First Blog

 In this chapter, we take up the character of the problem-solver. Their task is not a simple one. First, we look at 11 traits of the problem-solver, from being analytic to decisive, from being resilient to open-minded, and so on. (Section 2.)  Yet, the story is not as simple as that. There are pitfalls and risks owing to bias and other forms of subjectivity. (Section 4.) Remarkably, some of these are new on the scene in both psychology and philosophy. Even the way the problem is presented can affect the outcome and solution. In between we take up the paradox of incompetence – a massive problem we live with day after day, year after year. Introduction Characteristics of the Problem-Solver The Problem-Solving Paradox What Can Go Wrong? Conclusions. Link. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b0315_characteristics-and-pitfalls-of-the-problem-solver-activity-7081938526518317056-QzGm?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

Some of us live by maxims of the famous luminaries, past and present. Yet, it is upon us to understand just what is correct, actionable, and sensible. Let’s consider the lie from the inside and out. For us grown-ups Let’s begin with the maxim from Fyodor Dostoevsky , “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.” This lofty admonition sounds almost Utopian, with dire consequences for violation. The self-lie is wrong.   For the kids. We have “The Little Engine that Could,” a story used to teach children the value of optimism and hard work. This means to try hard regardless of doubt, also to be viewed as a possible self-lie. Dostoevsky instructs us not to, but most of us do try. Does this mean we lie to ourselves?   Yet, from another past luminary Thoma

Multiculturalism. There are multiple definitions of this term.  At the national level, it means words in a national document that we respect all other cultures and against which we will not discriminate.  For others, it means kinship, if not to one’s village but to one’s (former) country, race, or religion. Often, they bring along their old hatreds from their old country to the new. In this version, the group may stick together, live together, apart from their adopted country and in this way alone.  Businesses formed within a given subculture are free to hire within it, promote within it, and maintain kinships, despite the “words.” For others, it is a crass method to subdivide various cultures to vote in a certain way.  Multiculturalism comes down to the triple of words, kinship, and politics , each with their own variations of meaning.  No wonder it causes problems. Countries adopting a policy of multiculturalism ultimately have no culture.   It becomes a loosely ass

Immigration and Education Paradox The President has recently promoted a new immigration law.  English speaking and needed skills take priority.  You may agree or disagree.  But the pundits, always that crowd, have expanded the argument further – to education and immigration. They say we are educating foreign nationals to have highly technical skills.  Then, by law, they are required to return home.  However, the USA is not producing a sufficient number of technical USA citizen grads to satisfy job openings. It need many, many more.  The current push is to let foreign grads stay.  Let them stay - they say. Let’s allow those well trained, educated, and able students to take jobs right here.  Does this sound reasonable? Absolutely!  No brainer, huh?  Not quite .  By the requirement of law, the students to return home, the US has created a truly inexpensive and successful foreign policy program.  Those educated students, back home, and become allies of everything USA.  They be

  To Donald: A sweet tweet is worth more than a thousand trivial tweets. Advocates of “cookoo” theories often chime the loudest and are always on time. ______________ That Pesky Time . On the time travel paradox.   One of the most frequently applied scenarios against the possibility of time travel is the “grandfather” paradox.   Here it is. Right now, you travel back in time with a pistol to see your grandfather walking in a park long before he has even met your grandmother.   You shoot and kill him. Therefore, grandpa never meets grandma, and thus you cannot exist to travel back in time. ( This where the time travel paradox usually ends. But it goes on… )   Now then, since you don’t exist you couldn’t have traveled back in time to kill grandpa. Thus grandpa does meet grandma, and eventually you are born.   But now you can travel back to make the kill.    This repeats ad infinitum. What seems to be created is a time-conflict. Kill, no kill, kill, no kill, …   Doesn’t

Make no doubt about the dubious vetting of Syrian nationals.  If the President concedes to critics and delays or cancels the admission of Syrian refugees on the basis of incomplete or inaccurate vetting, he opens to door to the same vetting argument for particularly Latin American illegal immigrants on the same basis.  This is a profound problem for the Administration, given they believe in this type of domino theory. This creates a paradox for both the vetting process and the admission of immigrants for any reason that abrogates full security and identity protocols.  In short, many if not most agree: "Yes, we should accept refugees, but no, we wish no more uncertainty about our safety." If his party or opposition could give the Administration a pathway around this, it could help, however doubtful the reality his acceptance of such a plan.  Why?  There are always pathways around the pathways - all perfectly logical and reasonable. I truly hope for us all t