Category Archives: Beardall.Blog

Socially outraged

Who do you blame? Four perspectives on our role in social media anger. Which do you choose?

Twitter Age, or twitter-rage? In the social media world, there is always someone else to blame. Yale University offers research that supports claims that we are being manipulated. Links below.

Here are four perspectives, each with differing levels of psychological distance and blame attached. I am persuaded to take action, and offer some wider personal insight at the end.

One: Blame them, not me

A nice safe distant other to blame. We each have good reason to be angry. To be offended. The easy blame is directed at the politics of our day. A political class about as contemptable as they have ever been. Entitled others. Uncaring others. Others defending us or threatening us, and our way of life.

Two: We are just hard-wired that way

Blame our biology. Remove all psychological distance but claim no part in it at all. The harder truth is that we really are all built this way. These processes are at work beyond our conscious perception. In our brain, lurking deep below the surface of the social diplomacy contained within the pre-frontal cortex, is an emotional limbic system raging to get out. Our self-control makes us socially capable. But we are not always in control. Worse still, we seek social acceptance of our group – meaning chemical reward is available when our own goad us, will us on, or applaud. We like to be liked. Even if it means we must pretend we are right, or in control.

Three: We are being manipulated to be this way

This is the more sinister place to let blame sit. Acknowledging our part in destructive discussion, but not having to take the blame. At these moments even the right are wrong. This neuroscience is known and is being exploited. Advertising is built on propaganda lessons from WWII. Politics lives here. Peer pressure. Social norms. We are easily manipulated to behave a certain way. Most alarming however is 21st century psychological manipulation. We are engaging via formats that reward the polarised debate. That is what this study by Yale university concluded in August 2021 (detailed version see here). It would seem social harm has become an acceptable norm.

“It’s not my fault!”

All three perspectives above are correct. Conveniently, none of them require us to act. It’s just the way things are. In all cases, this is very much the playground view. The “it’s not my fault” response of every teenager. Our physiology backs this up. Our pre-frontal cortex does not completely develop until our mid-twenties, meaning our more ancient but primitive impulses act more strongly in our youth. This impulsiveness is being targeted and exploited.

As we allow ourselves to be directed towards these older neural pathways, it is this playground I think we all return to. Those developmental years, where everyone and everything else is available to blame.

Four: Control. No blame. Simply reclaim.

Which leaves the fourth perspective. Which is psychologically close-by, and for me to own. If all of these perspectives are true I can blame them all. Or I can accept my part in this playground. Owning my output from the games being played.

Taking back control

My simple choice. Twitter no more.

—end—

A grown-ups choice?

A few more personal observations which have helped me move forward. Maybe they can help others relate.

My return to Twitter served one positive step. I was suddenly back in the playground. The pre-teen boy. Seeking validation but getting rejection. Standing my ground anyway. Thinking myself smart, and ensuring my own isolation by that very fact – for me weaponised empathy and knowledge often had that effect. These are core traits for me. Wanting to know more about people and their ideas. It developed into consensus building, and problem solving. But not until well past school. I had to grow up a little first, and I buried much along the way.

The fact is that well into my teens these traits became ever more my prison. A prison I escaped only once I learnt humour, and how to make others feel comfortable and laugh. Weaponised empathy still, but in a more acceptable form. I can own that. More than I can own the playground that I so wished to be validated in, and never was.

Twitter is all those playgrounds all over again. Everywhere is psychologically a little less stable. Popular kids and wannabes, all trading on how to get likes. Everyone addicted to that next affirmation. Compelled to seek out their kin. Rewarded for not being kind. Just being seen. Being authentic but against these ideals. Yale now confirming we are being neurologically encouraged to act in more childish ways. I wonder how many others see an uncomfortable version of themselves this way?

So for me at least, that is the perspective I choose. Because it is the perspective I can own. And a means to consider environments where I am becoming better, not revisiting where I have been.

Visibility | Behaviour | Trust

I can apply a new heuristic to this old reality. As a perspective that I can actively manage, now that I have seen it with fresh eyes. I have visibility of a side of my discourse I do not like. A little lost trust in my intent and motivations. Time therefore to make a behavioural change. My change, rather than an attempt to change others I blame for being part of what is not my truth.

I rely heavily on social media whilst I remain locked-down. Perhaps too much. It is time to break free some of those chains. Politics no more. Twitter is shown the door. LinkedIn, my only outlet beyond this blog, is also being reigned in. I suspect my blog will become more regular as a result.

Let’s see if my temperament – notwithstanding living alongside bad politics -therein improves.

To be continued…but I will tweet no more

Be nice – be happy

International day of Happiness

Be nice – put the ‘phone away

I started today with an apology. Having spent much of Saturday afternoon in moderately civil debate on twitter, I went to bed sad and irritated. I woke up in much the same mood, but forced myself to examine why that was. I found a path to a little happiness as a result.

I am currently writing an essay that has me facing some self-doubt. It is all the harder for having to be just 500 words and aimed at a general-public audience. I am neither succinct, nor easily able to perceive that dividing line. So I hatched an ill-thought out, ethically suspect, and hubris-laden plan. Why don’t I engage with an audience on twitter and see if I can stand? Not my finest moment. I did actually learn a few things, but I made no friends. Indeed I rather arrogantly walked a mile or two with idle curiosity at what others fight hard to make their way through. The apology this morning was heart-felt but probably too late.

So I do feel a little happier, having acknowledged blame. More settled and socially normal again. I seek out social cohesion, so caustic debate is draining – and it rarely ends well. The apology was an important step for me. Strangers bickering in blindness would perhaps be easier to just walk away from. But that would linger still. For them and for me.

Genuine apology. An attempt to put right a wrong. The tiniest of kindness to bridge a divide. A gap where respect should have been. I am reminded that kindness is psychologically the better way. And that this is almost always true. Professor Abigail Marsh shows altruism is beneficial to mood, in all but a tiny psychopathic minority. Psychologist Jo Cutler suggests we are quite calculating with kindness, but argues it still has positive results. To which Evolutionary Behaviourist, Nichola Raihani adds that this “social instinct” is a fundamental to the human condition. Check out this BBC podcast for a summary of those truths.

So how will I be happy today? Maybe a little kindness to myself too. A good start point will be to stay away from my ‘phone and social media today. Allowing hubris to melt; and for respect to return. Respect for other opinions that may have less textbook clarity but more life-living experience attached. Respect for the dialogue. And respect for myself.

There. I am feeling a tiny bit happier already…

—end—

Further reading – www.dayofhappiness.net/report

This is great website to visit on International day of happiness.

What follows are notes I will return to, with some quick find observations to help me return here soon.

In regards to social media this paper, Chapter 4 of the 2022 Happiness Report, caught my eye as I prepared to write this blog. The paper confirms that studies seeking out emotional trends in a population could be conducted via social media analytics. The correlation of social media and survey emotions used as a comparisons, shown to most closely aligned in negative emotions of sadness and anxiety – see page 80 figure 4.2 for a more limited correlation for happy emotions. Even when reporting we are happy on social media, we may not be.

The paper also outlined a relationship between social media and survey emotion measures becoming most visible in times of large variations of emotions, such as during the COVID-19 outbreak (pp81). Key limitations noted as representative nature of samples so best limited to within-sample comparison as opposed to representing a wider population (pp96). Reporting bias is also inevitable given the lack of anonymity inherent in social media posting (pp97).

I also noted that the adjustments for gender were made as absolutes with no account for differences that may arise within samples due to heightened interest or topic. The 60% male gender bias not considered against more nuanced variations over time. I also consider the particular interest in gender difference but no other categorisation to be as much a reflection of bias in assuming emotional variance is most acute across gender difference. Something psychologists such as Gina Rippon are fighting hard to call out and change. Also, the subject of my current essay which I am finding so hard to land.

men are more visible on Twitter (pp81 citing Nilizadeh 2016)

tweets posted by male users account for ore than 60% of tweets with gender detected in our sample (pp81)

Happiness Report subsection regarding social media measures. My question: is gender actually the key category of interest here?

This particular paper was ultimately more interesting to me as an exploration of the validity (and limitations) of social media as a passive measuring tool for emotional trends. Passive because it was based solely on language and tone of all posts, not seeking direct questions as the survey comparisons had done. It concluded there was validity, most strongly in detection of negative moods. Although, that is no surprise given the tendency toward negativity expected during the Covid19 ordeal.

7 lessons from 2 years in isolation

What two years in lockdown has taught me

Life lessons from lockdown. Here are 7 lessons from two years indoors, expanded on below:

  1. take ownership of risk
  2. acknowledge your luck
  3. go with the flow
  4. acknowledge your relationships
  5. listen and learn
  6. set your boundaries
  7. start and end with respect

Two years ago, today

13th March 2020 was a Friday. The fear, and denial of a distant threat, had turned to a reality. SARS-Covid-19 had definitively arrived in London. I had already sought permission from my university course to either defer or be given means to complete my course remotely. This Friday 13th marked my last face to face meeting. A pass/fail assessed MSc presentation on Engineering Safety Management – a group exercise which I had unwittingly become the coordination point to conclude. My daily train trips to Farringdon had become notably more hazardous – to the point that walking the last mile or so from Blackfriars had already become normal. A walk that meant I could visit three pharmacies en-route and buy precious paracetamol, a daily need which was already in short-supply.

Living from home

Within days the whole country was locking doors. We speak of it now as “Working from home” but that is perhaps not quite equating to the same thing. The service industry was about to be starved of patrons, as life outside stopped. For the likes of me, indoors was now life. Work, rest, and play; becoming extended study, anti-socialising, and staycations.

Two years in, and perhaps a little more to go, I have a few observations to share. The remainder of this blog I therefore offer as lessons from living a lockdown life at home.

Lesson 1 : take ownership of risk

Life was already changing, but it was becoming increasingly clear that there was no contingency plan in high places. Hospitals were reporting high death-rates. Medical advice was contradictory. There was no clear guidance for those clinically vulnerable. If I were to come home with the virus, my wife (and the 21% of her lung capacity still working) would be quickly overwhelmed. We were not the average risk case. We could not live at the level of uncertainty now present. We needed to determine risk from our own perspective.

It was also obvious that even the average risk was late to be realised in high places. We had no confidence that we had institutions around us – government in particular – adapting or even reacting in a manner that was going to keep my wife safe. So the decision was made; we were staying home.

Luckily for us, we had been living with contingency plans set for some time.

Lesson 2 : 🍀 acknowledge your luck 🍀

Two years is a long-time to be away from the world. We are however more fortunate than many who have been in similar situation. We had less domestic or work related constraints to manage. Most people in the support groups for Pulmonary Fibrosis had a tougher time adjusting. Sadly, not all did. Economic or medical care demands exposed many to risk they could not manage. Others just boldly or foolhardily carried on – loud in their protest or denial but all suddenly stopping; followed by news of another death in the group.

We were lucky. Adversity had already found us. So too therefore had contingent planning already long been put into action. Life had dealt a crappy hand to a fine teacher and had forced her to give up work several years before. I had already made a career choice that enabled me to work from home. The home office was already built. The mortgage paid. Financial priorities reviewed, repurposed, dumbed down. Wanting less, needing less, earning less.

But I had also buried my own thoughts deeply, and they had already broken free. I was back at university revisiting life goals and needs. Dealing with mental illness, diagnosed the year before. Part of a reset already underway. For a multitude of reasons, we were already primed for dealing with change.

Lesson 3 : go with the flow

Going with flow is not quite as compromise-orientated as it first sounds. For any independent person, there is a stability problem if one just meanders and adapts to any and all demands put upon your time. My wife and I have a strong domestic platform: in our relationship; in our physical security, safety, and basic needs; and now also in our clarity of priorities. It is only by that stable base that I think we have been able to maintain a perspective of hope as daily challenges come and go. We can go with the flow. But only because we can also let some things flow by, or wash over us. Going with the flow has meant letting some options and aspirations go.

Lesson 4 : acknowledge your relationships

Love your network. Be part of the network you wish to know. With 21st Century technology to hand, networking is fundamentally how we each grow.

As a household this presents a moment to acknowledge many people:

  • Friends, family, and the kindness of strangers who have been at the other end of a phone. Places to chat, the occasional quiz or game of cards.
  • At the height of the pandemic local people making themselves available to fetch and carry medicines and sundries.
  • Long-standing relationships with supermarket chains, car dealerships, banks and credit card companies. All were vital sources of assistance and being looked upon favourably in our moments of need.
  • Prioritised, reliable, and understanding gas-heating engineers, white goods repairers, gardeners and tree surgeons.
  • A fleet of delivery services who have kept us going. A postal service that has regularly supplied me with books.
  • My business associates and client friends, university staff and fellow students, all making allowances for my situation.
  • Neighbours who have overlooked rickety fences, raggedy hedges, and occasional unkempt lawns.
  • The many medical staff at various hospitals who have enabled distance orientated treatment possible. A pharmacy who have delivered medicines to our door. Oxygen suppliers and breathing apparatus repairs as and when called. Plus my therapist, and GP both of whom have kept tabs on me too.
  • Long standing mentors and mentees, plus a few new relationships I’d categorise here. Old business contacts reaching out, offering support, or just revisiting online as a social outlet and checking we were okay.
  • The hundreds, many hundreds, of new connections, contacts, and sources of inspiration on platforms such as LinkedIn. A true lifeline connection to the outer world. A place of discourse, learning, and chat which eventually encouraged me to begin this blogsite. New connectivity in new places leading to new opportunities, invitations to join think-tanks, guest slots on podcasts, working groups, organisations and societies. Plus many moments to talk over zoom with amazing new people at leisure and at length.

So many kindnesses, from so many places.

This lesson in management is also a moment to appropriately acknowledge relationships at home. In many respects we are self-contained. Our relationship to each other is one of love and respect. We have built a home in that image. We habitually lunch at the table. Moments to regather from different corners of the home. We enjoy each other’s company, and our moments alone.

We rescued a cat a few months before I started university. Or maybe he helped rescue us. Like us, he is happy looking into rather than being in a garden that looks after itself, offering up wildlife at our windows. Each of those interacting relationships have helped pull us through.

Lesson 5 : listen and learn

Two years into a lockdown, and maybe just a few months to go. It’s been an enforced time of reflection and new learning. Communication in new ways. Cooperation in discourse, and collaboration in effort.

Listening and learning from the experiences of others and ourselves. Listening and learning from what is happening within ourselves, within our relationship, and within the home. Communication, or just checking-in.

For me that has also been part of deeper journey. Serendipity played a hand here, that I began to find ways to do this before this lockdown ensued. For me this is now meditation, contemplation, journaling, and occasional therapy. It is also this blog. Critically, it was also giving myself permission to reignite and feed a curiosity, a more open mind to see more, and hear more. Hearing the wisdom of others in many forms.

Lesson 6 : set your boundaries

Everyone will have different perspectives on working from home. How do we create the appropriate separation, if any? Not expecting people to be 24/7 at our beckoning or call.

My attitude is one of adaptability. To accept that there are times that other people’s need for work/life balance are going to impact my own. But I have also been prepared to retain boundaries that mean others respect my time too.

Thankful to my neighbour for tolerating blurred boundaries

I personally place a necessary lesser expectation upon others. Colleague, client, or collaborative partners. But I’m curious to know how this changes expectations of behaviour in ourselves. I work in different time zones, to deadlines or towards developmental ideas of my own, as well as remotely from people I interact with.

Lesson 7 : start and end with respect


There are no binary rules here. Home and work can co-exist. Being present and being honest with what that means becomes critical if it is to work long-term. This is simply relationship building and management by both sides, built around mutual respect. Both sides, therefore also meaning you.

My heartfelt thanks – so many have pulled us through!

Learning where to disagree

In defence of discourse

I love a discussion. Even if it requires a debate. Particularly one where I find my perspectives opposed. I am drawn towards people who are operating at levels beyond my ability. Much as I was once in sports, or in strategic games like chess. It is only by being beaten that I feel most tested, improved, or simply reformed. Unlike in sport however, my fifty-year-old brain may yet have better days to unfold.

A new place to learn – Heterodox

Yesterday, I was therefore thrilled to learn that my application to join Heterodox Academy (hxa) has been approved. This is an affiliation of 5,400 academically inclined professionals, primarily in the US but also represented by fellow members in 65 countries. The affiliation of members range from professors and post doctorate researchers, to postgraduate and undergraduate students. Most are from disciplines of the social sciences – psychology, philosophy, sociology, anthropology, history, economics and politics. All subjects I follow with interacting interest.

Heterodox refers to a non-conforming or unorthodox ways or beliefs. Per hxa’s website, all members are “committed to enhancing the quality of research and education by promoting open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement in institutions of higher learning”. In this regard, one is expected to support robust discussion and critical examination of truth. This appeals to me. It is an ideal that certainly seems unorthodox when all around we engage as polarised and divided interlocuters, caring only to take a debate towards our corner. This affiliation believes in seeking out the better truth, by supporting the quality of the discourse not the skill in debate.

The hxa-way

I now make a declaration. One that I am to repeat regularly.

“I support open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement in research and education.”

The Heterodox Academy pledge

At its core, this is the preservation of constructive production and dissemination of knowledge, The hxa-way holds to these simple ideals:

  • providing evidence based argument
  • seeking out the strongest opposing position
  • retaining a humility, and a willingness to be wrong
  • being constructive, rather than simply seeking to win
  • standing as oneself, not as an institutional representative

I like to think I live to these ideals. Whether in lively debate on LinkedIn, entering into professional discussion with clients, or writing for myself.

Work in progress – hubris beware

I am however in a state of transition as I seek to communicate more academically but plainly. Twice this week I have been reminded of the difficulty faced. Firstly, I was asked by a client to remove the McKinsey type language from my analysis. Secondly, an examiner marked a “densely packed” essay down to 65% for falling short in essay form, “please write grammatically correct sentences…this is not twitter.” [And I be like, WTF? I know, right!].

My journey continues. As do my attempts to bridge industry interest and applied academic precision.

About Me

In psychology we are required to look beneath the mask. This blog series is attempting to unmask some hidden parts of projects to engender a more collaborative way.

Find my professional mask here:

Original art

Psycho-analytics

Too much, too Jung

I had a therapy session today. First for a while. A tough week prompted a revisit with someone who knows my psychology well. All is fine, just a mental MOT.

Plenty in the news to take in. All testing my resolve as I approach two years in full lockdown. My psychology MSc also made for some interesting things to discuss. Exams passed – a few challenges to the academic process – all ending in smiles.

Principally, the therapy discussion enabled a comparison of teaching vs practice. The psychology I am studying almost completely ignores psycho-analytics, and the works of the likes of Jung and Freud. They will feature at some point, but they have historical interest rather than contemporary lessons to teach. Yet as soon as I need to reset and relate, these are the taught lessons and schema that help me the most. I see commonality between some of the analysis and explanations, for example Jungian archetypes have some level of connection to the typology of brain types currently being argued by the likes of Simon Baron-Cohen. Not that he will thank me for connecting the two.

I am delighted I get to think in such diverse terms. And that my reading invites wider perspective beyond. It is my moments of greatest inner dissonance that I find myself thinking with the most lateral connection. Offering my greatest challenge to whatever system of cognitive schema I am temporarily most reliant upon. It is also when my reading becomes most diverse. All aligning to a questioning of everything. Thankfully, that is no longer a source of self-doubt.

My learning advises me that people who regularly manage depression are amongst those most able to rebuild mental schema. With the most desire to challenge what may otherwise be accepted as true. This is primarily because a depressed state requires heightened awareness of what may not quite be so. Whether that is true or not, I find myself grateful of these moments. It means I get to regularly revisit, reform, and refine.

Appraisals of leadership

Weaponised words

I found myself living angrily this week. Angry at the realities of leadership that is evidently serving itself.

I try hard to maintain a network diverse enough not to be an echo chamber. I now find myself doubting whether my LinkedIn commentary this week has been constructive. Particularly that aimed directly at leadership. However, there were plenty others doing the same. Those voicing concern at direction – not the personal attacks that some feel free to share.

From my own filtered view, this social media showing of public mood seems to have been a persuasive factor in international diplomacy. A weight of sentiment, acting as a straw poll. Certainly the discourse rattled my own thoughts enough to draw some conclusions. And then call foul on leadership seemingly content to rattle sabres whilst quietly cashing in Russian cheques.

v | b | trust

This is low trust – the deceit of leadership. This is trustworthiness at its lowest ebb. Based upon remembered past bad experience of the individual. Or less helpfully, the bias and social stereotypes we each bestow upon out-groups, whilst we pretend we and our in-group stand tall.

visibility | b | t

This is increased visibility being sought. Increased uncertainty requiring closer examination. More regular checking. More questioning of response. Higher trust would curb some enquiry. But this is following discovery of falsehoods by our servants of government. Having been let down before and therefore wanting to see more. Seeing statements like “we will be decisive” meaning “we are being hesitant”. Still seeing the old characters in the spotlight. Smirks. Arrogance. Contrite. I’m alright.

v | behaviour | t

This is poor behaviour. This is Vladimir Putin receiving all manor of dignitaries in the last two weeks in order to reinforce a duplicity of assurance and intent. This too is the international responses that have since been slow to act – privately gauging public mood – whilst offering strong language to Ukrainian counterparts, in need of action not words.

On the other hand this is a speech from a comedy actor, turned premier. Speech amidst action. Leading by example. All capturing the attention of a wider world because it highlights the flaccid response from the rest. Words lead from the front in direct action, not cosy intentions or promises pretending to be more.

Other poor behaviour in leadership this week. This is Grant Shapps merrily posting on LinkedIn that he has set a TfL budget and that he now expects others to carry the blame. Delegation with no interest in ongoing influence or control. This is the Post Office scandal – a board and their lawyers allegedly attempting to hush up a litany of errors and concealing the collateral damage they knowingly caused. This is Carillion and it’s auditors now under investigation for what I can only assume to be – at the very least – contemptible apathy by all. In all cases this is leadership by proxy. A defensive decision-making attitude that exposes a willingness to see failure on their watch – conditional only upon ensuring failure is permitted to pass by with blame attached. Delegated blame, intended to ensure protection of a party, a corporation, or (more cynically) individual interests that can be thereafter restored.

A side note here is the caveat we all hold. The attempt to distinguish behaviour, by its intention. The white lie for good reason. Any parent or friend or mediator will know that – what is justified, half-said, or left out. In positions of influence or power, such intention inevitably becomes selective toward self-interest. The goodly compromise, that erodes morality; becoming the compromised, via self-declared moral cause. We are all human, after all.

visibility | behaviour | trust

What I conclude here is that I have been heuristically seeing these evolving situations with the tool improvisation anyone does when in a hurry. Returning to quick and peripheral judgements. I have sought more closely to assess what I think are hidden motivations and self-serving attitudes, based on a low level of trust in those I observe.

The sting in this tail

A final point is one I have had to ponder. Because I truly wish to reflect upon truth. This low trust in leadership I hold is recurring. It is sometimes one bordering on anti-establishment sentiment from within the establishment that keeps me safe. At some level it is a projection. If I am honest, one drawn from wondering if I would fair any better in face of such challenge of my own leadership. Or more squarely, my aversion to it’s sting.

In of itself, this is much the same assessment possible via a truth outlined via my own visibility | behaviour | trust. I am angry at leadership that does not serve, because the temptation is ever present to be just the same. We are all human, after all. But that’s the challenge, not the excuse.

Leading by example

Winning hearts and minds

We are about to turn a European country into a guerrilla buffer zone. That seems to be the (lack of) plan. Pretty despicable by all sides, and the worst-case outcome for Putin who I assume still favours that outcome to an overt NATO alliance war.

SWIFT may be a symbollic gesture. It is still a more meaningful gesture than the symbollic words and bluster offered so far. All nationalities weighing up economic priorities are sharing the shameful hesitation that Putin was counting on. And denying the early moral support “swift” action would have offered to the people of Ukraine.

This is the overt and globally supported economic action. Whatever is covert as forces and weapons on the ground is not what is putting hope into hearts and minds. SWIFT is the tangible actions that fearful Ukrainian people can see. Ironically slow is this response.

Enough of the powderpuff words that us armchair patriots desire. Time to test the hypobole of contingent planning, not just the rhetoric of resolve.

Original LinkedIn comment here

History repeating

Standing up for truth

My heart hurts for the innocent this evening. But if I’m honest, what I think I really feel is fear. Anxiety based upon a bursting of assumption. Assumption that tragedy of war only befalls distant shores.

I’m in awe of the bravery of the peoples of Ukraine tonight. And those in Russia prepared to stand up and break a silence upon what now unfolds.

As World War Two was becoming history, Karl Jaspers wrote his classic book “The origin and goal of history”. Publish in 1953. A monumental piece of philosophical discourse. He asserts that the human project only has 6,000 years of history, because to have history requires means to remember. He writes, “only with history did man become truly human” (Jaspers 1953, pp57). He is making the case that with history comes potentiality as well as substance; our transitory nature becomes a conscious reality and with it an ever-present awareness of our time and mortality; calling the individual to action amidst a historical perspective; this dependently acquired set of beliefs.

I read this book over Christmas, thinking how powerful his insights. Coming as they did, so soon after the Second World War. I also read his work thinking he was writing in a very different age. This week, we seem to be dragged back a little closer to that time again.

Karl Jaspers was a Swiss-German. He was a psychotherapist, turned scholar of philosophy. Brilliant, but without a philosophical position of his own, his name is less well known than other Germans of this time. Most notably Martin Heidegger, who infamously took to Nazism. Jaspers, married to a Jew, and generally regarded as the better human being than Heidegger became, is inevitably less well remembered.

In this same era – the era of propaganda and mass communication owing to the availability of radio – another psychological perspective was published in 1953. This was Carl Hovland and Yale University who explained persuasion inspired by the effectiveness of messaging in World War Two. The Hovland/Yale model, remains the prominent means to explain the critical importance of “who says what to whom”. It explains our susceptibility to propaganda. This model became the foundation stone of sales, marketing, and what we know to be the power of persuasion.

These insights came from moments of heightened uncertainty. Where a disdain to historic reality had prevailed. By those seeking to own truth, rather than speak it.

Today this same owned truth, is heard once more, in its insidious glory. Abroad. But also at home. What must prevail is the demand that we judge leadership that takes care for truth. And through that lens we must call out all who dare lead by weaponising truth. For it is they few alone, who are dealing out this new despair. In the name of owned truth.

Is less, more?

Measures, posts, and perspectives

I find myself writing offline with some regularity in early 2022. My daily blogging habit was intentionally broken over Christmas, but the faltering return was less planned. I have instead taken to being more active on LinkedIn again, or taking an idea from a discussion or lecture or journal and committing the thought to notes on my iPhone, maybe never to be seen again.

Daily visits to this website have fallen as a result. But my engagement and discussions have increased. So, I content myself with less blogs and less traffic as an acceptable loss to gain insight from discourse. Less of me, more of you. Being influenced whilst influencing.

So which is better? The habit and regularity. Predictability of output. Or the discourse and discussion with less committed but more explored?

Sound familiar? Because I contend that this is precisely the mistake early project commitment without room for discourse becomes. Sponsors responding to deadlines. Surrounding themselves by lawyers and bean-counters and procurement tacticians. Driven to move on and direct. Inform and commit. Instead of reframing, responding, and listening to what needs to be next.

There is no single right answer. But there are plenty of wrong reasons to either commit early, or dither without decisions ever being made. Sometimes its simply a matter of perspective or the inappropriate hidden influences elsewhere.

Are we gambling everything?

Hiding in plain sight

Superbowl Sunday is here. Or get up early Monday, as it is in my house. I’ll have watched it in 45 minutes by 7am tomorrow.

The name Warren Sharp meant nothing to me until ten minutes ago {here}, but as an infamous name in punditry, gambling, and – as reported by the NYer – with legitimate links as both poacher and gamekeeper in the worlds of professional sport and gambling, I suspect I will be seeing his name again. Or at least his pseudonym.

Visibility | Behaviour | Trust

My heuristic toolbox rattled as that revelation was read. A man too keen to keep a lid closed. High visibility but defensive in identity is a behaviour that gives reason to not immediately offer much trust. When new information offers reason to trust less, it is our own behaviours that necessarily change. We need to step closer and see more. Much as with our home grown current truth dodging politics. We see the lies, we more closely attend to the suspicious behaviour, as reduced trust is replaced by wider sources of information and intervention.

I’m sure Warren Sharp’s real name is less interesting than the mystery. But there is a wider point here. Gambling visibility is on the increase. Be it betting online, bingo on our phones, charities advertising weekly lotteries (in the name of their benevolent cause). How has this more overt behaviour that is aimed at playing on gambling habits been allowed? With the revelations of who is propping up political interests – maybe something is beginning to look more covert through another lens. Maybe my comparison of politics and gambling is more than just analogous.

And if visibility | behaviour | trust is nothing more than my heuristic warning light, it’s on full alert as the biggest gamblers of all in the pyramid builder crypto-currency world prepare to engulf the Superbowl tonight.