Supercausalitŕ, ipnosi e decision making

IPNOSI ◽  
2013 ◽  
pp. 55-70
Author(s):  
Antonella Vannini ◽  
Ulisse di Corpo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Living Systems ◽  
Negative Solution ◽  
The Unconscious ◽  
The Past ◽  
Innovative Model ◽  
The Future ◽  
Life Itself ◽  
Unconscious Mind

In 1942 the mathematician Luigi Fantappič formulated the theory of syntropy starting from the negative solution of the equation linking relativity and quantum mechanics. The negative solution had been rejected by physicists as it describes energy and matter moving backwards in time. However, Fantappič noticed that this solution is characterized by the properties of concentration of energy and matter, differentiation, complexity, formation of structures and evolution towards order. Since these properties coincide with the typical properties of living systems, Fantappič came to the conclusion that life demonstrates the actual existence in nature of the negative solution and that life itself is a result of causes located in the future. This innovative model offers an explanation of the fundamental distinction between "problem solving" and "decision making", according to which problem solving is based on information and knowledge acquired in the past, whereas decision-making is based on intuitions and emotional signals from the future. Ericksonian Hypnosis, together with the syntropy model of Luigi Fantappič, offers a way to bring the insight and resources of the unconscious mind into decision making.

Acta Fluens – Generatives Handeln und Improvisation im Jazz

2014 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-60
Author(s):  
Davide Sparti
Keyword(s):  
Walter Benjamin ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Human Existence ◽  
The Unconscious ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of

Obwohl jede menschliche Handlung mit einem gewissen Grad an Improvisation erfolgt, gibt es kulturelle Praktiken, bei denen Improvisation eine überwiegende Rolle spielt. Um das Risiko zu vermeiden, einen zu breiten Begriff von Improvisation zu übernehmen, konzentriere ich mich im vorliegenden Beitrag auf den Jazz. Meine zentrale Frage lautet, wie Improvisation verstanden werden muss. Mein Vorgehen ist folgendes: Ich beginne mit einem Vergleich von Improvisation und Komposition, damit die Spezifizität der Improvisation erklärt werden kann. Danach wende ich mich dem Thema der Originalität als Merkmal der Improvisation zu. Zum Schluss führe ich den Begriff affordance ein, um die kollektive und zirkuläre Logik eines Solos zu analysieren. Paradigmatisch wird der Jazzmusiker mit dem Engel der Geschichte verglichen, der nur auf das Vergangene blickt, während er der Zukunft den Rücken zugekehrt hat, und lediglich ihr zugetrieben wird. Weder kann der Improvisierende das Material der Vergangenheit vernachlässigen noch seine genuine Tätigkeit, das Improvisieren in der Gegenwart und für die Zukunft, aufgeben: Er visiert die Zukunft trotz ihrer Unvorhersehbarkeit über die Vermittlung der Vergangenheit an.<br><br>While improvised behavior is so much a part of human existence as to be one of its fundamental realities, in order to avoid the risk of defining the act of improvising too broadly, my focus here will be upon one of the activities most explicitly centered around improvisation – that is, upon jazz. My contribution, as Wittgenstein would say, has a »grammatical« design to it: it proposes to clarify the significance of the term »improvisation.« The task of clarifying the cases in which one may legitimately speak of improvisation consists first of all in reflecting upon the conditions that make the practice possible. This does not consist of calling forth mysterious, esoteric processes that take place in the unconscious, or in the minds of musicians, but rather in paying attention to the criteria that are satisfied when one ascribes to an act the concept of improvisation. In the second part of my contribution, I reflect upon the logic that governs the construction of an improvised performance. As I argue, in playing upon that which has already emerged in the music, in discovering the future as they go on (as a consequence of what they do), jazz players call to mind the angel in the famous painting by Klee that Walter Benjamin analyzed in his Theses on the History of Philosophy: while pulled towards the future, its eyes are turned back towards the past.

Truth Matters: Cognitive Integrity as an Intervention for Self-Deception

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugenia Isabel Gorlin ◽  
Michael W. Otto
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Autonomous Agents ◽  
Therapeutic Interventions ◽  
Empirical Validation ◽  
The Past ◽  
Adaptive Problem

To live well in the present, we take direction from the past. Yet, individuals may engage in a variety of behaviors that distort their past and current circumstances, reducing the likelihood of adaptive problem solving and decision making. In this article, we attend to self-deception as one such class of behaviors. Drawing upon research showing both the maladaptive consequences and self-perpetuating nature of self-deception, we propose that self-deception is an understudied risk and maintaining factor for psychopathology, and we introduce a “cognitive-integrity”-based approach that may hold promise for increasing the reach and effectiveness of our existing therapeutic interventions. Pending empirical validation of this theoretically-informed approach, we posit that patients may become more informed and autonomous agents in their own therapeutic growth by becoming more honest with themselves.

Decision making: How the past guides the future in frontal cortex

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. R303-R306
Author(s):  
Bharath Chandra Talluri ◽  
Anke Braun ◽  
T.H. Donner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Frontal Cortex ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Future

Scaling Up an Organization

Innovating ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Perez-Breva ◽  
Nick Fuhrer
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Scale Up ◽  
Scaling Up ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Future

Organizations don’t just grown on their own. You build them, and you may end up building multiple organizations, each one atop the previous one. The scale-up logic is straightforward: You present what you did (the past) to motivate where you will go (the future), but what you work on is the middle (the present). Most emerging organizations fail because they build for the future having ignored the entire present. But you don’t have to worry about whether a decision is optimal for that rosy future—it just needs to work today. As you build the next organization, you’ll reuse parts from the old one and you’ll get to implement everything you’ve learned. Growth and scale-up work like problem solving: no one cares how you first came up with the solution. The organization that systematizes your current innovation prototype is your first big milestone.

scholarly journals Knowledge and Decision Making - Do We Want What We Need?

10.28945/2525 ◽  
2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bogdan Lipicnik
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Future ◽  
Good For ◽  
Search For Information

Knowledge is a category that includes many past decisions. They could be good for the past but it is a question if they can work in the future. We can talk about programmed and non-programmed decisions. When a predetermined situation triggers a predetermined response we can talk about a programmed decision. If one wants to make a non-programmed decision he/she must search for information, identify the problem, evaluate possible alternatives, and act. If the process is more complicated, programmed decision will be more effective. Our research has revealed that future managers in Slovenia possess knowledge that involves more programmed that non-programmed decisions. This may indicate that they will have a lot of difficulties with decision making in complicated organisational systems. However, they cannot learn how to take decisions (even if they want to) because they do not know what they actually need. If they are successful at non-programmed decisions they want more knowledge from the same area; in fact they would need more knowledge about programmed decisions - and vice versa.

Was Emily Brown American Empress in Korea?

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-92
Author(s):  
Jong-pil Yoon
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Epistemic Status ◽  
Historical Inquiry ◽  
Epistemic Practice ◽  
Pragmatic Theory ◽  
The Past ◽  
Central Tenet ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Inferential Contextualism

Abstract This paper investigates the limits and meaning of historical inquiry in light of inferential contextualism that holds as its central tenet that the epistemic status of a proposition depends on the context of the subject. Historical inquiry, the discussion will show, is an epistemic practice that operates under the reliabilist presupposition that beliefs formed through the processes, whose pragmatic utility has been already proven in problem solving situations, may be taken to be rationally justified. As for the limits of historical inquiry, it will be pointed out that the practice is unable to achieve independent criteria for determining if the belief it produces correctly reflects the thing in reality it purports to be about and thus correspondence between the former and the latter cannot be established. Furthermore, beliefs formed by historical inquiry cannot be rendered verifiable even through a future-oriented pragmatic theory of truth because it inquires into what happened in the past, not what is to happen in the future. Despite the fact that we cannot tell the truth about the past in any certain and direct way, it is, the paper will conclude, still epistemically meaningful to distinguish justified from unjustified beliefs in history because historical inquiry is so closely connected with everyday epistemic practice through sharing pragmatically sustained processes that the former cannot be discarded without giving up the principles of the latter. There lies the meaning of historical inquiry.

Is the societal dialogue at the local level the future of social dialogue?

2005 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 439-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Yves Boulin ◽  
Ulrich Mückenberger
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Local Time ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Regional Level ◽  
Network Society ◽  
Social Dialogue ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Future ◽  
Supranational Level

The modern ‘network society’ restructures the system of ‘voice’ as it has come down from the past. Decision-making is drifting away from particular plants, organisations and institutions, and is becoming fluid — whereas voice remains fixed to plants, organisations and institutions. The tentative thesis put forward in this article is that only both regional/local and global ‘voice networking’ may be capable of coping with the decision-making character of the network society. This leads to efforts to integrate, into the bargaining processes, also representatives of civil society — NGOs on a European and supranational level, various ‘stakeholders' on a local and regional level. This gives two new roles to social dialogue: it has to take place not only on a sectoral, but also on a territorial level (‘la négociation sociale territorialisée’); and it has to ‘open up’ towards the territorial stakeholders (‘le dialogue sociétal’). Local time policies are taken as an example for such a new function of territorial social dialogue.

scholarly journals A review of the past, the present, and the future of fishers' knowledge research: a challenge to established fisheries science

2014 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 341-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward J. Hind
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Productive Activity ◽  
Fisheries Science ◽  
The Past ◽  
Knowledge Cultures ◽  
The Future ◽  
Qualitative Knowledge ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Fishers' knowledge research is an approach to fisheries research that has a relatively long history, yet has generally failed to become integrated into the fisheries science mainstream alongside approaches that rely primarily on the knowledge of professional scientists. Its continued position on the margins of fisheries science has not however stopped fishers' knowledge researchers from publishing an expanding literature, which they often use to advocate for the greater consideration of fishers' knowledge by fisheries scientists and managers. They believe that the unique and often highly qualitative knowledge of fishers could inform better decision-making, resulting in improved socio-ecological outcomes for fisheries. This review first outlines the scope of the fishers' knowledge literature, before outlining five waves of fishers' knowledge research that have developed over the last century. For each wave, the nature of the fishers' knowledge documented during it is noted, as is the research and dissemination approach taken by its practitioners. The impact of that wave on mainstream fisheries science is then assessed. Overall, it is found that only one wave of fishers' knowledge research is beginning to have consistent success integrating with mainstream fisheries science, a wave that omits the research of many of the unique elements of fishers' knowledge. Other waves have died out, or are in danger of dying out, either because they have failed to be noticed by mainstream fisheries scientists or because mainstream fisheries scientists have not welcomed their outputs. It is summarized that fishers' knowledge research will only continue as a productive activity if mainstream fisheries scientists begin to open their discipline to other knowledge cultures and if fishers' knowledge researchers facilitate this action by disseminating their research so that it is more accessible to these scientists.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document