Faith and knowledge must not be confused. There is a firewall between them. Knowledge depends on evidence and argument; it critically remains open to uncertainty, investigation, and revision. Faith is a well-imagined rock.
Is happiness a subjective, inner, feeling, or is it subject to analytical examination? If so, can your life and your happiness be objectively evaluated? Many philosophers but few psychologists believe so.
Is there such a thing as bogus happiness or bovine contentment among humans? Yes, there is: at least in thought experiments. Unabashedly hypothetical, thought experiments can show you what you would not want.
Emotionally unidimensional McConaughey’s Cooper unifies quantum and relativity theory, saves humanity, and finds love. Meanwhile, Michael Caine and Matt Damon explore life on the other side of the wormhole as supporting actors.
Food and drink are culturally variable, and so is the design of the places that offer them. A general nod to “cultural differences” does not explain much, especially when the purveying corporation is the same globalized one.
Ethnocentrism (aka ingroup-favoritism in academic speak) is considered a bane of humanity but it feels terrific during the World Cup. Its power is so great that people look for pathetic extensions when the primary passionate form of ethnocentrism is no longer available. To see how this works, let’s take a look at the “Brazilian Dilemma.”
Questions of psychological interest pop up everywhere. My approach to blogging is promiscuous, opportunistic, and heterodox. I comment on a variety of issues, ranging from animal behavior to the human experience of guilt and happiness to philosophy of science. I draw on personal experience, recent public events such as movies or media debacles, and of course the peer-reviewed archive of our field.