thoughts on psychology

This won't be a very coherent post but anyway...

I always wondered about psychology. 

 1.5kg of grey matter is what controls all our hopes and dreams, fears and sorrows.

We asked our teacher whether he thought it was a science, and he described it as a 'pseudo-science' due to the fact that it wasn't really science, but it did use the same methods. It comes up with really interesting theories and results from experiments that directly affect our lives, but due to the fact it can't be objectively determined like science, it isn't considered as such.

The history of psychology is always fascinating, and truth be told I'm not a historian so I don't know about it all. But I know of phrenology, which was the study of physical characteristics, which would in theory be able to tell you what kind of person someone was. (this was parodied by Terry Pratchett in his book Men at Arms, where retrophrenology is when someone hits you on the head, modifying your skull which in turn modifies your personality. Genius!). Then came Freud with his lovely theories about the Id, the Ego and the SuperEgo. These in turn led to Pavlov's famous experiment, and then Skinner's work on conditioning.

Little did Pavlov know, they were experimenting on us! (just like the white mice in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

Sample sizes are always a bone of contention when skeptics pick at the flaws of the experiment. A study done of university-age students may be different to a study done with retired pensioners, depending on what is being studied. I always thought there should be some sort of SUPER sample group that had a diverse mix of people from every race, gender and sex that could undergo all the experiments that require it. But then I realised they would all learn from previous studies, and results would be skewed again. Really, what would work the most is if EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the world was part of the study. But as that is impractical and uneconomical, it wouldn't work.

More after the jump!

the paradox of society: childbirths

Disclaimer: The below post is un-researched, my own opinion, un-eloquent and probably all bullshit.

The...Ascent of Man?

credit: http://cyemae.wordpress.com/evolution-of-man/

Society is supposed to change, adapt, and advance. Due to the fact that we are no longer evolving through Darwin's mechanism of 'survival of the fittest', our advancement comes from the changing environment around us. The human race increases it's collective intelligence in leaps and bounds, although some may argue that it is, at the moment, stagnatory (could be the subject of an entire post, which I will never write :)). Specifically, I want to focus on the effect of education on childbirth.

Sherlock Holmes; an enthusiast's musings

Apologies for the long post, bear with me. I'm not usually passionate for anything :P

 

"...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth..." -  Sherlock Holmes, The Sign of Four

As some of you may know, I am quite a Holmes fan. I don't know when it started, but I grew a deep affection for Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's greatest creation; Sherlock Holmes. He was referenced in pop culture everywhere, and I guess I just wanted to know what all the fuss was about. The picture above is my copy of the complete works of Sherlock Holmes (bought long ago at Borders (sadfaec)), and I finally finished it for the second time recently.

I believe the genius of his work stems from every human being's appreciation for a sharp, intelligent mind. For those who have specific passions, it is easy to appreciate a master at work. For example, as a violinist myself, while watching Itzhak Perlman play the haunting theme from Schindler's List, or the exciting gypsy tune Zigeunerweisen, I'm able to appreciate the subtle things that he does with expression or how he plays, because I know how hard it is to do. However for an outsider, it may only be the tune itself that makes an impression. 

Two things that all humans have in common is a brain and a body. It is no wonder then, that when people rise to master these two aspects of themselves, that the whole world can appreciate it. Sportsmen are revered around the world for their athletic finesse, celebrities are given much popularity by how they look, and (increasingly) scientists such as Stephen Hawking or my favourite, Neil deGrasse Tyson [twitter], who are also admired by many.

Sherlock Holmes is an example of an expert mind at work. The logical deductions he makes seem so simple when illustrated for us in the novels or short stories, but from the facts alone, we would not know what to deduce. Obviously, being a story, he's always right in his deductions (okay, there are some stories where he screws up, but still!). But this is the reason why we love Sherlock so much; we understand the logic that is required to arrive a certain conclusion, but we could never do it ourselves.

"Inspector Lestrade: In another life, Mr. Holmes, you would have made a excellent criminal. Sherlock Holmes: Yes, and you an excellent policeman." - Sherlock Holmes (2009)

The movies directed by Guy Ritchie are Sherlock Holmes with much more action. I enjoyed these movies (especially the second!) due to the fact that Sherlock was played so well by Robert Downey Jr. A curious mix of laconic and yet with bursts of energy and eccentricity that was his wont. Jude Law as Watson was also quite well done, and the way they interacted with each other was awesome. (epic bromance =D) The plots were original, and very well executed. Mycroft was beautifully enacted by Stephen Fry (another of my idols due to QI), but I think Irene Adler could have been better done (although Rachel McAdams is HOTTTT). EPIC MOVIES REGARDLESS.

"Anderson, don't talk out loud. You lower the IQ of the whole street." - Sherlock Holmes, Sherlock Holmes (BBC series)

Recently finished watching the Sherlock series by BBC; found it funny that each episode ran approximately the same length as the movies themselves LOL. The modern-day adaptation of the stories that came from the short stories was immaculate. A Study in Pink (Scarlet in the original), The Hound of Baskerville, A Scandal in Belgravia (Bohemia in the original) were all referenced quite well. The plots were well done for a modern-day adaptation, and the way technology was interspersed was amazing (texts, blogs, and the media showing off his public image with the deerhunter HAHA). 

I loved how it was presented. I especially adored the way Irene Adler was treated in this series...the series made the romantic connection between her and Sherlock quite well. However, the other characters I wasn't as impressed with. Moriarty was bonkers, literally, and not the upper-class sophistication as he was in the movie and the books. Mycroft was much too energetic for the lethargic, robust man he was in the books. Watson had a darker past than I thought was necessary, and Sherlock was...not as well played as Robert Downey Jr. He was good as an eccentric being, but he had no laconic, lazy feel to himself. That being said, the plot and writing was amazing; the comedy was contrasted by the darkness of the plot, and all the subtext was hilarious.

/poshrant

THANKS IF YOU'VE READ THIS FAR, I LOVE YOU =D you don't have to agree with ANYTHING I say; I'll still love you all the same.

call it an excuse

but I haven't been uploading vids or writing stuff at all. I don't think anyone is particularly disappointed but still...there IS sort of a reason ^^

Many people in this world are talented. Whether it is a gift of languages or an imaginative mind, everyone has something that they believe they are good at. I believe I am good at singing. I used to also believe that I could write creatively well. Of each of these two things, I have produced some work, which is most likely considered very amateur to the rest of the world.


However when I look to great classics of books in what I read (sci-fi), or even just on YouTube watching artists sing and create music, it makes my 'talent' seem insignificant. I know I will probably never have the passion these people have in their determined area of interest because I don't feel like anything will come of it.


I love singing, and listening to people sing. The way they can control their voices, the range that they have with their voices and the sheer level of passion they have for the art makes me envious. They sing often, they sing well, and they create new material that is enjoyable. Knowing my own skills, and the fact I haven't been singing for a period of time, makes me sad that I've lost that passion, and holds me back from doing anything more (youtube-related). I know that covering a song can show your potential to sing, but I always thought that covering a song gave it a different, maybe even more personal interpretation. Changing up the beat or rhythym. Pamplemousse is ridiculously good at rehashing songs in a distinctive way, and the Rocketeer Cover by Jenny Suk is a fantastic remix. And yes, I adore YouTube singers who, even just covering a song, can give their own distinctive feel to it. But I don't know if I can. This isn't to say that I don't enjoy singing though. I frequently annoy my sister with it, and many a time have had to check myself in the shower because I'm singing too loud!


I think it's different with books though. Recently, I've been reading the novels of Arthur C. Clarke, who was a genius in science fiction and wrote magnificently. His Odyssey books were brilliant, and I highly recommend them to anyone really. They're a bit dated in terms of science but the descriptions of planets and situations are captivating nonetheless. From these books, I've realised a few key things that made him so brilliant, and one of those things is explained here (though written by Chuck Palahniuk). I think this may be a more fruitful course to take, as there are features in a tale that can be replicated near anywhere.

And that may also be another problem. With the advent of the Internet, ANYONE can spread their writings or singings around the world, for better or worse. And with this flood of talent/non-talent (read: Rebecca Black), everything becomes diluted. It seems futile...so what's the point?

/rant

empty bookstores

I went up to Borders today...the one in Shoppingtown that is closing down. Everything's 70% off (although there aren't any good books there really (they have SO MANY LEFTOVER ROMANCE BOOKS LOLOLOL)). They're even selling signs and fixtures! like WHAT EVEN.

It makes me sad to see all those empty bookshelves. Alot of my childhood was spent in these book stores trying to read as much of the book as possible so I didn't have to buy it (lol asians) and it saddens me I can't do that anymore. The shelves were all empty; half the store was just shelves that they were selling! Doesn't it seem so...sad? So many books...a wealth of knowledge and entertainment that is just disappearing. Where can you go to buy books these days anyway? Angus and Robertsons got shut down, Borders is as well...I guess I'll be following one of my good friends in trawling the second-hand book stores. Online just doesn't do it for me.

/rant and obligatory 'i'll post more!' notice :)