Things I'd like to blog about (part II)

Part 1 (with explanation)

---

Problems with happiness research. E.g., people having just found a dime on the copy machine report greater overall life satisfaction. Also, the hedonic treadmill: Even people who become paralyzed eventually return to their original level of happiness within ~one year. And there are differences between types of happiness, particularly between pleasure and gratification. Pleasure is a signal or a byproduct; it should not be a goal.

Truth is overrated. Instead of trying to overcome biases, we should use them to our advantage.

Near death experiences. They have a fascinating history and are surprisingly common: 8 million people in the U.S. report having had one. Testable evidence for existence of the soul? There are many interesting studies on near death experiences and Duke even has a journal devoted to the subject.

Perfectionism and writing: A book needn't be an author's life work; a squib of novel insight with supporting evidence is sufficient. If you are going to have something be your life's work, let it be a book of your life's wisdom. Some people have 300 page books devoted to trivial topics and blog posts devoted to their life's wisdom; that seems ironic to me.

The idea of free will is not necessarily incompatible with determinism. (More from Wikipedia.)

Our evolutionary purpose might not be to advance our species, but to be the medium through which DNA evolves. Related: The peculiarity of sneezing -- sneezes happen not because the body is trying to eject harmful fluid but because the germ is trying to spread.

Things I learned about relationships from a very good course on Academic Earth.

Laughter, religion, and sleep: The three most puzzling things to psychologists.

How would formal education compare to a placebo, if one could be given? That is, what if people were put in a classroom and given meaningless homework assignments and tests ... how would the outcomes differ from traditional education? My guess is less than people think.

I am fascinated by the controversy over the definition of life. I wonder, could life be defined as that which has DNA, or are there exceptions?

It shows my arrogance to think that I can predict the next big thing, but I predict it will be a company that successfully filters content not based on keyword searches like Google but that delivers content straight to you based on knowledge of your individual interests and preferences. Sort of like the Netflix recommendation system but for more than movies and based on a much richer data set.

Is productivity spiritually important as Marty Nemko suggests or just another form of hedonistic pleasure?

People should be paid for their attention on the internet. How can that be arranged?