Category: babl

language has no meaning, words mean everything, the platform of thought is language, the mind is mapped by its words … yet change happens

Reading List: June 20

Posted on Posted in as written, babl, book shelf

References
Bainbridge, T. F., Quinlan, J. A., Mar, R. A., Smillie, L. D., Fajkowska, M. (2019). Openness/intellect and susceptibility to pseudo–profound bullshit: A replication and extension. European Journal of Personality, 33(1), 72–88.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Beals, K. L., Smith, C. L., Dodd, S. M., Angel, J. L., Armstrong, E., Blumenberg, B., Girgis, F. G., Turkel, S., Gibson, K. R., Henneberg, M., Menk, R., Morimoto, I., Sokal, R. R., Trinkaus, E. (1984). Brain size, cranial morphology, climate, and time machines. Current Anthropology, 25(3), 301–330.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Bednarik, R. G. (2014). Doing with less: Hominin brain atrophy. Homo, 65(6), 433–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchb.2014.06.001
Google Scholar
Bilker, W. B., Hansen, J. A., Brensinger, C. M., Richard, J., Gur, R. E., Gur, R. C. (2012). Development of abbreviated nine-item forms of the Raven’s standard progressive matrices test. Assessment, 19(3), 354–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191112446655
Google Scholar
Bjorklund, D. F., Kipp, K. (2002). Social cognition, inhibition, and theory of mind: The evolution of human intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J. C. (Eds.), The evolution of intelligence (pp. 27–54). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Google Scholar
Burke, H. R. (1985). Raven’s Progressive Matrices (1938): More on norms, reliability, and validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41(2), 231–235.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Byrne, R. W. (1996). Machiavellian intelligence. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews: Issues, News, and Reviews, 5(5), 172–180.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Byrne, R. W., Whiten, A. (1990). Machiavellian intelligence: Social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes, and humans. Behaviour and Philosophy, 18(1), 73–75.
Google Scholar
Carson, T. (2016). Frankfurt and Cohen on bullshit, bullshitting, deception, lying, and concern with the truth of what one says. Pragmatics & Cognition, 23(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.23.1.03car
Google Scholar
Čavojová, V., Brezina, I., Jurkovič, M. (2020). Expanding the bullshit research out of pseudo-transcendental domain. Current Psychology, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00617-3
Google Scholar
Crow, T. J. (1993). Sexual selection, Machiavellian intelligence, and the origins of psychosis. The Lancet, 342(8871), 594–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(93)91415-I
Google Scholar
Cunnane, S. C., Harbige, L. S., Crawford, M. A. (1993). The importance of energy and nutrient supply in human brain evolution. Nutrition and Health, 9(3), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/026010609300900307
Google Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. (1998). The social brain hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 6(5), 178–190.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
Frankfurt, H. G. (2009). On bullshit. Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Gavrilets, S., Vose, A. (2006). The dynamics of Machiavellian intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(45), 16823–16828. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0601428103
Google Scholar | Crossref
Geher, G., Miller, G. (Eds.). (2007). Mating intelligence: Sex, relationships, and the mind’s reproductive system. Psychology Press.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Grabo, A., Spisak, B. R., van Vugt, M. (2017). Charisma as signal: An evolutionary perspective on charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(4), 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.05.001
Google Scholar
Greengross, G., Miller, G. (2011). Humor ability reveals intelligence, predicts mating success, and is higher in males. Intelligence, 39(4), 188–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2011.03.006
Google Scholar
Handel, M. I. (1982). Intelligence and deception. The Journal of Strategic Studies, 5(1), 122–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402398208437104
Google Scholar
Humphrey, N. K. (1976). The social function of intellect. In Bateson, P. P. G., Hinde, R. A. (Eds.), Growing points in ethology (pp. 303–317). Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Jerrim, J., Parker, P., Shure, D. (2019, April). Bullshitters. Who are they and what do we know about their lives? [IZA Discussion Paper No. 12282]. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3390272
Google Scholar
Lee, K., Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(2), 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8
Google Scholar
Littrell, S., Risko, E. F., Fugelsang, J. A. (2020). The Bullshitting Frequency Scale: Development and psychometric properties. British Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12379
Google Scholar
Littrell, S., Risko, E. F., Fugelsang, J. A. (2021). “You can’t bullshit a bullshitter” (or can you?): Bullshitting frequency predicts receptivity to various types of misleading information. British Journal of Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12447
Google Scholar
Malhotra, N., Krosnick, J. A., Haertel, E. (2007). The psychometric properties of the GSS wordsum vocabulary test. GSS Methodological Report, 11, 1–63.
Google Scholar
McCarthy, I. P., Hannah, D., Pitt, L. F., McCarthy, J. M. (2020). Confronting indifference toward truth: Dealing with workplace bullshit. Business Horizons, 63(3), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2020.01.001
Google Scholar
McKeown, G. J. (2013). The analogical peacock hypothesis: The sexual selection of mind-reading and relational cognition in human communication. Review of General Psychology, 17(3), 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032631
Google Scholar
McLaurin, W. A., Jenkins, J. F., Farrar, W. E., Rumore, M. C. (1973). Correlations of IQs on verbal and nonverbal tests of intelligence. Psychological Reports, 33(3), 821–822.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
McNally, L., Brown, S. P., Jackson, A. L. (2012). Cooperation and the evolution of intelligence. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1740), 3027–3034. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.0206
Google Scholar | Crossref
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
Miller, G. (2000, October). Sexual selection for indicators of intelligence. In Novartis foundation symposium (pp. 260–270). John Wiley, 1999.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Miller, G. F., Todd, P. M. (1998). Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(5), 190–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(98)01169-3
Google Scholar
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision making, 10(6), 549–563.
Google Scholar | ISI
Pennycook, G., Rand, D. G. (2019). Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality, 88, 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12476
Google Scholar
Petrocelli, J. V. (2018). Antecedents of bullshitting. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 249–258.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Raichle, M. E., Gusnard, D. A. (2002). Appraising the brain’s energy budget. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(16), 10237–10239. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.172399499
Google Scholar | Crossref
Rosenberg, K., Trevathan, W. (2002). Birth, obstetrics and human evolution. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 109(11), 1199–1206. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-0528.2002.00010.x
Google Scholar
Roth, G., Dicke, U. (2005). Evolution of the brain and intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), 250–257.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Schillaci, M. A. (2006). Sexual selection and the evolution of brain size in primates. PLoS One, 1(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000062
Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L. (2002). What are big brains for? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(7), 4141–4142. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.082105099
Google Scholar | Crossref
Sharma, S., Bottom, W. P., Elfenbein, H. A. (2013). On the role of personality, cognitive ability, and emotional intelligence in predicting negotiation outcomes: A meta-analysis. Organizational Psychology Review, 3(4), 293–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386613505857
Google Scholar
Stone, V. E. (2006). Theory of mind and the evolution of social intelligence. In Cacioppo, J. T., Visser, P. S., Pickett, C. L. (Eds.), Social neuroscience: People thinking about thinking people (pp. 103–129). MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Thiessen, D., Gregg, B. (1980). Human assortative mating and genetic equilibrium: An evolutionary perspective. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1(2), 111–140.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Turpin, M. H., Walker, A. C., Kara-Yakoubian, M., Gabert, N. N., Fugelsang, J. A., Stolz, J. A. (2019). Bullshit makes the art grow profounder. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(6), 658–670.
Google Scholar
Walker, A. C., Turpin, M. H., Stolz, J. A., Fugelsang, J. A., Koehler, D. J. (2019). Finding meaning in the clouds: Illusory pattern perception predicts receptivity to pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(2), 109–119.
Google Scholar
Whiten, A. (2018). Social, Machiavellian and cultural cognition: A golden age of discovery in comparative and evolutionary psychology. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 132(4), 437–441. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000135
Google Scholar

Making The Print

Posted on Posted in art school, babl, coursenotes, da net

Making The Print

Finding your way, in the absence of a guide, means asking along that way from some who may be as lost as you.

the learner learns from those around them. the first steps toward the print are hesitant – building that vocabulary will be the most important part of your first few years. The bigger the range of options you have, the wider your creative possibility

sadly, in the online world Ansel Adam’s “The Print” serves as dictionary and thesaurus. The landscape print, as realized by Adams, and maybe Minor White is the entirety of the image bank. So, when encountering work by other imagists, objections to the limited, or excessive tones used forms the measure, the twain of acceptance and comprehension of the image.

The limitations of the weekenders are their lack of interest, not their lack of knowledge. They limit themselves, reducing their range of creative movement

Timid Search

most amateurs and workshop wanderers are timid, and constrained in their visual range. by taking on distinctive, different approaches to the print, they will encounter more permission in making their own work

by permission I mean allowance – greater range of acceptance, or at least understanding by looking; Increase your visual dexterity.

bw prints

Two Alternate Vantages

Henry Wessel (b:1942 – ), and Ralph Gibson(b:1939 – ) Henry moved from the East to West; Ralph moved from the West to the East.

Ralph Gibson learned photography in the Navy, then spent 2 years at SFAI before assisting, first , Dorthea Lange (1961-62), then Robert Frank (1967-68). Dorthea Lange provided Gibson with a mantra encouragement to find his “departure point.”

Henry Wessel taught at SFAI, having gotten his MFA from VSW in 72. He’d been in California (71) where the light had become his banner. About his arrival from a cold Rochester January (’71) he says:

I was like a starving man at a banquet. It was the first time I’d been and I was struck by the light, the variety of the landscapes, and the urban centers. It’s the place I keep coming back to, the closest thing I have to a concept.

giving yourself permission to work outside the lines

Both photographers have mastery, but each makes different prints; prints that diverge from the Medium Grey Full Scale standard which many workshops advance as the ultimate print. Full Scale negative onto a Full Scale print- this is an easy way of discriminating good from bad work. Of course, that approach isn’t what either of these masters holds themself to. Neither is a sloppy printer. Their works are distinctive, repeatable and each remarkable for attending to different visual intents. Both printers hold out masterly approaches.

Together they assist finding a path between counterpoints. not opposite poles, but matched endpoints such as Gibson’s strong toned prints, and Wessel’s broad middles. One offers Bang, the other Wiff.