The curious grammar of police shootings

You’ll often see a similar grammatical device when a police officer shoots someone. Communications officers at policy agenies are deft at contorting the English language to minimize culpability of an officer or of the agency. So instead of  . . .

. . . Mayberry Dep. Barney Fife shot and killed a burglary suspect last night . . .

You’ll see . . .

 . . . last night, a burglary suspect was shot and killed in an officer-involved shooting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/07/14/the-curious-grammar-of-police-shootings/

Paris, Beirut, and the Language Used to Describe Terrorism

“Not all media coverage is created equal, and sometimes the difference is in a few words.”

“As in Paris, the attacks in Beirut were the deadliest in decades, committed by the same medieval perpetrators from outside. And yet major American and European media outlets did not treat the two incidents similarly, which in turn, I suspect, contributed to an environment in which terror in Paris spurred Facebook to action in a way bloodshed in Beirut didn’t.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/11/paris-beirut-media-coverage/416457/

Podcast: Only Human: Listen Up

“Only Human invites you to participate in a listening bootcamp week that starts November 16 (but you can start the challenges at any time). With guidance from a memory champion, a world-class mediator, actors and improv comics, we’ve got five challenges designed to help you sharpen your listening skills.”

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/onlyhuman/series/listen/?utm_source=Newsletter%3A+This+Week+On+WNYC&utm_campaign=8f312753e5-This_Week_on_WNYC_3-10-15&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0473b3d0b8-8f312753e5-73203861&mc_cid=8f312753e5&mc_eid=ab24f2ae4e

Can science and religion coexist? Not on Mauna Kea, say Hawaiians.

What takes precedent when one particular location has religious but also scientific significance? Do people have a responsibility to make sacrifices in the name of scientific progress?

“Debate over the Mauna Kea project seems to pit conservationists against industry, and religion against science. But for native Hawaiians for whom worship intersects stewardship of the environment, concerns about conservation and freedom of religion have blended into a common cause.”

http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/1111/Can-science-and-religion-coexist-Not-on-Mauna-Kea-say-Hawaiians?cmpid=TW

America’s First Slavery Museum Shifts the Focus from Masters to Slaves

What roles does perspective play in learning history? How might we think of the institution of slavery differently if we focused on the experiences of those who were enslaved rather than the experiences of their masters?

“The entire museum is similar: You walk the same pathways that victims of chattel slavery walked, you listen to their stories in their own words, you see and hear the pieces of history that aren’t printed in textbooks or told on other plantation tours. You won’t find much information on the wealthy slaveowners on this plantation. Instead, Whitney presents slavery through the stories of those who experienced it.”

http://www.vice.com/read/americas-first-slavery-museum-shifts-the-focus-from-masters-to-slaves-511?utm_source=vicetwitterus

The war against humanities at Britain’s universities

What makes a subject worth learning? Worth teaching? Must there be a profitable end point for those learning? Can subjects have intrinsic value? These are some of the questions surrounding issues around subjects in the Humanities (History, Social Sciences, Human Sciences, etc.).

“The liberal education which seeks to provide students with more than mere professional qualifications appears to be dying a slow and painful death, overseen by a whole cadre of what cultural anthropologist David Graeber calls “bullshit jobs”: bureaucrats hired to manage the transformation of universities from centres of learning to profit centres. As one academic put it to me: “Every dean needs his vice-dean and sub-dean and each of them needs a management team, secretaries, admin staff; all of them only there to make it harder for us to teach, to research, to carry out the most basic functions of our jobs.” The humanities, whose products are necessarily less tangible and effable than their science and engineering peers (and less readily yoked to the needs of the corporate world) have been an easy target for this sprawling new management class.”

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/mar/29/war-against-humanities-at-britains-universities

Believing What You Don’t Believe

“t’s not that people don’t understand that it’s scientifically impossible for their lucky hats to help their team hit a home run or turn a double play — all but the most superstitious would acknowledge that. It’s that they have a powerful intuition and, despite its utter implausibility, they just can’t shake it.”

The Power of Nudges, for Good and Bad

“Nudges, small design changes that can markedly affect individual behavior, have been catching on. These techniques rely on insights from behavioral science, and when used ethically, they can be very helpful. But we need to be sure that they aren’t being employed to sway people to make bad decisions that they will later regret.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/upshot/the-power-of-nudges-for-good-and-bad.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-3&action=click&contentCollection=Economy&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article

Is Cold Medicine a Waste of Time?

“A 2009 study that will sound especially sinister to anyone who suffers from allergies put 39 patients with a grass allergy into a sealed room called the “Vienna Challenge Chamber.” Then, the scientists piped in grass pollen. The people were given phenylephrine, a sugar pill or another decongestant called pseudoephedrine. Phenylephrine did no better than the placebo, while pseudoephedrine — which must be obtained by going to the pharmacist’s counter — beat them both.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/rweb/biz/is-cold-medicine-a-waste-of-time/2015/11/04/8eb5c907f9ec9b32832cfe3f6862729d_story.html?wpisrc=nl_draw2

Should A Self-Driving Car Kill Its Passengers In A “Greater Good” Scenario?

“Picture the scene: You’re in a self-driving car and, after turning a corner, find that you are on course for an unavoidable collision with a group of 10 people in the road with walls on either side. Should the car swerve to the side into the wall, likely seriously injuring or killing you, its sole occupant, and saving the group? Or should it make every attempt to stop, knowing full well it will hit the group of people while keeping you safe?”

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/should-self-driving-car-be-programmed-kill-its-passengers-greater-good-scenario