I read in today’s media reports that Senator Stephen Conroy has an issue with Google over what can and cannot be shown over the internet. Apparently he wants Google and other search engine operators to introduce an ‘internet filter’ to limit access to certain sites.
He in reported to have said some of the material available (that he wants to be ‘filtered out’) “includes child sexual abuse material, bestiality, sexual violence including rape, instruction in crime and terrorist acts."
Now, personally, I would never choose to view such material – but that is my choice. If someone else chooses otherwise, even though I might question their moral compass, I respect their choice.
For the Australian Government, in the guise of Senator Conroy, to dictate what can or cannot be accessed on the internet is censorship – pure and simple censorship. This is just the thin edge of a very big wedge. Where will it end - don't want you to view an anti-governmet rally? Or how about reports unfavourable to the incumbent leader? Who decides what can and cannot be viewed and what redress is there?
The irony is that the Australian Government has commented (unfavourably) on the Chinese Government’s attempts to limit the access that Chinese citizens have on the internet using Google. Isn’t this precisely what Senator Conroy is trying to do to the citizen’s of this country??
He can't have it both ways. Talk about ethics!! Think about it.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Lies, damned lies and statistics!
To me the world has gone too far in requiring everything to be statistically proven before it is accepted as ‘true’. In this regard I would like to make a few general comments about statistics, particularly as applied and used in psychology.
I am studying statistics, via a subject called Research Methods 2, because I did Research Methods 1 and because the Psychology degree I am working towards demands that I should at least understand and be able to use some basic statistics. But I am a sceptic – I use statistics but I don’t really believe in them. You could say that I am an ‘agnostic’ when it comes to statistics. As a (hopefully) future worker in the field I swallow my agnosticism and constantly remind myself that the first responsibility of psychologists and people working in any of the social sciences or humanities is not to statistical accuracy but the well being of mankind - to happiness and health.
But then I need to consider the strong possibility (dare I use the word ‘probability’?) that my ‘agnosticism’ reflects the fact that I just do not enjoy the subject of statistics! I mean statistical reports give the impression of accuracy, of absolute fact, yet in reality there are phrases such as ‘differences may be due to sampling errors’ or ‘this cannot be answered definitively, but it can be evaluated in a statistical way’. This is short-hand for ‘what are the relative likelihoods of the opposing scenarios being important factors?” Or even mind bending statements that go like this: ‘Statistical decision making involves inductive inference. Based on a sample, we draw a conclusion about the population we think it was drawn from’ - if you get my drift! In reality, are statistics that important in the great scheme of things? Some people obviously believe in them but I don’t. Statistics may be useful indicators of something or pointers towards a solution but that is about as far as they (should) go.
While I have commented on this before, some repetition may be worthwhile. Statisticians tell me that it is a statistical probability that, being a male in a certain age group and with certain racial and physical characteristics and with certain religious beliefs, I will have certain likes and dislikes, be of a certain height, be overweight (even obese) and have this or that medical problem and that when presented with an ethical dilemma I will answer in this or that way. But I am not a ‘probability’ – I am a human being.
No doubt it is a great nuisance to statisticians and those who use their figures that mankind is not uniform but compounded of individuals with their own likes and dislikes and their own interpretation of events and situations. Statisticians (and others – politicians and such like) would like humanity to ‘conform’ to some easily defined standard or ‘norm’ but we don’t and pretending that we do is plain wrong – even a waste of time.
It must never be forgotten that the essence of every life is the fulfilment of the potential each is born with. All human life is bound to individuals who manifest it, and it is simply inconceivable without them. But every human is charged with an individual destiny and destination, and the journey to that destination or the fulfilment of that destiny is the only thing that makes sense of life.
To me there is a profound social process behind the figures used in the construction and evaluation of ‘scientific’ (read statistical) psychological data and that much of what we are ‘guided’ to do, as a consequence of an uncritical approach to statistics, relies on an ingenuous (mis)use of words that considers ‘facts’ as absolute certainty, as ‘true knowledge’, as ‘objective things’ beyond inference, question or reproach, and when information becomes ‘scientific’ merely because it is arranged and presented in a form that follows the APA (American Psychological Association) guidelines, we are in deep trouble.
As to the constant push by many aspects of our society to conform, how about (a repeat)of the wonderful quote from the Indian sage, Krishnamurti, “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” (from ‘All in the Mind’ by Merlin Donald)
Think about it.
I am studying statistics, via a subject called Research Methods 2, because I did Research Methods 1 and because the Psychology degree I am working towards demands that I should at least understand and be able to use some basic statistics. But I am a sceptic – I use statistics but I don’t really believe in them. You could say that I am an ‘agnostic’ when it comes to statistics. As a (hopefully) future worker in the field I swallow my agnosticism and constantly remind myself that the first responsibility of psychologists and people working in any of the social sciences or humanities is not to statistical accuracy but the well being of mankind - to happiness and health.
But then I need to consider the strong possibility (dare I use the word ‘probability’?) that my ‘agnosticism’ reflects the fact that I just do not enjoy the subject of statistics! I mean statistical reports give the impression of accuracy, of absolute fact, yet in reality there are phrases such as ‘differences may be due to sampling errors’ or ‘this cannot be answered definitively, but it can be evaluated in a statistical way’. This is short-hand for ‘what are the relative likelihoods of the opposing scenarios being important factors?” Or even mind bending statements that go like this: ‘Statistical decision making involves inductive inference. Based on a sample, we draw a conclusion about the population we think it was drawn from’ - if you get my drift! In reality, are statistics that important in the great scheme of things? Some people obviously believe in them but I don’t. Statistics may be useful indicators of something or pointers towards a solution but that is about as far as they (should) go.
While I have commented on this before, some repetition may be worthwhile. Statisticians tell me that it is a statistical probability that, being a male in a certain age group and with certain racial and physical characteristics and with certain religious beliefs, I will have certain likes and dislikes, be of a certain height, be overweight (even obese) and have this or that medical problem and that when presented with an ethical dilemma I will answer in this or that way. But I am not a ‘probability’ – I am a human being.
No doubt it is a great nuisance to statisticians and those who use their figures that mankind is not uniform but compounded of individuals with their own likes and dislikes and their own interpretation of events and situations. Statisticians (and others – politicians and such like) would like humanity to ‘conform’ to some easily defined standard or ‘norm’ but we don’t and pretending that we do is plain wrong – even a waste of time.
It must never be forgotten that the essence of every life is the fulfilment of the potential each is born with. All human life is bound to individuals who manifest it, and it is simply inconceivable without them. But every human is charged with an individual destiny and destination, and the journey to that destination or the fulfilment of that destiny is the only thing that makes sense of life.
To me there is a profound social process behind the figures used in the construction and evaluation of ‘scientific’ (read statistical) psychological data and that much of what we are ‘guided’ to do, as a consequence of an uncritical approach to statistics, relies on an ingenuous (mis)use of words that considers ‘facts’ as absolute certainty, as ‘true knowledge’, as ‘objective things’ beyond inference, question or reproach, and when information becomes ‘scientific’ merely because it is arranged and presented in a form that follows the APA (American Psychological Association) guidelines, we are in deep trouble.
As to the constant push by many aspects of our society to conform, how about (a repeat)of the wonderful quote from the Indian sage, Krishnamurti, “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” (from ‘All in the Mind’ by Merlin Donald)
Think about it.
Monday, March 8, 2010
What price freedom?
Injustice is just about the most corrosive effect known to man. That and hatred. These combined, as they often are, are a deadly cocktail. Injustice is the effect of hubris – someone, or a group of people thinking (believing) they are better than someone else (or another group) and using this “knowledge” to gain some unfair advantage or to exploit others for personal gain.
But then there is another kind which is more invasive and possibly more general, in that it is beginning to affect many more people. What I am talking about is the apparent injustice of so many rules, regulations and laws introduced to (allegedly) reduce crime and apprehend offenders.
We, as a Society, have got things all mixed up and up-side down. What got me thinking about this are the ‘safety features’ introduced at all ATMs. There are warnings to users to make sure there is no one looking on; to ensure they cover the key-pad with one hand while keying in their PIN and such like. I have nothing against these warnings but who are the people most affected and inconvenienced? We are! Normal people going about their lawful business.
The other side to these warnings are the extra security measures that are invading every aspect of our society. We have CCTV cameras all over the place in our cities (and sometimes in our offices and even, God forbid, in our homes); we are told (if we want our insurance premiums to be kept low) to have window locks; to have burglar proof screens on our windows; deadlocks on our doors; a home alarm system; to have alarms and immobilising devices fitted to our cars. We need personal identification numbers to access everything (or so it seems). Bus and taxi drivers are caged in to prevent attacks from drugged, drunk, angry or otherwise less than charitable passengers. Then think of all the checks that are imposed on us at airports nowadays – they have introduced full body x-ray ‘searches’ to see what (if anything) is hidden under clothing, at some airports. Our bags are inspected at supermarkets and police have the powers to (apparently) stop and search whom-so-ever they please. Again, who are the people most inconvenienced? We are!
Some cities have ‘no go’ areas where ‘normal’ people are discouraged from visiting. Then there are those walled and guarded estates with remote controlled gates and motion activated flood-lights that some of us like to live in.
Who is being inconvenienced? We are! Where is the privacy? Where is the freedom? It is almost as if the ‘good guys’ are in prison, or at least some claim to feel safe only when they are heavily guarded, gated compound, but yet the ‘bad guys’ are out there roaming free!
Something is really wrong here. We have lost that wonderful feeling of being carefree. Yes that is right – being free of care. Where now is the charm of a walk in the city, late on a cold moonlit night, when all is quiet (maybe!) and to see the world, quite literally in a different light – by moonlight, knowing that you may be considered a vagrant and be issued with a ‘move on’ notice? Where now is the pleasure of sleeping with the widows open on a balmy summer’s night and being cooled by the breeze, knowing that there is a possibility you may be burgled? Where now is the pleasure of smiling at a child and having the smile returned, without having the child’s mother look at you suspiciously as a possible paedophile?
I could go on in this vein for a long time but I am sure you get the idea. We are being pushed and pulled and squeezed into a box that is ‘safe’, always under observation, always under guard or being guarded against. How much more of this must we put up with? I am sure it is not doing anything to improve our ‘collective’ mental health – according the Australian Bureau of Statistics approximately one in five (yes 1 in 5) people will have some sort of mental health issue during their life! That is an astonishing figure but I am not sure what the solution is.
This is the injustice I am talking about.
As I said before I am not sure what the solution is because as the Indian sage Krishnamurti once said, 'It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society'.
But then there is another kind which is more invasive and possibly more general, in that it is beginning to affect many more people. What I am talking about is the apparent injustice of so many rules, regulations and laws introduced to (allegedly) reduce crime and apprehend offenders.
We, as a Society, have got things all mixed up and up-side down. What got me thinking about this are the ‘safety features’ introduced at all ATMs. There are warnings to users to make sure there is no one looking on; to ensure they cover the key-pad with one hand while keying in their PIN and such like. I have nothing against these warnings but who are the people most affected and inconvenienced? We are! Normal people going about their lawful business.
The other side to these warnings are the extra security measures that are invading every aspect of our society. We have CCTV cameras all over the place in our cities (and sometimes in our offices and even, God forbid, in our homes); we are told (if we want our insurance premiums to be kept low) to have window locks; to have burglar proof screens on our windows; deadlocks on our doors; a home alarm system; to have alarms and immobilising devices fitted to our cars. We need personal identification numbers to access everything (or so it seems). Bus and taxi drivers are caged in to prevent attacks from drugged, drunk, angry or otherwise less than charitable passengers. Then think of all the checks that are imposed on us at airports nowadays – they have introduced full body x-ray ‘searches’ to see what (if anything) is hidden under clothing, at some airports. Our bags are inspected at supermarkets and police have the powers to (apparently) stop and search whom-so-ever they please. Again, who are the people most inconvenienced? We are!
Some cities have ‘no go’ areas where ‘normal’ people are discouraged from visiting. Then there are those walled and guarded estates with remote controlled gates and motion activated flood-lights that some of us like to live in.
Who is being inconvenienced? We are! Where is the privacy? Where is the freedom? It is almost as if the ‘good guys’ are in prison, or at least some claim to feel safe only when they are heavily guarded, gated compound, but yet the ‘bad guys’ are out there roaming free!
Something is really wrong here. We have lost that wonderful feeling of being carefree. Yes that is right – being free of care. Where now is the charm of a walk in the city, late on a cold moonlit night, when all is quiet (maybe!) and to see the world, quite literally in a different light – by moonlight, knowing that you may be considered a vagrant and be issued with a ‘move on’ notice? Where now is the pleasure of sleeping with the widows open on a balmy summer’s night and being cooled by the breeze, knowing that there is a possibility you may be burgled? Where now is the pleasure of smiling at a child and having the smile returned, without having the child’s mother look at you suspiciously as a possible paedophile?
I could go on in this vein for a long time but I am sure you get the idea. We are being pushed and pulled and squeezed into a box that is ‘safe’, always under observation, always under guard or being guarded against. How much more of this must we put up with? I am sure it is not doing anything to improve our ‘collective’ mental health – according the Australian Bureau of Statistics approximately one in five (yes 1 in 5) people will have some sort of mental health issue during their life! That is an astonishing figure but I am not sure what the solution is.
This is the injustice I am talking about.
As I said before I am not sure what the solution is because as the Indian sage Krishnamurti once said, 'It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)