Cognitive Fluency

Chris Upton “Easy and True”
Drake Bennet’s Article, “Easy = True” states that cognitive fluency is "simply a measure of how easy it is to think about something, and it turns out that people prefer things that are easy to think about to those that are hard." Upon reading the first paragraph of this article I was immediately questioning its logic. The article suggests that when analyzing company’s financial statements one should ignore price to earnings ratios, debt levels, cash flows, etc., and instead suggests to, “invest in companies with names that are easy to pronounce.” As an accounting major, I was shocked at this statement and this idea simply lacks all logic. This logic cannot be applied to investing in companies because then we should all invest in companies that are easy to say regardless of the fact that they may be losing billions of dollars a year. This argument seems to suffer from the classic psychologist problem that comes with experimentation when all variables are not controlled compared with the independent variable. Correlation does not necessarily result in causation if all dependent variables are not controlled!

After denouncing this first argument of the article, I found their logic and other arguments much more sound. In the case of font and beauty I agreed with them completely. Upon reading about how people prefer clear, simple, and legible font because they trust it more holds true to me. When you see a commercial for a new drug promising to do X, Y, and Z for you, but then at the bottom of the screen they have tiny font that is a disclaimer for their product do you trust the product? I do not because of the small font. The small font causes me to question the product and the truthfulness of its advertisement.

When it comes to font color I thought this was especially interesting because of the role it culturally plays in our society and around the world. For instance the color red is often perceived by Americans as a warning of danger or to abstain from a practice/ activity. This is due to the fact that the color red is commonly used in our societal signs that tell us things such as stop, do not enter, smoking prohibited, etc. However, in different cultures such as China the color red has a completely different meaning. In China, red is associated with power and luck so the normal cognitive beliefs between cultures are not the same. The differences that exist among cultures provide for a very interesting analysis of cognitive psychology. It is important to understanding that what is true in America may not be true everywhere else.

I find Bennet’s argument that short and simple language helps us remember an item to be sound. We can see proof of this in the marketing of products in our society. We identify products by short sayings and jingles. “Got a Hunger? Satisfy it with Snickers,” “Pepsi the choice of a new generation,” “Red bull gives you wings.” Regardless of the fact that more kids may currently like Coke more than Pepsi, we associate these products and remember them because of these short sayings. For instance the other day I was hungry and went to the vending machine. After looking at my options I saw a snickers and immediately thought of its promise to satisfy my hunger….not surprisingly I chose this for my snack.

Bennet also talks about how people identify beauty with what is already familiar to them. I agree with this completely, and find that it is very true when it comes to the “beautiful celebrities “that are portrayed in our society. We think they are beautiful because we recognize them as being beautiful due to constant exposure in our media. When we see a new face we are likely to judge it based on old prior learned beliefs of what we regard as normal and beautiful.

Overall, I enjoyed the article. However, after reading the first paragraph I still question the validity of its argument. Perhaps it is the fact that I am an accounting major, or perhaps because it is the first thing I cognitively associate/remember about the article, but throughout the rest of the article, Bennet makes some very true arguments that can be commonly seen in my everyday interactions.

Cognitive Fluency

After reading the article, “Easy = True” by Drake Bennett, I found that most of the points he brings up make a lot of sense. The article introduces, “cognitive fluency”. It describes it as “a measure of how easy it is to think about something and that people prefer things that are easy to think about to those that are hard.” Also, items that are familiar to us are going to be easy to think about and therefore, we prefer familiarity. Specifically, I was intrigued by the topics of font and beauty.

According to the article, a font that is clearer, simpler, and more legible makes the reader believe that it is more truthful. For me, this holds true. A good example of this is when I am reading articles online. If the text is clear and legible without bright distracting colors, I am more likely to believe what it is saying. In contrast, when I come across an article in which the text is in cursive or in different colors, I am more critical of it and believe that it is not as truthful.

Thinking about this, it begins to make a lot of sense. It is no wonder that politicians and advertisers use simple, legible fonts when trying to get their audience to trust them and believe in their product.

Bennett also brings up the topic of beauty. According to the article, “…people assign all sorts of specific characteristics to things that feel familiar, like beauty.” This also makes a lot of sense to me. When I think about what our society defines as "beautiful", certain famous actors and actresses come to mind. I think this can be explained by the article. Because I see their faces all the time in the media, I am very familiar with their faces. Therefore, because I have already “learned these facial features, I like them.”

This idea that beauty is linked with familiarity is very interesting. The faces you see on TV and in other aspects of the media are in fact, prototypes of beauty. The article explains that prototypical faces are easiest to process, which is why we prefer them. I do realize however that this is not the only factor that needs to be taken into account when when considering what is “beautiful”.

Overall, I enjoyed reading this article and find most of the points Bennett talks about to be true.

Synaptic Transmission

BOOM, too fast to be perceived by the human senses, an electrical explosion overwhelms consciousness, potential energies of sodium, chloride, and potassium ions send neural impulses from axons to dendrites forming synaptic linkages upon which every thought, idea, invention, creation of man has passed through; it’s here within the interneuron transmissions the epiphany resides, yet I do not perceive it at the speed of light, instead it’s like the gentle and welcome warmth of a radiant fire momentarily bathing me in pure energy, awakening my mind and opening the gates to which all life pours abidingly, raw and unregulated, then as soon as it came it’s gone and all you’re left with are consolidated neural paths that form its memory.

Sentence

There is a sense of heroism which can be defined as a consistent pursuit for a commitment against all odds in Okonkwo, who, all his life, is struggling between his ideal and reality the way a tragic hero sticks to his faith but cannot override his doomed destiny, : his ideal of being extremely masculine is opposed to his inability to oppress his love for his adopted son, who is killed by Okonkwo himself to show his abeyance to the tribe; his vision of being the tribe leader to fight the invasion of western religion is in contrast to the reality that his tribe is tolerant and is willing to concede. ( inspired by " Things Fall Apart" )

Sentence

Jeremy is happy to live in Wisconsin, despite his extreme hatred for the cold and snowy winters, because he can enjoy the 'best of the best' squeaky cheese curds, he is able to cheer for a professional basketball, football, and baseball team year round, he can find a great lake to go 'drown a worm' on hot summer days, and most of all, because he was able to witness the greatest quarterback to ever play the game of football become a legend on the Frozen Tundra.

Chris Upton: Problems in America

In today’s divided political atmosphere the United States of America faces many problems, intensifying global warming and climate change, ballooning federal deficit plaguing our economy, depleting supplies of world-wide oil reserves, growing number of citizens lacking health insurance, rising cost of health care, diminishing social security reserves, spiraling public education costs, disintegrating infrastructure of cities, soaring unemployment rates, widening gap between the rich and the poor, ongoing military expansion overseas and deteriorating inner city public schools.

E = MC^2 + Ethical Conundrums

The quote “I don't know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones,” by Albert Einstein gives a short and direct synopsis of human behavior and shows the vulnerability of our existence due to that behavior. The use of implicit deductive referencing and explicit inductive facts form a multi-layered foundation for a thought provoking conclusion. The more layers you unfold the more depth and irony become evident in this short but sourly sweet quote.

The deductive characteristics of the quote can be seen in the reference to WW III and later in WW IV. The first deductive layer is he doesn’t know because World War III has yet to occur. The reason it’s implicit is because using “will be” the aphorism refers to the future and by asserting the truth that the future is undecided you get an indirect logically valid statement. The WW IV reference is deductive because of an idiom not found in the text’s literal meaning. In inferring your understanding of human behavior you can read much more than what the words alone can say. For example the behavior of creating progressively smarter, more accurate and deadlier technologies because we think it makes those who wield them safer. The implications of inferring valid understandings of human behavior and evaluating them in the context of this quote are limitless examples of implicitly deductive conclusions. The conclusions you draw are mostly direct criticisms of human nature.

The inductive parts of the quote are the same as the deductive except without making inferences to complete the quote’s logic. The first is “I don’t know with what weapons World War III will be fought, the other is “World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” When not looked at as an idiom the words lose their magic and ability to spark creative philosophical thought. On the other hand completely ignoring the literal understanding would destroy the pathos of the quote. It would be analogous to trying to read a book by only reading the words found on one side of each page. The humor and connection to the audience lies in the comedic format of the quote. Where the leading half separated by the comma is like a set-up and the latter half the punch line. For me a lot of the actual humor comes from the irony in combination with the comedic structure made evident in the inductive parts of the quote.

The most difficult part about analyzing this quote is correctly teasing out the irony I’m fairly confident exists, from the juxtapositions. One juxtaposition is the future is undecided yet WW IV will be fought using sticks and stones. Both parts of the juxtaposition can be viewed as examples of logos but by placing them one right after another you get a contrasting comparison and in some ways even a contradiction. There is also irony, specifically in the conclusions I draw like improving humanity is advantageous; technology can be used to improve humanity; we use technology to destroy our ability to create it. This is an example of irony because as societies try to improve the human condition through violent conflict resolution they actually succeed in doing exactly the opposite. Another example of irony is Einstein’s both a contributing inventor of a WMD and is being critical of it devastating effects on humanity.

The quote’s diction is surprisingly simple considering the author, but this does not at all make the ideas and rhetoric simple. Some examples of simplicity are no words exceed 2 syllables, it’s very common language, 7 of the 23 words repeat and 6 of those words are in the exact same order. The very end of the quote even ends in the cliché saying “sticks and stones.” The diction of the quote is a sign that its creator is being cognizant of his audience and their needs.

This quote’s audience is everyone because it’s trying to make people understand a kind of ethics that can improve all our lives. It shows us that our future is at this point and time in a state of unprecedented vulnerability. It’s vulnerable not because of the destructive capacity and degradation of humanity technology provides us but because our ethical ideologies are corrupt. What we understand to be advantageous increasingly becomes hindering, what is good becomes self gratifying and ethics embody possessions we barter and later discard as old fads. Sadly this quote will likely be an accurate prediction of our future. On the other hand if we allow our ingenuitive capacity to plateau maybe our scars will remind us never to pick up the sticks and stones in the same manner as before.