meet again with me at different times in the same place in
syafitra310.blogspot.com blog, this time I will make a resume of psychology
today.
As our world becomes more technologically complex, we are
less able to understand what makes it work, and it worries the old Columbia
astronomy professor David Helfand. "We shrink from facing the challenges
because we do not like numbers and more comfortable with confidence rather than
by rational thought," Helfand writes in his new book, A Survival Guide to
Misinformation Age. In the face of climate change and related challenges, he
said, our natural preference for binary thinking serve us particularly bad.
"When there is no one right answer, it was very uncomfortable for
people," he said. He hopes his book, which urges the scientific habit of
mind as a bulwark against nonsense, can help stem the tide
Why do we comfort with quantitative reasoning so low?
This is the way we were taught. A colleague called it "the third man to learn." Someone figures something, others go to school and learn how to do it, and then people who come to the students and said, "OK, this is how you do this problem. This is the pattern. Now do 10 more like it and that will mean you has mastered that. "it can transfer technical competence in doing certain things, such as for the SAT. But it does provide an understanding and there is no sense of how the results appear. So, when you ask questions that do not appear in the exact same format, you are at a complete loss.
It is increasingly clear that we can not trust the statistics many politicians throw at us. How can they get away with it?
Research And this Kahan at Yale shows that people use their cognitive reasoning ability to reinforce their group identity, not to analyze the data rationally, how to take sides. As he said, in a pluralist democratic society this is an unmitigated disaster.
Why do we comfort with quantitative reasoning so low?
This is the way we were taught. A colleague called it "the third man to learn." Someone figures something, others go to school and learn how to do it, and then people who come to the students and said, "OK, this is how you do this problem. This is the pattern. Now do 10 more like it and that will mean you has mastered that. "it can transfer technical competence in doing certain things, such as for the SAT. But it does provide an understanding and there is no sense of how the results appear. So, when you ask questions that do not appear in the exact same format, you are at a complete loss.
It is increasingly clear that we can not trust the statistics many politicians throw at us. How can they get away with it?
Research And this Kahan at Yale shows that people use their cognitive reasoning ability to reinforce their group identity, not to analyze the data rationally, how to take sides. As he said, in a pluralist democratic society this is an unmitigated disaster.
Thanks you've opened my blog on my resume so good bye.
1.
Bulwark = benteng
2.
Increasingly
=semakin
3.
Unmitigated= sejati
4.
Confidence =kepercayaan
5.
Particularly =khususnya
6.
Provide =menyediakan
7.
Cognitive= kongnitif
8.
Reasoning =penalaran
9.
Quantitative= kuantitatif
10.
Scientific =ilmiah
11.
Analyze= menganalisi
12.
rather than= dari pada
13.
nonsense =omong kosong
14.
Misinformation =informasi yang salah
15.
Climate =iklim
16.
Pattern = pola
17.
exact same =sam persisi
18.
reinforce =memperkuat
19.
stem =batang
20.
provide= memberikan
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar