Memory is less than fully reliable. People usually get more certain about past decisions/observations over time. It's a trick the brain plays on itself--evolutionarily useful for creatures trying to survive in nature, but problematic for modern humans aiming for objectivity. 4/x
-
Show this thread
-
Comey's reexamining a past decision, interrogating himself. He wants to believe he acted objectively, following the law and nothing else. But could the widespread assumption that Hillary would be the next president have influenced his decisions? Maybe. That's being honest. 5/x
2 replies 5 retweets 27 likesShow this thread -
Leaders who recognize their own fallibility and interrogate past decisions will make better decisions in the future. But many Americans want unwavering certainty. Like a child with a parent, they're not sure what to do and find comfort believing that someone else does. 6/x
2 replies 9 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
Constant uncertainty is a terrible trait in leaders. But unexamined certainty is bad too. No matter what else you think of Comey, it's good he asked himself "Why did I do that?" and admitted subconscious/non-objective factors may have played a role. Everyone should do that. (END)
1 reply 8 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @NGrossman81
Everything you said in this thread.
It's why I read you despite my not knowing what you're talking about much of the time. Sometimes you'll flip that switch and the bulb illuminates.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @waningestrogen
Thanks. Glad you liked it. Would you mind elaborating on what you mean by "not knowing what you're talking about much of the time"? On Twitter, Medium, or both? Because I didn't explain something clearly, or because I sometimes assume readers are already familiar with something?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NGrossman81
Your content is often beyond my realm of understanding. I try to read beyond my capabilities. Sometimes it takes, sometimes it doesn't. I don't read enough on Medium. The 24/7/365 newscycle has been overwhelming since January 2017.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @waningestrogen
It really has been overwhelming, hasn't it? And thanks for the feedback. I try to straddle the line between accessibility and complexity, aiming to write for audiences with both higher and lower levels of knowledge about a given topic. Sometimes I pull that off, sometimes I don't
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @NGrossman81
I appreciate that. If my comprehension was better (but I'm aging here), I might cut my reading list. Sometimes I need to read several takes on the same story before the aha moment. We all learn differently. I relate to words more than video and soundbites.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @waningestrogen @NGrossman81
Not saying, but have wondered if that contributes to the division happening now. News/media has undergone a seachange the last 20-25 years. If people don't read but only take in 30-60 second soundbites, and draw conclusions from that, well, I think we end up with a Trump.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I think that's played some role, yes, though it's hard to figure out how much. Basically, it's the information revolution--the internet and now social media. Shorter, less detailed, more sensationalist news.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.