During the '60s, I guess I was a baby factory. My three children were born in '62, '66 and '69. My focus was on them, my upwardly mobile husband, work and finishing my B. A. degree.
You talk about segregated schools! I grew up in a segregated community. Lest you don't get this concept, let me explain. I attended school and church, never realizing there was a black/white issue in the world. Why would I? My parents, who taught me to be nice and polite to all individuals, didn't seem to know, themselves, how serious an issue it was. Not until the incident, anyway. My grandparents and uncle attended the local Methodist Church. My Uncle's committee arranged for a guest evangelist to speak. Nobody took note that the church hierarchy had assigned an African American to the task. We finally noticed when the local motel refused to let him have a room. Hard to realize in this day and age, but no negro people were allowed in my hometown after sunset. A room was found for him in the next town north. Everything, but the scar on my soul, went on happily ever after. Well, no doubt the minister's soul was scarred worse.
My next barely escaped learning experience was the summer after my high school graduation. A friend from elementary school invited me south -- to Paducah, KY -- to spend the weekend with his family. I boarded the bus. Being a back of the room kind of person, I headed toward the back of the bus. There were three individuals leaning into the aisle. All were white. Two men, one woman. One was a soldier way too happy to see a girl my age. My usual avoidance mechanism set in, just in time, so that I dropped into the only empty seat in front of them. I sat beside a young black male who did not leave the bus in Paducah. He was headed straight for the south, seated in the front of the bus and I was so segregated that I didn't even know the issue. It was 1956.
From 1963-1965 my husband and I lived in Bloomington, IN. He was a doctoral student and I a secretary at Indiana University.
Three of us girls ate lunch and played cards together at work. I remember being hurt when the African American said to me, in an accusatory tone, that the other white one and I were "so tight". I didn't feel any tighter with one than I did with the other. I still didn't get it.
Just before the ex's graduation, he began job hunting at various universities. We left Indiana during the "worst snow storm in fifty years" and were greeted by daffodils at the Florida state line. The job interviews did not turn out to the ex's liking, so we were in a real hurry to pick up our daughter from the grandparent's home and get back to the land of snow and ice. We decided to take turns driving through the night.
Outside Selma, AL, a place that had been much in the news, my pea sized bladder set up an attack. We drove for miles and miles looking for a filling station or shopping area. Somewhere in the moonless wilderness, we finally came upon a small light. As we pulled in, I noticed a negro man standing in the shadows. A white man approached a screened-in restaurant. The negro man softly called to him. I saw the white man nod and take money from the black man before approaching the restaurant to place an order for both of them. I still didn't get it.
I was directed by signs toward ye olde country outhouses. I was dumbstruck when I stood before three of them. They were labeled "His", "Hers" and "Theirs". I finally got it. No further instructions needed, Lord. From my sheltered, protected, segregated world, it had been hard to understand what the fuss was all about. The memory still causes knots in my stomach.
We got the heck out of Selma at once.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
So You Think You're the One?
Come on folks, let's face it. I'm just not that hot. In fact, I wasn't all that hot when I was young and generally described as cute and sweet. So why in my seventy-fifth summer did I get "hit on" in stores on two consecutive shopping trips? Why does the grapevine keep circulating my name as special friend to someone I've never even met? I don't care if he lives right next door to me, I've never met him. In fact maybe he's looking for my next door neighbor. As far as I know, she's actually looking for someone, cute young widow that she is. She's not all worn out from waiting on a significant other. She'd probably still like a little girl to go with that little boy of hers. At the risk of sounding paranoid, who sent you? Who put you up to this? How high is the bet?
You might think I'm just imagining all this. So, how would you take it if a stranger bent over in front of you, looked up into your face -- not more than a foot away -- and smiled while you were selecting face soap from a bin. No, I'm sure I didn't know him.
Then there is the one I call "Hair". Rude, you say? Since I've never met him either, I don't know what else to call him. He actually shampooed his habitually greasy hair, parted it in the middle and let it flow down past his shoulders. He knew he looked pretty nice. Then, he walked down the street toward his prey -- a look of anticipation and sureness of result on his face. But the result wasn't as anticipated. How confused that made him. Where was his error?
Could it be their goals are different? He, like many men, is pretty casual about the sex thing. If people are attracted to each other, why complicate things with marriage and playing house? Why not get it on and then get on to the next one?
Does she have a say? So you decided she was your summer fling? Does she want a fling? Maybe, unlike you, she wants a long-term relationship complete with white satin and lace? Maybe she really is ready for her 2.3 children and the picket fence. Can she tell by your gait that you are not the permanent kind?
And what happens to her if she agrees to a summer thing? How many of those could she survive before such as you looked askance? Even in this age, they call women sluts if they have more than a couple of summer encounters. How deep does your concern for her go? Is it that you just want to be the one who wins that bet?
Or maybe she has been there and done that. Maybe one longer-term marriage was sufficient for her. Perhaps she is luxuriating in the freedom from a high maintenance dude, an over-controlling parent or a bunch of finally grown kids. Maybe even a summer of fun feels like too much loss of freedom. You can never tell.
Then maybe she fears you are one of those types that requires being married. If she offered you the opportunity to "live in sin" instead of tying her down, what would you say? "No?" Would you express your need to have a helpmate to cook and clean the house while you worked a minimum wage job to support her? Would you promise her she could cater your weekend parties? Would you tell her the names of your future children?
Have you asked her what kind of things she likes to do? Does she like to read? Do you? Does she hate sports, especially those in which you revel? Is she the cerebral type, and you the mechanic who leaves car parts all over the house and yard? What do you have in common? You don't know? Why the heck not?
You mean you've never walked up and introduced yourself? You've never discussed the weather? Yet, you thought to break the ice by getting her into the sack straight away. What ever happened to going out to dinner or a movie? Is that a thing of the past?
Or are you married, looking for something on the side? Maybe she considers herself a coveted entrée, not a side dish. Maybe she deserves a little respect and expects a lot of it. Do you know that in a woman's experience, married men are the number one most likely people to "hit on" a single female? They are said to represent at least one third of the men who subscribe to singles services. Second are young black men hoping to stop by for a while, leave a baby and take off again. Third are young white men less than one third her age. Are you one of these, or are you older than you appear? Perhaps if you knew her age, you would not be interested at all. But did you do anything to find out?
Of course, there is always the chance she is involved already, but did you think to find out? Or maybe she is married, but he is away in the military. Worse, at her age, he may be in a nursing home.
So, nevertheless, you think you're the one. Well possibly you could have been, but probably not. But you'll never know. Why not? Because you presumed that if you decided, it would just be. You didn't go to any effort to find out who she, the person inside of the body, is. You did not talk to her. You did not wine and dine her. She was worth no effort from you other than you deciding you were the one. And once you finally decided, your approach was all wrong. You showed her that you were sure of her. That made it too late.
You might think I'm just imagining all this. So, how would you take it if a stranger bent over in front of you, looked up into your face -- not more than a foot away -- and smiled while you were selecting face soap from a bin. No, I'm sure I didn't know him.
Then there is the one I call "Hair". Rude, you say? Since I've never met him either, I don't know what else to call him. He actually shampooed his habitually greasy hair, parted it in the middle and let it flow down past his shoulders. He knew he looked pretty nice. Then, he walked down the street toward his prey -- a look of anticipation and sureness of result on his face. But the result wasn't as anticipated. How confused that made him. Where was his error?
Could it be their goals are different? He, like many men, is pretty casual about the sex thing. If people are attracted to each other, why complicate things with marriage and playing house? Why not get it on and then get on to the next one?
Does she have a say? So you decided she was your summer fling? Does she want a fling? Maybe, unlike you, she wants a long-term relationship complete with white satin and lace? Maybe she really is ready for her 2.3 children and the picket fence. Can she tell by your gait that you are not the permanent kind?
And what happens to her if she agrees to a summer thing? How many of those could she survive before such as you looked askance? Even in this age, they call women sluts if they have more than a couple of summer encounters. How deep does your concern for her go? Is it that you just want to be the one who wins that bet?
Or maybe she has been there and done that. Maybe one longer-term marriage was sufficient for her. Perhaps she is luxuriating in the freedom from a high maintenance dude, an over-controlling parent or a bunch of finally grown kids. Maybe even a summer of fun feels like too much loss of freedom. You can never tell.
Then maybe she fears you are one of those types that requires being married. If she offered you the opportunity to "live in sin" instead of tying her down, what would you say? "No?" Would you express your need to have a helpmate to cook and clean the house while you worked a minimum wage job to support her? Would you promise her she could cater your weekend parties? Would you tell her the names of your future children?
Have you asked her what kind of things she likes to do? Does she like to read? Do you? Does she hate sports, especially those in which you revel? Is she the cerebral type, and you the mechanic who leaves car parts all over the house and yard? What do you have in common? You don't know? Why the heck not?
You mean you've never walked up and introduced yourself? You've never discussed the weather? Yet, you thought to break the ice by getting her into the sack straight away. What ever happened to going out to dinner or a movie? Is that a thing of the past?
Or are you married, looking for something on the side? Maybe she considers herself a coveted entrée, not a side dish. Maybe she deserves a little respect and expects a lot of it. Do you know that in a woman's experience, married men are the number one most likely people to "hit on" a single female? They are said to represent at least one third of the men who subscribe to singles services. Second are young black men hoping to stop by for a while, leave a baby and take off again. Third are young white men less than one third her age. Are you one of these, or are you older than you appear? Perhaps if you knew her age, you would not be interested at all. But did you do anything to find out?
Of course, there is always the chance she is involved already, but did you think to find out? Or maybe she is married, but he is away in the military. Worse, at her age, he may be in a nursing home.
So, nevertheless, you think you're the one. Well possibly you could have been, but probably not. But you'll never know. Why not? Because you presumed that if you decided, it would just be. You didn't go to any effort to find out who she, the person inside of the body, is. You did not talk to her. You did not wine and dine her. She was worth no effort from you other than you deciding you were the one. And once you finally decided, your approach was all wrong. You showed her that you were sure of her. That made it too late.
Inappropriate Use of Behaviorism
When people like Nathan Azrin and Ted Ayllon and their group began adapting and applying the research of behavioral scientists, such as B. F. Skinner, to humans, there was a great debate. The pros and cons were discussed at depth, much like people had debated the pros and cons of nuclear energy. Like any powerful new phenomenon, "good people" would no doubt use it for the good of mankind, while evil people would use it to control others and exploit their fellow men. Like other such discussions, it is probably still being debated in academic circles on occasion.
Most people familiar with the Principles of Learning from Operant Conditioning and/or the behavioral versions, including the simplistic B-Mod formulas, see the great advantage of using such methods in the home and our schools. As parents and educators responsible for helping young people grow into productive citizens, using the techniques takes the pain out of child rearing. Instead of using the rod to get the desired results, children can be "rewarded" for appropriate behaviors, thus becoming stellar citizens with half the effort and trouble.
It is when people become teenagers and adults that the lines of appropriateness begin to blur. Do we have a right to reward conformity and discourage the uniqueness of teens? Isn't non-conformity how they show self expression and establish themselves as adults?
Humanism, a counseling and psychology point of view, suggests that it is much more humane to enlist the teen or adult to agree to a program that will change specific behaviors. But, what if the person prefers his own self or way to your way? Are you sure your way is right? There are some ways both teens and adults can misbehave that anyone would agree need to be modified. But these areas are few in basically productive individuals.
Let's face it, it takes a pretty arrogant individual to think that he or she has the right way to do something. It takes a very arrogant and self-serving individual to decide to use the Principles of Learning from Operant Conditioning to change others to be like himself. And what self-respecting individual would want to become like a person such as that?
It is a given that control freaks are long on self-service and short on consideration for others. It is into the hands of these individuals that such powerful knowledge should never fall. Fortunately, most people are exposed only to the B-Mod version with it's watered down techniques of rewards and punishments. They don't know the actual functional definitions. They haven't been taught that one man's "reward" can be another's "punisher". They are simple technicians, not knowledgeable planners.
On the whole, behaviorism does not belong in the workplace. Most adults know the fundamentals of being a hard-working, reliable and loyal employee. If anyone does not know this, they don't get much past a short-term trial period anyway. It's not likely someone will work well a few years and then let their work ethic fall apart. Even if they did, the natural consequences of the hire and fire structure would go into effect and remedy the situation.
Any use of reinforcement and punishment beyond salary increases and promotions should be unnecessary. Yet, workplace after workplace has inadequately trained individuals applying B-Mod techniques to well-functioning employees, many of whom are more desirable employees than the modifier. But control freaks will be control freaks, won't they?
It seems an appropriate time to mention that there is a huge problem with applying any control techniques to adults. People just aren't as easy to control as animals. We can think. We can decide. We like our way. We don't want to be a clone of you. We sometimes don't even like you all that much. We frequently have good reason not to think so highly of you.
Businesses need to be wary of trying to change the behaviors of others. If it is totally necessary to do so, never use any employee below the management level. Continually train the individuals used to do this. And remember, most of all, if the employee can tell they are being "modified", that means you don't know what you are doing.
Most people familiar with the Principles of Learning from Operant Conditioning and/or the behavioral versions, including the simplistic B-Mod formulas, see the great advantage of using such methods in the home and our schools. As parents and educators responsible for helping young people grow into productive citizens, using the techniques takes the pain out of child rearing. Instead of using the rod to get the desired results, children can be "rewarded" for appropriate behaviors, thus becoming stellar citizens with half the effort and trouble.
It is when people become teenagers and adults that the lines of appropriateness begin to blur. Do we have a right to reward conformity and discourage the uniqueness of teens? Isn't non-conformity how they show self expression and establish themselves as adults?
Humanism, a counseling and psychology point of view, suggests that it is much more humane to enlist the teen or adult to agree to a program that will change specific behaviors. But, what if the person prefers his own self or way to your way? Are you sure your way is right? There are some ways both teens and adults can misbehave that anyone would agree need to be modified. But these areas are few in basically productive individuals.
Let's face it, it takes a pretty arrogant individual to think that he or she has the right way to do something. It takes a very arrogant and self-serving individual to decide to use the Principles of Learning from Operant Conditioning to change others to be like himself. And what self-respecting individual would want to become like a person such as that?
It is a given that control freaks are long on self-service and short on consideration for others. It is into the hands of these individuals that such powerful knowledge should never fall. Fortunately, most people are exposed only to the B-Mod version with it's watered down techniques of rewards and punishments. They don't know the actual functional definitions. They haven't been taught that one man's "reward" can be another's "punisher". They are simple technicians, not knowledgeable planners.
On the whole, behaviorism does not belong in the workplace. Most adults know the fundamentals of being a hard-working, reliable and loyal employee. If anyone does not know this, they don't get much past a short-term trial period anyway. It's not likely someone will work well a few years and then let their work ethic fall apart. Even if they did, the natural consequences of the hire and fire structure would go into effect and remedy the situation.
Any use of reinforcement and punishment beyond salary increases and promotions should be unnecessary. Yet, workplace after workplace has inadequately trained individuals applying B-Mod techniques to well-functioning employees, many of whom are more desirable employees than the modifier. But control freaks will be control freaks, won't they?
It seems an appropriate time to mention that there is a huge problem with applying any control techniques to adults. People just aren't as easy to control as animals. We can think. We can decide. We like our way. We don't want to be a clone of you. We sometimes don't even like you all that much. We frequently have good reason not to think so highly of you.
Businesses need to be wary of trying to change the behaviors of others. If it is totally necessary to do so, never use any employee below the management level. Continually train the individuals used to do this. And remember, most of all, if the employee can tell they are being "modified", that means you don't know what you are doing.
Sunday, September 1, 2013
My Issues With Paul
As a psychologist, I am well aware that the blindness, as well as the hearing of voices by Saul of Tarsus, could be construed as a break with mental health. The lack of sight would probably be construed as hysteria and the hearing of voices as schizophrenia.
The general public, at least the Christian portion of it, thinks nothing of believing that Saul (Paul) had a genuine religious experience. They believe that God struck him blind on the Road to Damascus and that he called Paul to "turn over a new leaf" and turn to Him. Whatever caused Paul's great guilt complex on that road, he became one of the greatest Apostles of Jesus.
That same Christian part of the general public, however, is among the first to label a fellow human as mentally ill when they say they believe God speaks to them or sends them messages. Well, which way is it? You can't "have your cake and eat it, too."
It is this kind of schizophrenic Christian belief that causes non-Christians to view us as emotional and spiritual lepers -- the unwashed, the unclean, the untouchable. We need to merge our two personalities in this modern world and formulate a new, improved set of beliefs.
One thing we need to keep foremost in our minds is that Paul made a lot of decisions based on an impending end of this world. He did not expect there to be a full planet of Christians and non-Christians in 2013. He did not see beyond a brief lifetime -- probably just his. Now, we should not fault him for this belief. He was simply believing and quoting Jesus, himself.
The problem is, the words of Paul, meant for a short interim between the death of Jesus and the end of the world, are still being used to dictate Christian beliefs and behavior today.
One of my biggest issues is that we read his words not to marry -- at least leaders of Catholic Churches do -- as the gospel truth in this millennium even though Paul stated that his suggestion was due to the impending end. So, generations of religious leaders have lived bereft of a spouse and children. In some, their sex needs have become so great that they preyed on vulnerable little children. Perhaps had they been permitted a hetero or homosexual significant other, there would have been less molestation in the church. I recognize, of course, that there is an illness that causes some adults to prey on little children sexually, and some of these individuals may suffer from that. However, I believe it is possible that many turned to this disgraceful behavior because they could no longer quell their sexual needs and those poor, innocent little kids were handy.
In Women In the Ministry at lousdevotes.blogspot.com, I wrote of the apparent contradictions in scriptures attributed to Paul and his caution to wait until the new Kingdom to follow Jesus' teachings because the end is near.
I'm not suggesting that we "throw out the baby with the bathwater," but I am suggesting that we of the current age at least make note of what issues he raised that he attributed to being because of the impending end.
Paul was writing to the churches he had helped form about real issues of that age. He may have been a prophet, yet do we have evidence of that? His words at that time were pertinent to that time. They may be harmful today.
As example, had all Christians of that age chosen not to marry and reproduce, it would have meant the annihilation of the Christian portion of the human race. Big of Paul to say it is better to marry than to burn. That gave Catholics outside the priesthood a reason for families.
But at the same time, such teachings led leaders of the early church to classify sex as a sin. It is not a sin, it is a gift from God. It is how we exercise that gift in conjunction with God's commandments that renders it good or bad.
The general public, at least the Christian portion of it, thinks nothing of believing that Saul (Paul) had a genuine religious experience. They believe that God struck him blind on the Road to Damascus and that he called Paul to "turn over a new leaf" and turn to Him. Whatever caused Paul's great guilt complex on that road, he became one of the greatest Apostles of Jesus.
That same Christian part of the general public, however, is among the first to label a fellow human as mentally ill when they say they believe God speaks to them or sends them messages. Well, which way is it? You can't "have your cake and eat it, too."
It is this kind of schizophrenic Christian belief that causes non-Christians to view us as emotional and spiritual lepers -- the unwashed, the unclean, the untouchable. We need to merge our two personalities in this modern world and formulate a new, improved set of beliefs.
One thing we need to keep foremost in our minds is that Paul made a lot of decisions based on an impending end of this world. He did not expect there to be a full planet of Christians and non-Christians in 2013. He did not see beyond a brief lifetime -- probably just his. Now, we should not fault him for this belief. He was simply believing and quoting Jesus, himself.
The problem is, the words of Paul, meant for a short interim between the death of Jesus and the end of the world, are still being used to dictate Christian beliefs and behavior today.
One of my biggest issues is that we read his words not to marry -- at least leaders of Catholic Churches do -- as the gospel truth in this millennium even though Paul stated that his suggestion was due to the impending end. So, generations of religious leaders have lived bereft of a spouse and children. In some, their sex needs have become so great that they preyed on vulnerable little children. Perhaps had they been permitted a hetero or homosexual significant other, there would have been less molestation in the church. I recognize, of course, that there is an illness that causes some adults to prey on little children sexually, and some of these individuals may suffer from that. However, I believe it is possible that many turned to this disgraceful behavior because they could no longer quell their sexual needs and those poor, innocent little kids were handy.
In Women In the Ministry at lousdevotes.blogspot.com, I wrote of the apparent contradictions in scriptures attributed to Paul and his caution to wait until the new Kingdom to follow Jesus' teachings because the end is near.
I'm not suggesting that we "throw out the baby with the bathwater," but I am suggesting that we of the current age at least make note of what issues he raised that he attributed to being because of the impending end.
Paul was writing to the churches he had helped form about real issues of that age. He may have been a prophet, yet do we have evidence of that? His words at that time were pertinent to that time. They may be harmful today.
As example, had all Christians of that age chosen not to marry and reproduce, it would have meant the annihilation of the Christian portion of the human race. Big of Paul to say it is better to marry than to burn. That gave Catholics outside the priesthood a reason for families.
But at the same time, such teachings led leaders of the early church to classify sex as a sin. It is not a sin, it is a gift from God. It is how we exercise that gift in conjunction with God's commandments that renders it good or bad.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Statistical Interpretation
Recently, reporters have been using a variety of statistical terms that some seem not to fully understand. During my education, there was even an article of required reading warning us to look for ways people deliberately manipulate statistics to prove a point.
A former professor of mine, a research teacher, used to refer to the subject as "sadistics". This was his way of expressing the difficulty of understanding the topic, as well as his aversion to it. A lot of people feel the same way.
There are, for instance, three ways of determining the "average" of a set of figures. They are called the mean, the median and the mode.
The median is, literally, the middle number. If you have 61 numbers in your sample or set, you count down the list until you reach the thirty-first number and that is the median. Once again, it is a form of computing the average.
The mode, on the other hand, is the most frequent number. If you have the same 61 numbers, one or two of each value, and the lowest number is repeated several times, then the lowest number is the mode.
The arithmetic mean is determined by adding (computing the sum of) all sixty-one numbers and then dividing the sum by the number of numbers. In our example this is sixty-one.
In the following hypothetical example, let us compute the three different averages and talk abut the results. I have numbered the set of figures for ease in finding the median.
Our Hypothetical Sample
1. 15,000,000 32. 15,000
2. 15,000,000 33. 15,000
3. 5,000,000 34. 15,000
4. 5,000,000 35. 15,000
5. 5,000,000 36. 15,000
6. 5,000,000 37. 15,000
7. 5,000,000 38. 15,000
8. 5,000,000 39. 15,000
9. 500,000 40. 15,000
10. 500,000 41. 15,000
11. 500,000 42. 15,000
12. 500,000 43. 15,000
13. 500,000 44. 15,000
14. 500,000 45. 15,000
15. 500,000 46. 15,000
16. 500,000 47. 15,000
17. 500,000 48. 15,000
18. 500,000 49. 15,000
19. 25,000 50. 15,000
20. 25,000 51. 15,000
21. 25,000 52. 15,000
22. 25,000 53. 15,000
23. 25,000 54. 15,000
24. 25,000 55. 15,000
25. 25,000 56. 15,000
26. 25,000 57. 15,000
27. 25,000 58. 15,000
28. 25,000 59. 15,000
29. 15,000 60. 15,000
30. 15,000 61. 15,000
31. 15,000
In the above example, it is easy to determine the median and the mode. Both of them are 15,000. The arithmetic mean, however, is quite different. This figure is radically skewed higher because of the large figures at the top. The arithmetic mean is 1,077,786.885. Quite a difference, isn't it?
So, let's play with the figures a little. Are you trying to prove that American seniors are about to become the richest age group in the country? Would you use the mean, the median or the mode? The median and the mode would show a low figure, wouldn't they? They are both $15,000. To prove American seniors are rich, one would have to use the arithmetic mean at $1,077,786.88. But would this be a true representation of the wealth of American citizens? Not at all. Most American citizens represented by this figure, have $15,000, not over $1,000,000. In fact, it would take a person with $15,000 a year income over 71 years with no withholding and no spending to accumulate a figure commensurate with this arithmetic mean. You dream the impossible dream.
One of the worst interpretations of statistics is made when interpreting the results of group comparison studies. This kind of study is used a lot in medical research, including the dental plaque compared with heart disease research. A former local news anchor was interpreting the results as plaque on the teeth is causing heart trouble. No can do! The best we can say of correlational evidence is that the two groups "co-relate." We cannot assume a causal relationship from correlational data. It could be the plaque does cause heart trouble. It could be that heart trouble causes plaque on the teeth. It could even be an accidental coincidence.
Remember to check the figures of your reporters, your doctors, your editorialists when making your decisions. All are subject to error. A few intend to mislead. Oh yes, and please check my figures to see if I made any errors when keying in the sample. To err is human, or so the great writer once said.
A former professor of mine, a research teacher, used to refer to the subject as "sadistics". This was his way of expressing the difficulty of understanding the topic, as well as his aversion to it. A lot of people feel the same way.
There are, for instance, three ways of determining the "average" of a set of figures. They are called the mean, the median and the mode.
The median is, literally, the middle number. If you have 61 numbers in your sample or set, you count down the list until you reach the thirty-first number and that is the median. Once again, it is a form of computing the average.
The mode, on the other hand, is the most frequent number. If you have the same 61 numbers, one or two of each value, and the lowest number is repeated several times, then the lowest number is the mode.
The arithmetic mean is determined by adding (computing the sum of) all sixty-one numbers and then dividing the sum by the number of numbers. In our example this is sixty-one.
In the following hypothetical example, let us compute the three different averages and talk abut the results. I have numbered the set of figures for ease in finding the median.
Our Hypothetical Sample
1. 15,000,000 32. 15,000
2. 15,000,000 33. 15,000
3. 5,000,000 34. 15,000
4. 5,000,000 35. 15,000
5. 5,000,000 36. 15,000
6. 5,000,000 37. 15,000
7. 5,000,000 38. 15,000
8. 5,000,000 39. 15,000
9. 500,000 40. 15,000
10. 500,000 41. 15,000
11. 500,000 42. 15,000
12. 500,000 43. 15,000
13. 500,000 44. 15,000
14. 500,000 45. 15,000
15. 500,000 46. 15,000
16. 500,000 47. 15,000
17. 500,000 48. 15,000
18. 500,000 49. 15,000
19. 25,000 50. 15,000
20. 25,000 51. 15,000
21. 25,000 52. 15,000
22. 25,000 53. 15,000
23. 25,000 54. 15,000
24. 25,000 55. 15,000
25. 25,000 56. 15,000
26. 25,000 57. 15,000
27. 25,000 58. 15,000
28. 25,000 59. 15,000
29. 15,000 60. 15,000
30. 15,000 61. 15,000
31. 15,000
In the above example, it is easy to determine the median and the mode. Both of them are 15,000. The arithmetic mean, however, is quite different. This figure is radically skewed higher because of the large figures at the top. The arithmetic mean is 1,077,786.885. Quite a difference, isn't it?
So, let's play with the figures a little. Are you trying to prove that American seniors are about to become the richest age group in the country? Would you use the mean, the median or the mode? The median and the mode would show a low figure, wouldn't they? They are both $15,000. To prove American seniors are rich, one would have to use the arithmetic mean at $1,077,786.88. But would this be a true representation of the wealth of American citizens? Not at all. Most American citizens represented by this figure, have $15,000, not over $1,000,000. In fact, it would take a person with $15,000 a year income over 71 years with no withholding and no spending to accumulate a figure commensurate with this arithmetic mean. You dream the impossible dream.
One of the worst interpretations of statistics is made when interpreting the results of group comparison studies. This kind of study is used a lot in medical research, including the dental plaque compared with heart disease research. A former local news anchor was interpreting the results as plaque on the teeth is causing heart trouble. No can do! The best we can say of correlational evidence is that the two groups "co-relate." We cannot assume a causal relationship from correlational data. It could be the plaque does cause heart trouble. It could be that heart trouble causes plaque on the teeth. It could even be an accidental coincidence.
Remember to check the figures of your reporters, your doctors, your editorialists when making your decisions. All are subject to error. A few intend to mislead. Oh yes, and please check my figures to see if I made any errors when keying in the sample. To err is human, or so the great writer once said.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
A Bully Is Just A Bully
This Week was reduced to a shouting match again the other Sunday. As a result, we've come away with little information of use to this world.
Verbal bully behavior, whether in one's personal life, or on television is regrettable. I don't know why people think that the person who shouts the loudest is the one who is right. By their shouting behavior, apparently a lot of talk show participants do think so. At least they believe they win when they do it.
People just are not always going to agree. That happens to be a good thing, not bad. It's obvious that most discussion programs are set up with representatives from both sides of an issue. But once in a while, more care needs to be taken with the personality types that are mixed together. Some guests of bigger than life standing deserve to be heard, even when we disagree with them. Others, especially the wannabe pundits, can be especially cantankerous. Last Sunday, there was a mix of loud mouths and quiet spoken individuals. When the quiet ones began expressing opinions, they got talked over again and again. Sometimes it is difficult to understand why we are subjected to loud, highly opinionated people who haven't that much to offer.
Being a woman, I'm all for the success of the female gender (I almost want to say species). But get some assertiveness training ladies. Being assertive means getting your points across in a calm, consistent and respectful way. It includes listening to others. It does not mean shouting down someone who disagrees with you just because you are louder and meaner than they.
I'm reminded of my own introduction to assertiveness training which began with the statement that overly aggressive people need assertiveness training just as much as passive people do.
Perhaps discussions such as the Round Table need to formulate some rules for participation similar to those used in debates. Each person might be told they have X seconds or minutes to respond and that they cannot interrupt or shout each other down. Then, stick to the rules.
I imagine most viewers watch these shows to learn, not to witness some brou-ha-ha staged with bullies. After all a bully is just that -- and it doesn't make the bully right.
Verbal bully behavior, whether in one's personal life, or on television is regrettable. I don't know why people think that the person who shouts the loudest is the one who is right. By their shouting behavior, apparently a lot of talk show participants do think so. At least they believe they win when they do it.
People just are not always going to agree. That happens to be a good thing, not bad. It's obvious that most discussion programs are set up with representatives from both sides of an issue. But once in a while, more care needs to be taken with the personality types that are mixed together. Some guests of bigger than life standing deserve to be heard, even when we disagree with them. Others, especially the wannabe pundits, can be especially cantankerous. Last Sunday, there was a mix of loud mouths and quiet spoken individuals. When the quiet ones began expressing opinions, they got talked over again and again. Sometimes it is difficult to understand why we are subjected to loud, highly opinionated people who haven't that much to offer.
Being a woman, I'm all for the success of the female gender (I almost want to say species). But get some assertiveness training ladies. Being assertive means getting your points across in a calm, consistent and respectful way. It includes listening to others. It does not mean shouting down someone who disagrees with you just because you are louder and meaner than they.
I'm reminded of my own introduction to assertiveness training which began with the statement that overly aggressive people need assertiveness training just as much as passive people do.
Perhaps discussions such as the Round Table need to formulate some rules for participation similar to those used in debates. Each person might be told they have X seconds or minutes to respond and that they cannot interrupt or shout each other down. Then, stick to the rules.
I imagine most viewers watch these shows to learn, not to witness some brou-ha-ha staged with bullies. After all a bully is just that -- and it doesn't make the bully right.
Thursday, August 15, 2013
Hackers, Pranksters and Sociopaths
It has long puzzled me why low-lives go to such great lengths to figure out creative methods of stealing from others. On a recent newscast, there was a real pip. A woman asked a man if she could cool off by taking a swim in his pool. She proceeded to strip down to her birthday suit and entertain him. All the while, her partner was ripping off the lascivious gentleman.
There are many scams designed to part others, especially senior citizens, from their cash and belongings. I want to ask all of the above, "Why don't you use that creativity and focus that effort on becoming the next George Washington Carver, Beyoncé, Jimmy Carter or Dr. Dre? Why not use your gifts for the good of mankind and go down in the annals of history as a great American, Greek, Englishman, African, Scot or Russian? Why do you put yourselves on the downward slope toward infamy and prison, or even a violent death?
I read somewhere that a hacker was asked why he spent his time in illegal activity instead of developing hardware or software like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. Do you know the hacker's answer? "Because I can." That's no news. A lot of people can hack. Some of them use that ability to the benefit of their fellow man as well as their own bank accounts. Why do you suppose that these people choose evil intent? They would make more money working in Silicon Valley, where they actually have job openings, than they can scam out of old people. Old people, with rare exceptions, don't have anything. I don't know where some of these columnists get the figures saying they do. Most seniors receive around $1050 per month or less. If a man has a wife, they don't get the whole amount for both of them. The collective amount is figured downward as close to the poverty level as they can get it.
I don't know if these criminals are just immature pranksters or if they are full-blown sociopaths. Perhaps there are some of both involved.
I wrote an earlier draft of this article a week or so ago. Before that day was over, I had received a computerized phone call telling me my debit card was no longer authorized for use on the internet, but I could fix the problem by calling a certain number. Since I've never used a debit card on the internet, I cut the call off. I called my bank, described the situation and told about hanging up. She told me that was good because it's a scam that is prevalent right now. Another one.
How wonderful this world would be if the scam artists and thieves would use their wonderful creativity for inventions and innovations. Instead, person after person, male and female, young and old, choose to use their creative gifts to scam the old, rob the rich, relieve the poor of their few precious belongings. And then they head for church on Sunday and sing the praises of the good Lord as if they, themselves, have spent the previous week honoring God, their parents and a beloved grandmother.
There is one woman I've encountered in Aldi's stores. When she gets parallel to me in another aisle, a buzzer goes off. I'm talking different Aldi's here. The first time, the buzzer was so loud it startled everyone in the vicinity. The last time, she had quieted it about fifty per cent. I'd think it was some store buzzer, except the woman's appearance is quite distinctive -- tall, attractive, black, fifties or early sixties. When the buzzer goes off, she is there. I've heard there is a way to get someone's credit card number, but I don't know how it is done. Is that what's happening? The local news told a story that this is occurring a lot right now.
This kind of scammer is not alone. Every time there is a major storm, dishonest tree trimmers and roofers come out. People mail letters telling others they have won a prize they can collect by sending in money. Messages are received that a loved one is in trouble in a foreign country, so please send dollars.
Identities are stolen. On-line banking is sabotaged. One Asian man called and told me I had used my credit card to order pizza. Wrong, Mister. They won't deliver pizza to my neighborhood. I get my pizzas out of the freezer section at the grocery store.
If these people wrote a mystery instead of being a mystery, do you suppose they might win a Pulitzer? We've barely scratched the surface of how important they can become. Why would they prefer a prison jumpsuit over the tuxedo they could wear to an awards ceremony if their rap song hit number one?
Wouldn't it be nice if all individuals used their God-given gifts for something other than trying to outwit the vulnerable among us? It can't bring much self-satisfaction to prey on easy targets. A hit song or best-selling book would be much more fulfilling.
There are many scams designed to part others, especially senior citizens, from their cash and belongings. I want to ask all of the above, "Why don't you use that creativity and focus that effort on becoming the next George Washington Carver, Beyoncé, Jimmy Carter or Dr. Dre? Why not use your gifts for the good of mankind and go down in the annals of history as a great American, Greek, Englishman, African, Scot or Russian? Why do you put yourselves on the downward slope toward infamy and prison, or even a violent death?
I read somewhere that a hacker was asked why he spent his time in illegal activity instead of developing hardware or software like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. Do you know the hacker's answer? "Because I can." That's no news. A lot of people can hack. Some of them use that ability to the benefit of their fellow man as well as their own bank accounts. Why do you suppose that these people choose evil intent? They would make more money working in Silicon Valley, where they actually have job openings, than they can scam out of old people. Old people, with rare exceptions, don't have anything. I don't know where some of these columnists get the figures saying they do. Most seniors receive around $1050 per month or less. If a man has a wife, they don't get the whole amount for both of them. The collective amount is figured downward as close to the poverty level as they can get it.
I don't know if these criminals are just immature pranksters or if they are full-blown sociopaths. Perhaps there are some of both involved.
I wrote an earlier draft of this article a week or so ago. Before that day was over, I had received a computerized phone call telling me my debit card was no longer authorized for use on the internet, but I could fix the problem by calling a certain number. Since I've never used a debit card on the internet, I cut the call off. I called my bank, described the situation and told about hanging up. She told me that was good because it's a scam that is prevalent right now. Another one.
How wonderful this world would be if the scam artists and thieves would use their wonderful creativity for inventions and innovations. Instead, person after person, male and female, young and old, choose to use their creative gifts to scam the old, rob the rich, relieve the poor of their few precious belongings. And then they head for church on Sunday and sing the praises of the good Lord as if they, themselves, have spent the previous week honoring God, their parents and a beloved grandmother.
There is one woman I've encountered in Aldi's stores. When she gets parallel to me in another aisle, a buzzer goes off. I'm talking different Aldi's here. The first time, the buzzer was so loud it startled everyone in the vicinity. The last time, she had quieted it about fifty per cent. I'd think it was some store buzzer, except the woman's appearance is quite distinctive -- tall, attractive, black, fifties or early sixties. When the buzzer goes off, she is there. I've heard there is a way to get someone's credit card number, but I don't know how it is done. Is that what's happening? The local news told a story that this is occurring a lot right now.
This kind of scammer is not alone. Every time there is a major storm, dishonest tree trimmers and roofers come out. People mail letters telling others they have won a prize they can collect by sending in money. Messages are received that a loved one is in trouble in a foreign country, so please send dollars.
Identities are stolen. On-line banking is sabotaged. One Asian man called and told me I had used my credit card to order pizza. Wrong, Mister. They won't deliver pizza to my neighborhood. I get my pizzas out of the freezer section at the grocery store.
If these people wrote a mystery instead of being a mystery, do you suppose they might win a Pulitzer? We've barely scratched the surface of how important they can become. Why would they prefer a prison jumpsuit over the tuxedo they could wear to an awards ceremony if their rap song hit number one?
Wouldn't it be nice if all individuals used their God-given gifts for something other than trying to outwit the vulnerable among us? It can't bring much self-satisfaction to prey on easy targets. A hit song or best-selling book would be much more fulfilling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)