I have added another folk idea

Cynic that I am . . .

A first run at making a table for the final chapter of the book on the evolution of stupidity I am writing.

Read a sample chapter from the new book about the riddle of intelligence. www.berghahnbooks.com/samplers/ant...

In the last chapter of the book on the evolution of stupidity I want to return to the Truth Test to show how hard it is to know what is really involved, etc. I've created two visual versions. If you trust the source, it sounds possible, and fits your beliefs, then it is true. © John Edward Terrell

I think these new definitions in the book-in-the-works on the evolution of stupidity may help . . . I won't be including the illustration with these definitions.

Same book being written about human nature. Which cover works best for you?

I am continuing to see if I can "show" and not just "tell" what your brain is doing, and why so many seem content to stop at BELIEVE. The text will add that another word for "identify" is "assume."

It's beginning to take shape for sure.

When a manuscript is submitted to Berghahn, the authors are asked to make suggestions about possible cover art. This is a real challenge for the book John Hoopes, Stephen Acabado, and I are writing about belief. Maybe this? Photo by form PxHere

I think this is an improved (and more appealing) version of this "belief quiz" for the book on belief.

My inner Alice had a brainstorm last night, and one of the ideas she came up with was this one. AI = Artificial Belief.

Look what I just plucked from the mails today.

I think I have put together a good lead image for the conclusion to the book on what makes us human. In the book "ignorance" simply means "lack of knowledge."

I have reworked one of the figures for the conclusion of the book I am writing about human nature. 𝗙𝗶𝗴𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝟰.𝟯. (a) Creative thinking: forming beliefs. (b) Categorical thinking: relying on habitual answers. (c) Relational thinking: looking for consequences.

I am obviously having fun, but serious fun. I need a chapter opening image for the Conclusion to the book I am writing on what makes us human. This image builds on the previous imagery in the book and maybe (?) has a bit of exotic appeal? Tentative title: SCIENCE AND SUPERSTITION.

I think I have figured out how to show and not just tell in the book I am writing about human nature what I am calling "thought styles." (a) categorical; (b) relational; (c) belief; and (d) habitual. The MAGA crowd is strong on (d).

Although I am not sure I can get away with in the book I am writing, but definitions of what is a "belief" almost always make BELIEF something that is the opposite of something else called TRUTH. This makes truth something that is "out there" rather than something we have to work at "having."

I have come up with what I am calling the "Truth Test." The vast amount of evidence supporting the truth of this test supplied nowadays by Donald J. Truimp is truly overwhelming. "If you trust the source, it sounds possible, and fits your beliefs, then it is true."

Look what just arrived in the mail!

One of the distinctions made in the book I am working on with Stephen Acabado and John Hoopes about belief is that there is a real difference between assumptions and beliefs. Google AI and XI Grok do a shitty job of saying what it is. Shows that AI isn't about intelligence but canned responses.

I think I've got a better title for the book I am working on. Chapter 3 is devoted to 3 case studies. Nature: revitalization movements, MAGA, and Constitutional Originalism Nurture: The Continental Convention, religion Choice: LGBT+, castrati, transvestism, transexualism, drag queens, etc.

Another fine example of what I have long called "Christmas Tree" archaeology in the Pacific. (Hint: Find something? Pin it to the same old story, and your job is done. And rest assured that fame & fortune are coming down the chimney after you have gone to sleep.)

An important book that gives a powerful message about indigenous knowledge and the critical importance of acknowledging our global diversity.

An important book that gives a powerful message about indigenous knowledge and the critical importance of acknowledging our global diversity.

I am not sure which one is the better comedy, but both shows are certainly entertaining.

In case you were wondering what the word "objectification" means.

Just published. www.berghahnbooks.com/title/Terrel...

Rereading Herbert Simons 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 (1996) underscores how much of science then assumed the key elements of concern were "systems," "complexity," and "environment." It is also clearer why Skinner's extreme environmentalism was not seen as extreme as it was, etc.

Why I am glad to be editing the new Berghahn series EXPLANATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES. anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1...

In the book about human nature I want to write for the Berghahn series EXPLANATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES, when do you think I should confess to the reader that this figure can also be labeled as "doing science"?

Sadly, this is way too true. At least in the Land of Trump.

I think that at last the book has a good title.

For the book on what makes us human I am starting to work on, I am trying to show, not just tell, key ideas. One is that either/or thinking may not get you far enough down the road to see the consequences of what you are doing in the here and now. May this?

I have become increasingly convinced that categorical thinking is indeed the human default. If true, this may explain why it is difficult to define what is relational thinking. I am hoping this figure from the book being proposed on what makes us human may help . . .

(a) The human brain is predisposed to accept that if something looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. (b) I call a similar test “The Truth Test.” If you trust the source, it sounds possible, and fits your beliefs, then it is true. © John Edward Terrell

A new book that gives truth to lies about how life really works. My chapter in this collection of new essays is called "The Fallacy of the Austronesians and Other Folk Ideas."

Hogwarts or Harvard?

Hogwarts or Harvard?

I am not sure about the captions yet (I haven't finished drafting the main text) but maybe this is a way to introduce what will be discussed in the following chapters of the book on what makes us human?

In the Introduction to the book I am now working on, I am probably going to introduce the reader (if they don't already use them) to how ternary plots can help us break away from simplistic either/or, black-and-white, binary thinking and avoid the common error of assuming correlation = causation.

The first book in the new series at Berghahn is now available!

Has anyone else noticed that D.O.G.E. is today's Salem Witch Trials? They thought the Devil was real back then. Many today believe it is something called "government waste."

A book for the Berghahn series EXPLANATIONS IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES? WHAT MAKES US HUMAN? Exploring the Artificial Realities of Daily Life Introduction: Only Human Chapter 1: Nature or Human Nurture? Chapter 2: The Human High-Five Advantage Chapter 3: The Human Dilemma Conclusion: The Human Animal

My latest video