THINKER'S ALMANAC - February 23

Why is one of the keys to a successful Ted Talk not just the content of the talk but also the talk’s time limit?

Subject:  Attention - TED Talk Time Limit

Event:  TED Founded, 1984

In 2005, Time magazine reported that research conducted by Microsoft Corporation concluded that the attention span of the average individual dropped from 12 seconds in 2000 to 8 seconds in 2005. Time also noted that the attention span of a goldfish is 9 seconds(1).

A bit more optimistic view of the human attention span can be found at TED conferences, where the rule is no presentation may exceed 18-minutes.  It’s hard to argue with the success of TED Talks; they are streamed more than 2 million times per day.

                                                        Image by Mohamed Hassan from Pixabay 

TED (Technology, Entertainment, and Design) was created by Richard Saul Wurman, who hosted the first TED conference in Monterey, California, on this day, Thursday, February 23, 1984.  Attendees paid $475 to watch a variety of 18-minute presentations.  In 2009, TED began to depart from its once a year model by granting licenses to third parties for community-level TEDx events.  The TED.com website was launched in 2006, and today there are TED events in more than 130 countries.

As TED curator Chris Anderson explains, the time limit is no accident; instead, it is a purposeful standard that helps both the speaker communicate clearly and the audience learn more efficiently:

It is long enough to be serious and short enough to hold people’s attention. It turns out that this length also works incredibly well online. It’s the length of a coffee break. So, you watch a great talk, and forward the link to two or three people. It can go viral, very easily. The 18-minute length also works much like the way Twitter forces people to be disciplined in what they write. By forcing speakers who are used to going on for 45 minutes to bring it down to 18, you get them to really think about what they want to say. What is the key point they want to communicate? It has a clarifying effect. It brings discipline. 

Communication coach Carmine Gallo explains the logic of the 18-minute time rule based on the physiology of the brain:

The 18-minute rule also works because the brain is an energy hog. The average adult human brain only weighs about three pounds, but it consumes an inordinate amount of glucose, oxygen, and blood flow. As the brain takes in new information and is forced to process it, millions of neurons are firing at once, burning energy and leading to fatigue and exhaustion. (2)

Furthermore, although the brain makes up about 2% of the body’s total weight, it uses 20% of the body's energy.

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the rationale behind the 18-minute time limit for TED Talks?

Challenge - Under 18 But Not Minor:  Some of the most effective and memorable speeches in history come in under the 18-minute rule.  For example, Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, which he gave at the March on Washington on August 28, 1963, was 17 minutes long.  Speaking at a normal pace, the average 18-minute speech would be approximately 2,500 words.  Do some research on great speeches, and find one that you like that is under 2,500 words.  Explain the rhetorical context of the speech and, besides the fact that it is less than 18-minutes long, explain why you feel it is effective.

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

-February 23, 2011:  On this day an important study on language was published. More specifically, the study revealed the power of metaphors to persuade.  In the study, participants were shown two different metaphors describing the same situation:

Crime is a beast ravaging the city.

Crime is a virus ravaging the city.

People who read the “beast” metaphor were more likely to suggest law enforcement-based solutions, such as more police or longer jail sentences.  In contrast, people who read the “virus” metaphor were more likely to suggest education initiatives or economic policy changes. Clearly metaphors subtly influence our thinking, bringing to mind different associations.  When we think of a “beast,” for example, images related to brute force and cages come to mind.  In contrast, when we think of a “virus,” images related to antidotes and prevention come to mind. (3).

Sources:

1-McSpadden, Kevin. “You Now Have a Shorter Attention Span Than a Goldfish” Time.com 14 May 2015.  

2-Gallo, Carmine. “The Science Behind TED's 18-Minute Rule.”  Linkedin.com 13 March, 2014.

3-Thibodeau, Paul H. and Lera Boroditsky. “Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning.” Feb. 2011. PLoS ONE 6(2): e16782.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - February 22

What animal did German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer hold up as providing insights into the nature of human interactions?

Subject:  Pessimism - The Porcupine’s Dilemma

Event:  Birthday of German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer, 1788

Life swings like a pendulum backward and forward between pain and boredom. -Arthur Schopenhauer

Arthur Schopenhauer, who was born on this day in 1788, is philosophy’s best known curmudgeon. He was born into a wealthy German family, but tragedy struck when he was just a teen:  his father’s suicide caused him, like Buddha, to begin reflecting on life’s suffering:  “In my seventeenth year, without any earned school education, I was gripped by the misery of life as Buddha was in his youth when he saw sickness, old age, pain and death.” 

                                                            Image by Gordon Johnson from Pixabay 

Schopenhauer had little doubt that the glass of life was half empty; nevertheless, he still resolved as a philosopher to record and share his thoughts: “Life is an unpleasant business; I have resolved to spend it reflecting upon it.”

Just in case anyone doubted his pessimistic outlook, Schopenhauer entitled one of his works Studies in Pessimism (1851).  Here he gives a less than glowing review to life:

In early youth, as we contemplate our coming life, we are like children in a theatre before the curtain is raised, sitting there in high spirits and eagerly waiting for the play to begin. It is a blessing that we do not know what is really going to happen. Could we foresee it, there are times when children might seem like innocent prisoners, condemned, not to death, but to life, and as yet all unconscious of what their sentence means.

There are two closely related words, however, that present a ray of sunshine and hope in Schopenhauer’s otherwise gloomy world view:  ascetic and aesthetic.

“Ascetic” refers to the monk-like existence of a person who lives a life of self-denial.  The ascetic overcomes bodily desires and appetites, never marries, and embraces a life of austerity and humility. Schopenhauer lived a very simple, regimented life.  He never married, and lived alone, except for a pet poodle named “Atma,” a Hindu word for the supreme universal soul.

“Aesthetic” refers to the branch of philosophy that contemplates and explores the nature of art and beauty. Attending the theater, reading poetry, or examining a painting allow us to hold a mirror up to life.  Schopenhauer advised us to respect all artistic creations:  “Treat a work of art like a prince.  Let it speak to you first.”  Of all the arts, music was especially important to Schopenhauer; he was known to play his flute every evening after dinner (1).

Schopenhauer also turned to nature as a means to reflect on life.  In his famous parable called the “Porcupine’s Dilemma,” he holds up the social habits of porcupines as providing wisdom into the tension between intimacy and autonomy that lives in each of us.  Sigmund Freud was so inspired by Schopenhauer’s prickly metaphor that he kept a bronze porcupine figurine on his desk:

A number of porcupines huddled together for warmth on a cold day in winter; but, as they began to prick one another with their quills, they were obliged to disperse. However the cold drove them together again, when just the same thing happened. At last, after many turns of huddling and dispersing, they discovered that they would be best off by remaining at a little distance from one another. In the same way the need of society drives the human porcupines together, only to be mutually repelled by the many prickly and disagreeable qualities of their nature. The moderate distance which they at last discover to be the only tolerable condition of intercourse, is the code of politeness and fine manners; and those who transgress it are roughly told—in the English phrase—to keep their distance. By this arrangement the mutual need of warmth is only very moderately satisfied; but then people do not get pricked. A man who has some heat in himself prefers to remain outside, where he will neither prick other people nor get pricked himself. (2)

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What are the two areas of life that Schopenhauer turned to to find hope in what he saw as an otherwise hopeless existence?

Challenge - Fables of Flora and Fauna:  Like Schopenhauer, the philosopher Alain de Botton advises us to examine nature:  “Nature is a kind of book, and when we open our eyes to it, find its pages filled with distinctive lessons about wisdom and serenity” (3).  Do a bit of research on some specific plants or animals.  Select one that you find particularly interesting.  Explain how what you learned about his plant or animal might serve as a parable for the human species.

ALSO ON THIS DAY:  

February 22, 1930:   Today is the birthday of psychologist Walter Mischel. Mischel’s marshmallow test gives us unique insight into the role that willpower plays in individual success (See THINKER’S ALMANAC - September 23).  Summarizing his work, Mischel said the following:

“. . . When I am asked to summarize the fundamental message from research on self-control, I recall “Descartes’s famous dictum cogito, ergo sum—“I think, therefore I am.” What has been discovered about mind, brain, and self-control lets us move from his proposition to “I think, therefore I can change what I am.” 

Sources:

1-Warburton, Nigel.  A Little History of Philosophy. New Haven:  Yale University Press, 2011.

2-Schopenhauer, Arthur. “Studies in Pessimism - A Few Parables”  (1913)   translated by Thomas Bailey Saunders.  Wikisource.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Studies_in_Pessimism/A_Few_Parables

3-”The Wisdom of Nature” The School of Life

https://www.theschooloflife.com/thebookoflife/the-wisdom-of-nature/

Reading Check:

-What is the difference between the adjectives “ascetic” and “aesthetic”?

-Why did Schopenhauer view the porcupine as a good metaphor for humans?

THINKER'S ALMANAC - February 21

How does Bloom’s Taxonomy give us six different ways to learn a concept?

Subject:  Thinking/Learning - Bloom’s Taxonomy 

Event:  Birthday of Benjamin Bloom, 1913

Creativity follows mastery, so mastery of skills is the first priority for young talent. -Benjamin Bloom

Today is the birthday of American psychologist Benjamin Bloom.  In 1956, Bloom created what has become the most influential model of how people learn and how people think.  Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, which was created over sixty years ago, remains one of the most useful tools for teachers and students to articulate the ways in which the brain processes learning, beginning with foundational learning and moving to higher levels of critical thinking.

Image by Rosy / Bad Homburg / Germany from Pixabay

The idea behind Bloom’s Taxonomy is to help teachers and students advance their thinking and learning beyond superficial levels.  By classifying thinking into six categories, the model makes the thinking and learning process less abstract, showing how students can process their learning in different ways and at different levels.  In addition, the taxonomy provides a scaffolding that provides a firm foundation for learning as well as a safe structure for reaching higher levels of thinking and learning.

Knowledge – Remember/Define/Memorize: This is the most fundamental level of learning something.  It is the recall level where students memorize a fact, a definition, or a concept.  If, for example, you were studying the concept of cognitive dissonance, you might write down and memorize the definition.

Comprehension – Understand/Explain/Paraphrase:  This is where students move beyond just memorization by explaining what they know in their own words, by summarizing main ideas, and by illustrating what they know with examples.  This also involves comparing, contrasting, classifying, inferring, and predicting.  Engaging with the learning in this way, moves the learning from short term memory to long term memory, making it more likely that the learner will be able to master what they are learning.  If, for example, you were studying cognitive dissonance, you might demonstrate your understanding of the term by explaining what cognitive dissonance is in your own words and by giving a specific example to illustrate it.

Application – Use/Demonstrate/Sketch: This is where students use what they have learned by applying it to a new situation or context.  Using the knowledge takes it from the theoretical level to the practical application level, making the learning both more meaningful and more practical.  If, for example, you were studying cognitive dissonance, you might apply your knowledge of it by explaining how cognitive dissonance might relate to a situation in which a person buys a new car.

Analysis – Examine/Classify/Dissect: This is where students examine and break information into parts or classifications.  It involves looking at causes and effects, making inferences, and supporting generalizations with evidence.   If, for example, you were studying cognitive dissonance, you might analyze it by identifying the specific causes and effects that make it happen.

Evaluation – Appraise/Argue/Judge: This is where students form and defend opinions about what they are learning.  It involves making judgments based on criteria and supporting those judgments with valid evidence.   If, for example, you were studying cognitive dissonance, you might evaluate it by discussing whether or not the overall effects of cognitive dissonance on individuals are positive or negative.

Synthesis – Create/Design/Compose:  This is where students use their knowledge and learning to create something new and original.  It involves combining elements into new patterns or generating alternative ideas or solutions.  For example, if you were studying cognitive dissonance, you might write a research report on the term where you use evidence from two or three different sources to explain your position on why it is an important concept.  You might also develop your own graphic to illustrate the cause and effect relationships related to the idea.

Notice that each of the six different levels of the taxonomy requires the learner to engage at deeper and deeper levels with the learning, integrating that knowledge in different ways, ways that are successively more challenging, ways that require more and more cognitive engagement, which then leads to higher order thinking and higher levels of mastery.  

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What are six different levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, and how does the Taxonomy make learning less abstract and help push students to higher order thinking?

Challenge - Learning in Bloom:  How might you create a lesson that teaches a basic abstract concept in a way that students truly learn it?  Take an abstract concept that you know well, such as capitalism, photosynthesis, or rhetoric, and write a lesson plan that involves six different activities that students will do — at each of the six levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.  The goal is to help students move from basic understanding to higher order thinking. 

ALSO ON THIS DAY:  

February 21, 1962:  American author David Foster Wallis was born on this day. In 2005, Wallis presented the commencement address entitled “This Is Water”  to the graduating class at Kenyon College, a liberal arts college in Gambier, Ohio.

Wallace began his address with an anecdote:

There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”

As Wallis continued his address, he challenged the graduates to approach their lives philosophically by thinking and reflecting consciously, paying attention to the obvious realities that, though seemingly obvious, are -- like water to the fish -- often the hardest to see.  The freedom provided by education, according to Wallace, is the ability to choose to pay attention and see what is hidden in plain sight.

Sources:

1-Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc, 1956.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - February 20

How can a disheveled, 1970s-era TV detective help us to understand the power of strategic questions? 

Subject:  Epistemology - The Columbo Method

Event:  Premiere of the television detective drama Columbo, 1968.

The art and science of asking questions is the source of all knowledge. -Thomas Berger

Imagine if the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates became the lead in a new detective television series.  It’s not that far of a stretch when you consider that Socrates was consumed by the same thing that all television detectives are.  Like Socrates, they are on an epistemological quest for knowledge, more specifically, knowledge that will lead them to the truth.  

Socrates used an analogy to describe the difference between unsound truth and sound truth.  He imagined two beautiful statues by the sculptor Daedalus.  The unsound truth, which came about via intuition, is like a statue placed precariously atop a pillar.  The first strong wind that comes along will knock it over.  The sound truth, however, is anchored to the ground by tethering cables, making it impervious to even gale-force winds.  For Socrates, the test of differentiating the unsound truth from the sound truth was to determine which one stood up under the scrutiny of questioning (1).

When we think of Socrates today, we probably think of his characteristic toga, and we probably also think about his characteristic Socratic method of questioning.

Another character known for his characteristic dress and method is the television detective Columbo.  Instead of a toga, he wore a raincoat.  Like Socrates, he valued questioning, but he added a wrinkle that made his method memorable and particularly effective for fighting crime.

                                                        Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay 

The television show Columbo -- which premiered on this day in 1968 -- had a 

unique template.  Instead of following the typical “whodunnit” structure of traditional detective dramas, the Columbo writers inverted the template, beginning each episode by making the audience eye-witnesses to the crime being committed, which included knowing the identity of the perpetrator.  Instead of being a “whodunit,” Columbo followed the “howcatchem” format.  After seeing the crime committed before their eyes, the audience then got to see the cigar-smoking, raincoat-clad detective Columbo sniff out the trail of clues until he found the guilty party.

Like Socrates, an essential element of Colombo’s method was questions; however, his approach was a bit more indirect. It begins with an understanding of the importance of first and last impressions. Psychologists who study memory highlight the serial position effect and our tendency to recall best what is presented first (primacy effect) and what is presented last (recency effect). 

Columbo’s method began with a first impression that was deliberately crafted to disarm a suspect.  His disheveled appearance and his seemingly absent-minded manner put the suspect at ease, and his opening questions were always casual, respectful, and non-threatening, designed to get the suspect talking about things other than homicide.   

Columbo’s final interactions with a suspect were also deliberately designed to leave an impression.  Just as he appeared to be finishing his meeting and turning to leave, he would turn back around and say, “There’s just one more thing.”  Having thought that the interaction with the detective had concluded, the suspect would be caught off guard   At this point Columbo would point out facts from the case that appeared to be in conflict.  Instead of presenting this conflict in an accusatory manner, he would state it in a way that was self-deprecating, rubbing his head and expressing his own confusion, appearing to give the suspect the benefit of the doubt. He would then deliver the final probing question which the suspect -- being disarmed by Columbo’s odd manner -- would answer in a careless, less than thoughtful way, often revealing something important (2).

In an episode called “How to Dial a Murder,” one suspect, who happened to be a psychologist, saw through Columbo’s method, saying, “You’re a fascinating man, Lieutenant. . . . You pass yourself off as a puppy in a raincoat happily running around the yard digging holes all up in the garden, only you’re laying a minefield” (3).

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the Columbo method, and how does it differ from the Socratic method?

Challenge - That is the Question:  Do a search for quotations about “questions.”  Select one quotation that you like, and write a paragraph explaining why you think the quotation is an important one.

Sources:

1-de Botton, Alain. The Consolations of Philosophy.  New York:  Vintage International, 2000.

2-”The Columbo Technique.”  Changing Minds.

3-Griffiths, Mark D. ”The Psychology of Columbo.” Psychology Today, 20 Feb. 2018. 

THINKER'S ALMANAC - February 19

According to Copernicus, what is true knowledge?

Subject:  Metacognition - Copernicus’ Definition of True Knowledge

Event:  Birthday of Nicolaus Copernicus, 1473

Today is the birthday of Nicolaus Copernicus, a man who not only changed the world as we know it but also the universe.  

Born in Poland in 1473, Copernicus was both a polyglot and a polymath.  He spoke Latin, German, Polish, Greek, and Italian.  In addition to holding a doctorate in canon law, he was also a physician, mathematician, classics scholar, translator, governor, diplomat, and economist.  Today, we know him best as the astronomer who challenged the orthodox belief that Earth was the center of the universe.  Fifteen-hundred years after the ancient Greek astronomer Ptolemy established his theory that the planets, the sun, and the stars revolved around a stationary Earth, Copernicus presented his revolutionary theory.  He claimed that not only did the Earth rotate on its axis, but also that Earth and the other planets revolved around the sun.  Copernicus’ work in astronomy was the quintessential achievement of the Renaissance, totally transforming mankind’s view of the universe and paving the way for future work by Galileo, Kepler, and Newton.

                                Nicolaus Copernicus - Image by Gordon Johnson from Pixabay 

A true man of science and of learning, Copernicus embodied the Renaissance ideals of searching for knowledge and challenging conventional wisdom. His opus On the Revolution of the Celestial Spheres was published in 1543, the same year he died (1).

One quotation that typifies Copernicus’ scientific approach is one that uses simple terms to express a profound insight:

To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge.

Today cognitive psychologists sum up Copernicus’ insight using a single term: metacognition.  Meta is Greek for “about,” and cognition is Latin for “to know.” Metacognition, therefore, is “thinking about thinking.”  More than just being aware that we think, metacognition is the process of monitoring our own thinking.

As Copernicus reminds us, metacognition is not just what we know, it is also being aware of what we don’t know, as well as being aware of the ways we sometimes delude ourselves.  To understand the ways we think best and the ways we fall short of sound thinking, we should always keep in mind the relationship between both knowledge and ignorance.  

Notice, for example, how the following wise voices from the past express this relationship:

-Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance.  –Confucius

-The greatest obstacle to discovering the shape of the earth, the continents and the ocean was not ignorance but the illusion of knowledge. –Daniel J. Boorstin

-The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance. — Socrates

-The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: Be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge. — Elbert Hubbard

-To be conscious that you are ignorant is a great step to knowledge. — Benjamin Disraeli

-The beginning of knowledge is the discovery of something we do not understand. — Frank Herbert

In the book Make It Stick, the authors discuss one specific learning strategy that employs metacognition to help learners be more productive and more efficient in their study.  The strategy is called retrieval practice, and recent studies have documented that this strategy is much more effective than rereading a text, highlighting a text, or even reviewing notes.

The key aspect of retrieval practice is self-quizzing or testing.  When reading a text or listening to a lecture, therefore, the student should generate questions for self-testing.  Once the student has finished reading or listening, he or she should use the questions to recall and recite out loud the facts, concepts, or events from memory, without using the book or notes for reference.  The basic premise of retrieval practice is that learning that sticks is learning that is effortful.  Furthermore, the effortful act of retrieving knowledge from memory strengthens the memory, increasing the likelihood that knowledge will stay in long term memory.  Like walking an unfamiliar path through the woods, the more you travel the path, the more confidence you have in remembering your way without getting lost.  Retrieval practice also decreases the likelihood that 

students will delude themselves into believing they know what they don’t know. Since the strategy requires that students recite answers aloud without notes, they are able to exercise good metacognition by clearly determining what they know and what they don’t quite know yet (2).

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is retrieval practice and how does it relate to metacognition?

Challenge - What Do You Know?: How can you apply retrieval practice to increase your metacognition?  Select an article or short story that you have not read before.  As you read the passage, write down three questions based on the key ideas you’re reading.  When you finish the reading, put the passage away, and attempt to answer each of your questions by reciting the answers out loud.  As you answer each question, rate your level of confidence with your answer on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being you feel highly confident; 1 being you need to look back at the passage to answer).  Once you have finished, take a moment to reflect on the strategy.  How did it feel to answer out loud?  Do you feel like this strategy will work for you in the future? 

Sources:

1-”Nicolaus Copernicus” - New Mexico Museum of Space History

2-Brown, Peter C., Henry L. Roediger III, Mark A. McDaniel.  Make It Stick:  The Science of Successful Learning.  Cambridge, Mass.:  Harvard University Press, 2014.