The Shallows

You may remember me raving about The Shallows by Nicholas Carr a few weeks ago. Well I read a review of the book by Sam Leith in last weekend’s Sunday Times. The review is good, but in case you are pushed for time (or on the Internet surrounded by hyperlinks) the two most important points (to my mind) are as follows.

1. “Your brain spends a huge amount of cognitive capital on processing the medium itself, leaving less working memory to process the message.”

2. “His argument is about the form , not the content.”

Future Files

I was looking online to see whether my Australian publisher had started to promote my new book (Future Minds) the other day when I stumbled across someone from Adelaide blogging about my old book saying that it was more or less rubbish and I was more or less an idiot for attempting to predict what might happen in the future. Apparently, this is because my source material for the book was reading newspapers and magazines and because my worldview was coloured by limited experience – namely that of a fifty-year-old bloke from Sydney.

OK, let’s get the record straight. I am a forty-year-old bloke that was living in Sydney but is now living in London. She should have foreseen this, but more on this point in a minute. My worldview is indeed coloured by experience (show me where it isn’t). As for reading newspapers and magazines, yes, I confess. I like newspapers, magazines and books. I also travel and talk to a diverse range of people from all walks of life that are more intelligent than I am to have my views challenged. Clearly, if one spent all day reading the National Enquirer or UFO Monthly one might have a strange view of the future, but I find the Economist, Financial Times, New York Times, New Scientist, Prospect and other publications quite useful.

I have nothing personal against Ms X  but I think she made two key mistakes. Firstly, she openly admitted that she hadn’t actually read Future Files and that her criticism was based on a small article in a regional newspaper. Secondly, her criticism becomes somewhat questionable when you realize what this woman does for a living. She’s a journalist and psychic. Go figure.

Too much email

According to Basex, a business research consultancy in the US, the (negative) cost of multi-tasking to the US economy is USD$650 billion annually. Modern office technology is a contributor. According to McKinsey, between 1997 and 2005 email traffic grew by a multiple of 215. There are now 77 billion corporate emails sent every working day and by 2012 may hit 150 billion.

Orders of Magnitude

What have I been up this? I’m glad you ask, dear reader. On Thursday I did a half-day workshop at the London Business School for a group of South African students. The workshop was on futures thinking and was interesting because many of the trends that I usually talk about do not apply in South Africa. For example, demographics are very different and the country faces some particular health issues also. If you are not familiar with the Mont Fleur or Dinokeng Scenarios for South Africa check them out (see link comments below).

The other thing I did this week was have dinner with Napier Collyns, co-founder of GBN. Or rather I didn’t. He was seated too far away and we only snatched five minutes conversation about reading, generational shifts and intelligence. This event was put together by a very smart guy called Noah Raford who is studying for a PhD in crowd-sourced scenarios at MIT.

Anyway, I did have a fascinating chat with one guy much older than myself who was lamenting the death of slide rules. His point was that we have lost thinking in terms of orders of magnitude. In the olden (slide rule) days one only got answers ranging from 1-10. You had to apply an order of magnitude to this and this made you think. I thought this was an interesting point.

Social Networks & Innovation

Ronald Burt, a sociologist at the University of Chicago, has spoken about  “structural holes” inside organisations. For example, a study by Mr Burt inside Raytheon (a defence company) found that not only did those managers with wider social networks come up with the best ideas but also that when people talked to close colleagues about their ideas these ideas tended not to be developed whereas those that went outside work for a discussion tended to get much further. In other words, homogeneity kills creativity at some level whereas serendipity encourages it. This makes perfect sense to me although perhaps someone should tell those individuals frantically widening their social networks on sites such as Facebook or Linked-in because Burt’s observation (and my intuition) says that such networks tend towards more of the same.

Sites such as these are largely predicated upon the belief that the more people who know the better you will perform. But these sites inevitably attract like-minded individuals and information and experience tends to narrow. Mr Burt is not against social networks as far as I can tell, far from it, but be does seem to be saying that one should pursue hybrid networks that have no apparent social structure.

Baby Mozart

The idea of the ‘Mozart Effect’ in children dates from 1993 when Frances Rauscher, a psychologist, wrote a paper that appeared in the American science journal Nature. The paper summarised a study in which Rauscher asked 36 college students to listen to 10 minutes of Mozart or 10 minutes of relaxation music. Immediately after listening to one or other form of music the students were asked to complete a series of spatial reasoning tests, including a test involving imagining what a piece of paper folded several times and then cut with scissors would look like once it was unfolded. The finding was that the students who had been listening to Mozart were better at these tasks than the students who had not.

What happened next was actually more interesting than the experiment. The media got hold of the story and started to extrapolate. First the media drew the conclusion that the effects of a simple paper folding exercise could be applied to broad intelligence and second they somehow drew the conclusion that what had worked with college students could also be applied to small children and even foetuses. This obviously excited all kinds of excitable people and pretty soon politicians were jumping on the musical bandwagon. In 1998, the Governor of the American state of Georgia insisted that all new mothers be given classic music to play to their infants whilst in the state of Florida it was mandated that day-care centres play classical music to their infant students.

Why did this happen? According to Nikhil Swaminathan, writing in the Scientific American, the reason was that the research seemed to connect directly with a belief in infant determinism (the idea that what happens to a child in their very early years has a critical, and possibly irreversible, impact on the rest of their life). Some musicians and ‘ologists still believe that music therapy has a profound effect on young brains, and there is some evidence (e.g. Alfred Tomatis) to suggest that music affects conditions such as dyslexia, autism and attention deficit disorders. But overall the jury is still out as to whether the effects are anything more than insignificant or temporary.

A German study by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in 2007 claimed that the Mozart Effect was nonexistent and many individuals have argued that young children would be better off learning an instrument rather than listening to a recording of Mozart. It could even be argued that placing a small child in front of a television to passively listen to music is actually damaging because it is once again an example of the negation of parental care. The parent is free to do something else whilst the child watches or listens to music but the child is then deprived of physical contact and misses out on free play.

An eye to the future

Vision Optic Co. in Japan has created glasses that stop people from falling asleep. The glasses, aimed at drivers and students preparing for exams, feature an earpiece vibrator that warns the wearer when they are about to nod off. When I was growing up the television closed down – literally – at midnight and there wasn’t much chance of going shopping or paying a few bills at midnight because all the shops firmly shut at 5.30pm. Convenience stores and online banking had yet to be invented. But it’s not just that we need more sleep to incubate ideas, we need to daydream more too. An article in the Boston Globe claims, when we daydream, a specific pattern of brain activity is activated. This is known as the default network and it is in this brain state that the mind starts to make connections between seemingly unrelated information, ideas or events.