MVP: Rd 23 v Roosters

[The Who]

Human nature. If its identified that someone is considered to have a problem, whether he or she has it or not, one's attention is focused on that area. We probably overlook the same issue in others because our attention hasn't been directed there. When one's attention is focused on something, you tend to look for it, and any examples no matter how infrequent, tend to reinforce the belief of the problem. The anecdotal becomes the general. Shock jock radio personalities use the same principle. Diverging somewhat, but as an example, one or two escape from a prison. Shock jocks focus on that and promote it as an endemic problem, when in fact it isn't. Just a clever prisoner or a minor gap in security. The problem existed but it wasn't representative of the whole security performance ( witnessed this a few times in my career). Yet the public is influenced to believe it is an endemic issue.

3. Insightfulness
2. Empathy
1. Use of correct grammar

 

[deanm]

3. Haumole
2. Garrick
1. Croker

 

[Bearfax]

3. Insightfulness
2. Empathy
1. Use of correct grammar

Not so much empathy. More to do with logic. We respond emotionality to issues, and this colours our perspective. Important to set aside your partiality and conjecture and allow the tangible evidence to lead you, even if it seems to oppose your preconceived perspective. Question everything, including your own frame of reference.

 

[The Who]

Not so much empathy. More to do with logic. We respond emotionality to issues, and this colours our perspective. Important to set aside your partiality and conjecture and allow the tangible evidence to lead you, even if it seems to oppose your preconceived perspective. Question everything, including your own frame of reference.

So. Is your MOM vote for Lodge, or Logic?

 

[Bearfax]

So. Is your MOM vote for Lodge, or Logic?

Its WHO we are my friend