholy environment, where an endless dissension between two people groups continues, there is still the spirit of life.

One that each human participates in, whether in an conflicted area or not.

East-Jerusalem based photographer Tanya Habjouqa has focused her work on photographing the Palestinian communities of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.

She captures a way of life that is not always seen by the public eye. Her series is titled “Occupied Pleasures,” and displays the Palestinian community enjoying the pleasures of life as any person would.

 posted this April 8, 2014

The Rarely-Seen Lives of Palestinians

Photographed by Tanya Habjouqa

palestine pleasure5

Teenage girls try on dresses for an upcoming dance at their private school in Ramallah.

Bodybuilders in Gaza show off the results of their work.

The images are striking yet simple and garnered her a World Press Photo award. Regarding the Occupied Pleasures work, Habjouqa says:

More than 4 million Palestinians live in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, where the political situation regularly intrudes upon the most mundane of moments. Movement is circumscribed and threat of violence often hangs overhead.

This creates the strongest of desires for the smallest of pleasures, and a sharp sense of humor about the absurdities that a 47-year occupation has produced.

This is an exploration of the moments where ordinary men and women demonstrate a desire to live, not just simply survive.

A family and friends play cards on the roof in the Dheisheh Refugee Camp of Bethlehem

A yoga class in the outskirts of Bethlehem in the village of  Zataara.

Students from the  Al-Quds University javelin team finish up one last practice before the summer holiday begins.

A few boys enjoy a cool break from the heat in a small kiddie pool in the West Bank village of Kufr Ni’ma.

Two young women enjoy the view on the way up to the “Mount of Temptation” in a cable car in Jericho.

Young men enjoy some shisha in the natural setting of Ein Qiniya. A few Israeli settlements are nearby.

On the way to the Eid Celebration, a man enjoys a cigarette on the last day of Ramadan in the West Bank.

Some women model at the Intercontinental Bethlehem for upcoming designer Nadya Hazbunova.

The Gaza Parkour team practices in a cemetery on the outskirts of their refugee camp in Khan Younis, Gaza.
palestine parkhour

After final high school examinations, youth in Gaza flock to the sea and to the fun fair to let off steam
palestine pleasure2

Two furniture makers take a break in a pair of plush armchairs (of their creation) in the open-air in Hizma, against Israel’s 26-foot high Separation Wall.
palestine pleaure

14 year old Sabah Abu Ghanim, Gaza’s famous girl surfer, waits to catch a wave
palestine surfing

A young fiancee goes wedding dress shopping in Gaza. Her future husband is working in Libya, where she hopes to join him.
palestine wedding

A mobile toy store van cruises along the Gaza beach highway.

A young boy takes his donkey for a swim, and attempts to get him out near Gaza’s Deir al-Balah refugee camp.
Tanya-Habjouqa2_palestine 3

A family enjoys a picnic in Ein Qiniya, the nearest nature spot for families in Ramallah
palestinian pleausre 12

via featureshoot

Shawn Saleme is a full time writer for Visual News.

Having traveled to over 45 countries, his international escapades continue to influence his writing and perspective. When not in a foreign territory, he makes his home in his native San Francisco Bay Area. Become friends with him on Facebook and invite him to share drinks and stories with you.



“I’m intent on contemplating the two symmetrical hills…”

The truth before the last one.

The reality we are conscious of, as it was already displaced for quite a time.

Only our automatic reflexes, gestures and night dreams confirm the new reality, which our consciousness steadfastly refuses to see, admit and confront.

Time out of joint?

I am riding in a familiar environment and suddenly I see dozens of regular buildings growing from earth, on both sides of the road. The scene damaged my expectation of how beautiful the quaint village looked like, a few months ago.

I got a ride with Iranian acquaintances and they paid a quick visit to a young Iranian woman. They said that she is having an open house to rent or sell her apartment.

The young lady was sitting on a couch outside the door of her apartment to welcome the visitors, mostly Iranians. No one stepped inside. They simply handed her small amount of cash as “down payment” and they left.

She told me that the word spread that she needs a plane ticket to definitely go back home, and this is the custom to financially aid the departing Iranians.

This first part was a night dream before I realized that I was dreaming, and my partial consciousness started to weave a story and getting engaged in the dream.

Now, we are heading to another Iranian guy whom I don’t know and I read the name of “Jean Dayeh” on one of the houses in the entrance of the complex. I’m surprised and wondering “What this Lebanese history investigator on the life of Antoun Saadeh and his Syrian Nation Social party is doing here?”. I decided that I should be paying him a visit before I leave this quaint village.

It is dark. As we are driving back, and on a whim, I asked the driver to drop me at the Iranian lady’s apartment, to the astonishment of my acquaintances.

This part is the semi dream-like phase and I got up, wide awake. I read for an hour and re-integrated the bed, eyes closed and I resumed weaving a story around the dream, since I decided that the young lady is beautiful and worth conversing with her.

Feyrouza welcomed me, as if it was the most natural of behaviors. I felt comfortable and I wanted to indulge in a friendly, open-hearted conversation. The expectation was shared, and that was my feeling.

I said: “I overheard that you recently divorced”. She admitted this fact with no further explanations, and I was not about to ruin the conversation with platitudes.

I said: “Do you feel that going back home is a decision to leave behind any hopes for a better life and prosperous future?”

A minutes silence revealed a realization that was sinking in. She said hesitatingly:

“My uncle, from my mother side, has a project for me.”

With a chuckle, she resumed “And I think that an old school friend has been investigating my whereabouts and my recurring status”

I cannot make small talks: I usually don’t speak unless I have a solution, even if I had no experience or expertise on the subject.

Uncharacteristically of me, I felt talking just to open up opportunities for Feyrouza to vent off the complex ideas that were clinking in her brain, producing more noise than harmonious string of possibilities.

I said: “I feel that your mind is set to get married and have children in your homeland. Sort of assuming that the extended family will provide the proper support system to raise a family?”

She replied: “Most of the married women who are expecting children abroad find their mothers and sisters visiting them for extended time when waiting to give birth. My apprehension is that I don’t find myself trained to be a good host for relatives who are not used to the customs in this country.”

I said: “I never were able to invite anyone of my family to pay me a visit. I never were able to rent an apartment or even purchase an old car. Playing host requires plenty of abundance and means, since our families are used to a lavish life-style back home. Is that part of your difficulties? Unable to figure out a financial self-autonomy status?”

It seems I gave her an exit reply: “We don’t talk about finances in our customs. And I’m sorry you had difficult years studying abroad without much family help and support”

I said: “I have this character flaw: I was never able to ask a favor from anyone. I don’t recall demanded any stipend from my father or mother. I lived the frugal life and denied myself the experience of appreciating luxury items, simply because I could never bring myself to ask for money.

You know, only by asking for favors you open up the best opportunities to making long lasting friends.  The problem is that most connections require exchange of favors, and I never had this confidence that I’ll be capable of returning favors in kinds.”

I had to change the subject and said: “I did my studies in a university town. And it was completely flat for miles around. Your university is located in a versatile landscape.  For example, when the students leave for Thanksgiving, how you used to fill the time and space? Did you go trekking with a group of friends in the neighboring wilderness?”

She replied: “Great idea. Wonder why my group is not into such relaxing physical exercises in nature?”

We decided for a backpack trekking to the northern chain of hills, an hour walk uphill, after we drove for half an hour to the base of our destination.

The climb was mostly smooth with a few difficult abrupt section that are surmountable without rope and gears: We didn’t bring any kinds of gears since we were no professional climbers and never thought of discovering serious troubles on a small hill.

I usually wrap my head with a large handkerchief or a light towel under my hat or cap. The towel keeps my head cool and protect my neck from sun rays. All I do is to wring the towel from sweat and recover my head.

The view on the top was glorious. I had not been to the Himalaya for comparison sake, though I managed to climb the Sannine Top in Lebanon to the “French Room” and the clouds obstructed the views of the environs.

As usually, once on the top, I get off all my shirts to dry my skin and dry my shirts, as well as removing my shoes and socks. I laid down and rested my head on my backpack. Kind of a habit.

Feyrouza was not disturbed, but she had to insert a comment. She said: “You selected the best spot. Gallantry is no longer a la mode once we live for a short period in a western State.”

She was standing over me, all her tops removed.

I ended giving my spot to my companion.

She had a wonderful view, all the way to the seashores. My view shrank to two symmetrical small hills, my head resting on her lap and facing her eyes.

One of the hill was more exposed to the sun rays and was covered with a thin layer of transpiration. This shiny hill looked more active and the other sister stoically rooted in the shadow of the shiny hill.

Within an hour, a thick cloud obscured the sun and we felt the chill. It was time to descend from the top.

The covered hills followed in our foot steps.

Covered, uncovered.

That’s how Mystery rules.

Covered with myths, most of them lacking imagination, and idiosyncrasies based on customs and traditions of daily life.


That is how I felt when I suddenly decided to definitely return home: I didn’t expect any bright prospect to come to me once I reached home. No valid job, mostly unfamiliar environment after decades of  self- “exile”, a long time of living alone, no relatives and incognito in a large city.

I was leaving my individual freedom with no relatives around me and was about to have family and community meddling in my life… what they expected from me, how the neighbors perceive me…

I got wed. Now, what I do next?

Note: This article is a shortened version of a previous post, focusing on what to do next after the wedding…

Millions of couples get wed every day.

The vast majority never experienced intercourse, at least one party in the union.  It is no surprise that most of the couples have not met before the wedding, at best they have seen a puny picture of the member, supposed to living with for the rest of their life.

Many couples love the companionship.  The sexual part, and principally the intercourse phase, is the least interesting exercise in their mind, at least for one member of the couple.

It is wise that rarely any one in the couple bring up the truth that the sexual part is in second or third order of priority:  The wrong interpretation is invariably a bad one, of the most dangerous kind.  For example, “Am I that disgusting? Am I ugly?  Do I smell terrible?”

Well, you got wed and now you are wondering “what should I do next to make this courageous decision a success story?”

First principle, and maybe the only one of value for sexual intercourse, is that male partner is the passive part:  The woman should be the active and guiding partner.

Many males wait years before they comprehend that a successful, rewarding, and pleasuring intercourse is to sit back and let the woman do the job right.

Many women know that they are the one getting the most pleasure of that exercise, but they postpone indefinitely getting the courage of teaching their husband to take the proper course of action.

Before you resume the rest of this post, I suggest to the brides to imagine (visualize) the kinds of story they should undertake as they got the principle down.

Now that you have your own story of the proper way to enticing your man to perform intercourse in a very relaxed manner, you may continue reading.

I can figure that most women think that a sexy attire, in the privacy of the house, is the first in the list of “must do”.

This line of thinking comes with years of training and ruining the family treasury for clothing.  Sexy wear is an excellent idea but it is mainly a prompt.

The groom and the bride have acquired particular idiosyncrasies as to the varieties of sexy cloth.  Once the man comprehends what garment is meant by “tonight there is intercourse“, then the way is clear.

The man knows the objective of the evening, he feels relaxed, and can think of ways to be romantic.  The main hurdle is crossed, once the prompt is clearly defined.

Next, olfactive or the sense of smell is the most powerful sense in the lymbic (primitive) brain system.

Thus, both parties have to have a bath and smelling fresh.  A joint bath is excellent; you rub one another body parts, get relaxed, laugh, and play like kids.

By the by, both parties learn the nice smells that they jointly love; the kind of soaps, the perfume… Once this phase is nailed down, things can progress smoothly.

While wearing the sexy gown and then taking a joint bath or shower, make sure the background music is devoid of any lyrics: You don’t want to clutter your thinking brain; focus on what excite the limbic system.

The sense of touch has a direct route to the lymbic system but it has lost its power for men.  Women are more endowed with the pleasure of touch:  they kept this sense alive from practicing it since childhood.  Men don’t get excited by touch; it is mainly to enhancing his mental imagination.

The only “touchy” part in a male is the closest region of his anus.

I get generous and add the genital parts, but this is a manner of increasing his ego.  I am convinced that when a female touch the genital parts of a man, it is the imaginative brain section that is excited. The man think: “Wow, she wants it!” and that is enough for assuring an erection.

Man has to touch his partner everywhere, and seriously learn the most efficient exciting parts in his partner:  He does not want to bore his partner with lousy time-waster when the partner is ready to enjoy.

I suggest to the women to use boldly the largest skin areas in the hands, feet, and thighs: Nail and finger touching is to be avoided because man is different from woman in that powerful section of the lymbic system.

The sense of touch is basically atrophied in man and it is fundamentally used to excite the imaginative sections in the brain.

Good luck in your journey of learning the body of your partner:  It might be the initial phase in appreciating companionship and privacy.

February 23, 2005

“In peace time, why and how often are Human Factors professionals hired?”

In peace time, governments of modern countries are the major employers of Human Factors and industrial psychologists either directly or indirectly.

Many of government’s contracts with private companies attach clauses that require involvements of these professionals in their projects, and so they get hired in order to secure bids.

In peace time, which is rare, companies have the luxury to select who they think are the best qualified candidates from the vast pool of job applicants, locally and internationally.

People assume that the hired applicants are mostly the best qualified technically and the best trained for the jobs.

Most of us are very skeptical about that assumption of hiring the best qualified applicants, especially in underdeveloped countries. 

It seems that this skepticism is applicable everywhere and for good reasons.

When you have to interact with coworkers every day for eight hours a day, it stands to reason that you prefer people whom you think are compatible to your idiosyncrasies.

So far, this approach might be considered rational emotionally, and bearing many elements of common sense and good judgments.

On the other hand, how could any one test his incompatibility of living and interacting with someone else, based on his discrimination on sex, race, color and religion if the opportunities to meet with them is an impossibility or at best the interactions are fleeting?

Under social and political pressures, governments have enacted laws that prohibit discrimination on the jobs unless the applicant is proven unqualified by well documented facts for specific requirements.

Obviously a law is not much of a law if no painful penalties are attached to it and no enforcement mechanisms are contemplated or an appropriate budget allocated for an independent agency and inspections agents.

So, how could an enforcement agency go about clamping down on these companies that discriminate unabashedly and with no impunity?

The first main tool is to collect data and analyze the proportions of the population hired.

A more serious analysis would compare these proportions within each department, especially in the higher levels jobs.

Any critical discrepancy in these proportions will trigger a red alert for direct inspection of the non abiding firms and legal actions taken.

By the by, the enforcement agency would learn to set priorities in their enforcement endeavor and learn what categories of companies are most inclined to discriminate for closer targeting.

So, what other job descriptions can be applicable to the training of Human Factors graduates in peace time?

A few of the design training in sound curriculum offer capabilities for designing instruction manuals, job aids, training programs, evaluation of systems on criteria of safe usage, ease of operation, ease of maintenance and repair, acceptability and retaining products.

Many of these jobs are taken by other graduates who have narrow multidisciplinary training and knowledge but are not described as engineering jobs and evidently lower wages are offered and gladly accepted.

Another job opportunity is designing workstations, not only in manufacturing facilities, but also computer workstations for institutions, private use, and educating the consumers to the various safety and health problems related to sedentary and repetitive jobs.

Note:  The version of a student to my article gave the impression that discrimination to jobs is prevalent only in underdeveloped countries.  I believe that perception is not correct since only a consistant and persistent application and enforcement of the anti-discrimination laws can hold discrimination behavior to a reduced level and check its spread among the companies and institutions.




February 2023

Blog Stats

  • 1,516,586 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 822 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: