Surviving the shower – That Daily Shower Can Be a Killer
It seems counterintuitive that simple chores and seemingly harmless everyday acts, such as showering, could be seen as hazardous and life threatening, but it’s the little things that may one day do us in.
The natives of New Guinea acknowledge how low risks can lead to death and act accordingly by sleeping in clear fields away from dead trees which can fall down during the night. Are they just being paranoid or is their attention to low risks justifiable? To most the possibility of dying by being crushed under a dead tree is 1 out of 1,000, but the New Guineas live each day as if it might be that 1 in 1,000 day.
Their well practiced habits to watch out for repetitive low risk (but of course still very risky) situations can be considered “constructive paranoia.” The New Guineas aren’t the only people in the world to embody this attitude. Pilots who have lists and lists of safety regulations and checks are just one example of being careful and meticulous to avoid the 0.000001% chance of dying by something that can be avoided by practicing such methods and avoiding the danger altogether. How can you die by sleeping under a dead tree if you never slept under the tree in the first place?
Americans tend to not think like the New Guineas do because of the availability of doctors, police officers, and 911 dispatchers. Also, we tend to underestimate the possibility of ourselves being in a life threatening situation. Take for instance, getting in a car crash. A young driver may think “It’ll never happen to me. I’m a careful driver,” and the parent may think “It’ll never happen to my child,” but the risk for getting into a car crash is still out there and often times happens when one least expects it to. A risk is a risk, no matter how small the risk is.
It is important to remain alert for these type of low risks that are often underestimated. I’m not saying to go through life paranoid that you can die by tripping on the sidewalk, or slipping in the shower, or getting crushed beneath a tree. Just to be vigilant and aware of the surroundings in order to lessen the chance of this day being that 1 in 1,000 day.
Do Toms shoes help anybody? – Do Toms Shoes Really Help People?
It seems counterintuitive that by trying to help provide shoes for a kid in Africa by participating in a buy-one-give-one program we are either not making any significant change to their life (as they already have shoes to wear), or worsening the local shoe company’s market.
By providing free shoes, food, and other goods to people in other countries that we believe need the provisions, we are actually making the locals dependent on the foreign organizations providing the free goods instead of the countries’ local governments and businesses (shoe stores, clothing stores, food markets, etc.). The perfect example would be the Haitians after the Haiti quake. Haitians began to rely on NGOs for the services and goods that could be provided by the Haitian government.
One company, Two Degrees Foods, is able to truly aid the people we intended to help with our “good deed” by working with the local industries of a country to identify malnourished children. They then contact the food manufacturers so the manufactures can produce food appropriate to the country involved.
Wanting to do a good deed by donating food and other goods like shoes isn’t a wrong thing to want. However, if by donating goods to a country’s we are essentially hindering the country from advancing and relying on themselves, then is the buy-one-give-one program really a good idea?
What Other People Say May Change What You See
It seems counterintuitive that people are given freedom of choice, but are ultimately influenced by social pressures to unconsciously conform to the majority’s choices.
Experiments have been done to see the effect of social conformity. One experiment, first conducted by Dr. Solomon Asch, is when test subjects were shown two cards. The first card had one line on it and the second card had three lines of different lengths on it. The subject had to decide which line on the second card matched the line on the first card. However, before the subject made their choice, they witnessed several other “subjects” choosing the same wrong line. The other “subjects” who went before the real subject were actors meant to impose peer pressure on the real subject. Surprisingly, 3 out of 4 subjects agreed with the actors’ wrong answer at least one time, and 1 out of 4 agreed with the actors’ decisions 50% of the time.
Why would they choose the wrong line if they know it’s wrong? Researchers discovered that seeing isn’t believing, but seeing what others (the majority) want you to believe. Using MRI scanners, researchers discovered that when agreeing with the majority on a wrong answer, the subject is doing so unconsciously (no brain activity in areas that show conscious decision making).
Social pressure is very real and very influential to how a person can perceive the natural world and make important decisions. Conforming to the social majority is sometimes easier, but isn’t standing firm with one’s decision more important? It is imperative for people to become aware of the social pressure and its effects because most of the time, they don’t even know they’re affected.
Rowan Counterintuitive 