from the world's big
The Dawn of Data as Dusk of Degrees
Currently, we are unable to prove our “hidden” knowledge, things that are learned “along the way” rather than in a certified course or degree program. That needs to—and will—change, perhaps thanks to these innovative start ups.
Today we are all creating data and do it all the time, with every swipe of a credit card, click of a mouse button or finger tip on a touch screen. With the rise of mobile devices a whole new data set, Geolocation, got into this immense pool of information, yet we, the creators of information are not really profiting from it. Sure, we get a free coffee or burger if we check in to our favorite coffee shop or burger restaurant but that should not be the end of the line.
Information or data when looked at one by one might look trivial but as soon as you zoom out and take a look at a chain of information you will be able to see a pattern. Fast food restaurants are amongst the first to use this trend by rewarding us with a free drink or something else after we checked in to the place three times. They can do so because they collect all their customer’s data, filter it and draw conclusions. They can even go a step further and share (sell) this information with health insurance companies which then are able to draw their own conclusions based on the data obtained e.g. diseases people may get later in life based on the stuff they were eating and therefore cut health benefits, all of which led to a big scandal in Germany a few years ago, but that’s a different story.
Down to the present day many people don’t realize how much they actually share every single day and how it could be beneficial for their careers. As I said, one information or data set alone may be trivial in itself but collected and filtered over several months or years it might actually say a lot and become meaningful.
In today’s society all our knowledge is proven by snapshots taken from and during our educational career. What I mean by that, it’s the tests we took and the exams we sat and hopefully passed. However, knowledge and learning are far more than a test score.
Up to now, no one is able to prove ones “hidden” knowledge, things we learned “along the way”. That needs to change.
Imagine you are an art lover and every spare minute you either read a book, watch a documentary on TV, listen to a podcast on SmartHistory or go to exhibitions. I think it is pretty safe to assume that after some years you have gained a level of knowledge equal if not superior to someone who studied art at college. The difference is that if you decide one day to quit your job and start working for an art gallery or similar, you will most likely have a much harder time getting the job than someone fresh out of college as this person will have a prove in form of a diploma but you have just your knowledge which is not proven according to present day standards in our educational system and even in society. Yes, there are the successful career breakers and people creating their own jobs or niches but these are the shining exceptions and far from a general validity.
Now what if you tracked everything related to your hobby / passion over the years and your employer could take a look at the data, seeing that every single day you worked on the topic? The great and exciting thing is, all that data is already out there. What we have to do is to a) finish with the old mindset seeing data either as something boring or dangerous and b) establish a mindset that values data and what makes people want to have control over their data and to help them collecting it in a meaningful way.
Let’s take a look at three examples based on applications and services most of us use every day.
Foursquare, Gowalla and Facebook check-in
Each time you visit a museum, an art gallery, a conference etc and check in the venue this data would become part of your Knowledge Graph. If you became a regular at a particular museum the collected check-ins would prove that you are actively interested in a certain topic or the data could underline a general interest in art or history.
Amazon, Barnes&Noble, Netflix, iTunes, Blippy
Most of us buy books and DVDs online these days. Every book you buy related to art or history should be part of your Knowledge Graph. Same is true for documentaries which we most likely buy or rent on Netflix or iTunes. Additional information could be a rating or review you give. And even if you bought your books in a classic bookstore the data could be tracked via services like Blippy.
YouTube, Big Think, TED, Fora.TV
More and more top shelf educational content is available on the Internet for free. Take lectures from universities on YouTube and iTunes as an example. And even not looking that far, Big Think itself has a great collection of videos on a variety of topics you can learn from. Most video platforms track how long the videos are watched by each user. This information would be a great addition to the Knowledge Graph.
There are of course more possible ways to make sense of education related data. In January I wrote a post on “Why Analytics will become more powerful than High Level Degrees” based on one of the best examples for such a system, the Khan Academy. In an interview with Forbes, Salman Khan said
In ten years, twenty years [from now] I think an employer would rather like to see your log from a site like Khan Academy where it doesn’t get just a 3.2 point GPA in psychology. It gets what you did, when you did it, how well you were able to help your peers, how consistently did you work.
“Well, this guy worked three hours every day for twenty years on this stuff. This is a persistent kind of guy I want working for me.”
And we will be able to give people this kind of analytics. I think that can be a more powerful transcript than just a high level degree right now.
Yesterday Chris Dixon shared the story of one of his friends who got accepted by the MIT without a high school diploma but based on “a pile of code he wrote and sent it to colleges.” Stanford, Berkley and others dismissed his application but got very interested in him when he was ready to start his Master.
Join multiple Tony and Emmy Award-winning actress Judith Light live on Big Think at 2 pm ET on Monday.
From "if-by-whiskey" to the McNamara fallacy, being able to spot logical missteps is an invaluable skill.
- A fallacy is the use of invalid or faulty reasoning in an argument.
- There are two broad types of logical fallacies: formal and informal.
- A formal fallacy describes a flaw in the construction of a deductive argument, while an informal fallacy describes an error in reasoning.
Appeal to privacy<p>When someone behaves in a way that negatively affects (or could affect) others, but then gets upset when others criticize their behavior, they're likely engaging in the appeal to privacy — or "mind your own business" — fallacy. Examples:<br></p><ul><li>Someone who speeds excessively on the highway, considering his driving to be his own business.</li><li>Someone who doesn't see a reason to bathe or wear deodorant, but then boards a packed 10-hour flight.</li></ul><p>Language to watch out for: "You're not the boss of me." "Worry about yourself."</p>
Sunk cost fallacy<p>When someone argues for continuing a course of action despite evidence showing it's a mistake, it's often a sunk cost fallacy. The flawed logic here is something like: "We've already invested so much in this plan, we can't give up now." Examples:<br></p><ul><li>Someone who intentionally overeats at an all-you-can-eat buffet just to get their "money's worth"</li><li>A scientist who won't admit his theory is incorrect because it would be too painful or costly</li></ul><p>Language to watch out for: "We must stay the course." "I've already invested so much...." "We've always done it this way, so we'll keep doing it this way."</p>
If-by-whiskey<p>This fallacy is named after a speech given in 1952 by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_S._Sweat" target="_blank">Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr.</a>, a state representative for <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi" target="_blank">Mississippi</a>, on the subject of whether the state should legalize alcohol. Sweat's argument on prohibition was (to paraphrase):<br></p><p><em>If, by whiskey, you mean the devil's brew that causes so many problems in society, then I'm against it. But if whiskey means the oil of conversation, the philosopher's wine, "</em><em>the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning;" then I am certainly for it.</em></p>
Slippery slope<p>This fallacy involves arguing against a position because you think choosing it would start a chain reaction of bad things, even though there's little evidence to support your claim. Example:<br></p><ul><li>"We can't allow abortion because then society will lose its general respect for life, and it'll become harder to punish people for committing violent acts like murder."</li><li>"We can't legalize gay marriage. If we do, what's next? Allowing people to marry cats and dogs?" (Some people actually made this <a href="https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/national/cats-marrying-dogs-and-five-other-things-same-sex-marriage-won-mean/dLV9jKqkJOWUFZrSBETWkK/" target="_blank">argument</a> before same-sex marriage was legalized in the U.S.)</li></ul><p>Of course, sometimes decisions <em>do </em>start a chain reaction, which could be bad. The slippery slope device only becomes a fallacy when there's no evidence to suggest that chain reaction would actually occur.</p><p>Language to watch out for: "If we do that, then what's next?"</p>
"There is no alternative"<p><span style="background-color: initial;">A modification of the </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma" target="_blank" style="background-color: initial;">false dilemma</a><span style="background-color: initial;">, this fallacy (often abbreviated to TINA) argues for a specific position because there are no realistic alternatives. Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher used this exact line as a slogan to defend capitalism, and it's still used today to that same end: Sure, capitalism has its problems, but we've seen the horrors that occur when we try anything else, so there is no alternative.</span><br></p><p>Language to watch out for: "If I had a magic wand…" "What <em>else</em> are we going to do?!"</p>
Ad hoc arguments<p>An ad hoc argument isn't really a logical fallacy, but it is a fallacious rhetorical strategy that's common and often hard to spot. It occurs when someone's claim is threatened with counterevidence, so they come up with a rationale to dismiss the counterevidence, hoping to protect their original claim. Ad hoc claims aren't designed to be generalizable. Instead, they're typically invented in the moment. <a href="https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ad_hoc" target="_blank">RationalWiki</a> provides an example:<br></p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">Alice: "It is clearly said in the Bible that the Ark was 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high."</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">Bob: "A purely wooden vessel of that size could not be constructed; the largest real wooden vessels were Chinese treasure ships which required iron hoops to build their keels. Even the <em>Wyoming</em> which was built in 1909 and had iron braces had problems with her hull flexing and opening up and needed constant mechanical pumping to stop her hold flooding."</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">Alice: "It's possible that God intervened and allowed the Ark to float, and since we don't know what gopher wood is, it is possible that it is a much stronger form of wood than any that comes from a modern tree."</p>
Snow job<p><span style="background-color: initial;">This fallacy occurs when someone doesn't really have a strong argument, so they just throw a bunch of irrelevant facts, numbers, anecdotes and other information at the audience to confuse the issue, making it harder to refute the original claim. Example:</span><br></p><ul><li>A tobacco company spokesperson who is confronted about the health risks of smoking, but then proceeds to show graph after graph depicting many of the other ways people develop cancer, and how cancer metastasizes in the body, etc.</li></ul><p>Watch out for long-winded, data-heavy arguments that seem confusing by design.</p>
McNamara fallacy<p>Named after <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McNamara" target="_blank">Robert McNamara</a>, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_Defense" target="_blank">U.S. secretary of defense</a> from 1961 to 1968, this fallacy occurs when decisions are made based solely on <em>quantitative metrics or observations,</em> ignoring other factors. It stems from the Vietnam War, in which McNamara sought to develop a formula to measure progress in the war. He decided on bodycount. But this "objective" formula didn't account for other important factors, such as the possibility that the Vietnamese people would never surrender.<br></p><p>You could also imagine this fallacy playing out in a medical situation. Imagine a terminal cancer patient has a tumor, and a certain procedure helps to reduce the size of the tumor, but also causes a lot of pain. Ignoring quality of life would be an example of the McNamara fallacy.</p><p>Language to watch out for: "You can't measure that, so it's not important."</p>
A new study looks at what would happen to human language on a long journey to other star systems.
- A new study proposes that language could change dramatically on long space voyages.
- Spacefaring people might lose the ability to understand the people of Earth.
- This scenario is of particular concern for potential "generation ships".
Generation Ships<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a1e6445c7168d293a6da3f9600f534a2"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H2f0Wd3zNj0?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Many of the most popular apps are about self-improvement.
Emotions are the newest hot commodity, and we can't get enough.