Let's face it, humanity has a lousy definition, accompanying practice, and analysis of peace.
From the Britannica, we note that Daniel Kahneman got a Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002 for his integration of psychological research into economic science (a prize he shared with the American economist Vernon L. Smith for his use of laboratory experiments in economic analysis, which laid the foundation for the field of experimental economics); only means that the Nobel committee are just as prone to believing in a reproduction of an old theme of dichotomy (good/evil) cast into a new role with a new script (fast/slow). Thousands upon thousands of people have bought into accepting and sometimes selling what amounts to as an old snake oil presented in a new package. For all the presumed sophistication explicated in the labeled system 2 thinking, such believers have shown themselves to be a system 1 adherent; because most people have not surveyed multiple subjects deliberately looking for underlying basic patterns and then association them with brain hemispheric attributes which fully indicate the existence of a dichotomous/trichotomous arrangement. But if you coreleate one subject with another one subject and then use a dichotomy to explained some supposed connection between the two while harboring a two-framed dispostion to interpret perceptions accordingly; then you have a world-shattering theory for which you can get a prize from a committee of people who... for all we know, could be trained monkeys on corporate controlled leashes because they buy into such a primivity of conceptualization as having eyed a succulent piece of fruit.
Plain and simple, we are looking at a time of mental frame that we may call a "dichotomy" as a type of generalization that has been alternatively labeled to give the impression of a specificity in which to give the articulation greater value... all the while overlooking that it is one pattern amongst several others cast into the same small pond we may describe as a "law" (recurring event) of conservatism underlying all economic and other behavior that will be forced to be more conserved due to a decrease in resources... and this decrease will be part of an overall "adjustment rationalization" used to maintain some semblance of equilibrium in an incrementally deteriorating planetary environment and system. The interest being given to the "Thinking, Fast and Slow" perspective is like the character in a movie clinging onto a suitcase full of jewels, money or other currency with one hand while the necessity of using two hands to save themselves from a clift-hanging situation is not, in their two-patterned way of thinking— a viable option of consideration. They would rather die, or have everyone else killed than sacrifice that which they consider to be more valuable than life... their own or anyone else's. This is how the application of a two-based connection between human behavior and economics is being viewed... as a supportive rationale for clinging onto the suitcase and clinging on to the old dichotomy of Peace/War (conflict).
Similar to the idea of a "Correspondence Principle" in Quantum Mechanics, the assumed "correspondence" being made between Psychology and Economics within the constraints of a two-patterned equation (fast/slow) is a primitive equation. Though like an abacus that is skillfully used in the hands of a practiced user, the same goes for those skilled in the usage of two-patterned orientations. Yet, the fact that the world does not make the usage of an abacus part of the stock and trade of accounting, means that humanity has the ability to look outside the box. Humanity needs to do the same with respect to the constrained adoption of a two-patterned "set in stone" formulation for either economics or psychology/behaviorism. A reference to the correspondence principle may be of value to some readers at this point:
(The "Correspondence Principle" is a) philosophical guideline for the selection of new theories in physical science, requiring that they explain all the phenomena for which a preceding theory was valid. Formulated in 1923 by the Danish physicist Niels Bohr, this principle is a distillation of the thought that had led him in the development of his atomic theory, an early form of quantum mechanics.
Early in the 20th century, atomic physics was in turmoil. The results of experimentation presented a seemingly irrefutable picture of the atom: tiny electrically charged particles called electrons continuously moving in circles around an oppositely charged and extraordinarily dense nucleus. This picture was, however, impossible in terms of the known laws of classical physics, which predicted that such circulating electrons should radiate energy and spiral into the nucleus. Atoms, however, do not gradually lose energy and collapse. Bohr and others who tried to encompass the paradoxes of atomic phenomena in a new physical theory noted that the old physics had met all challenges until physicists began to examine the atom itself. Bohr reasoned that any new theory had to do more than describe atomic phenomena correctly; it must be applicable to conventional phenomena, too, in such a way that it would reproduce the old physics: this is the correspondence principle.
The correspondence principle applies to other theories besides quantum theory. Thus the mathematical formulations for the behaviour of objects moving at exceedingly high speeds, described by relativity physics, reduce for low values of speed to the correct descriptions of the motions of daily experience.
Source: "Correspondence Principle." Encyclop—dia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.
Such words as "paradox", "turmoil", "quantum" (quantity, group), "circles" (cyclicity), "energy" (currency, behavior), "classical" (traditional, status quo), "nucleus" (central authority, gravitational well, greed, "selfie"...) etc., have applications in both psychology and economics as well as multiple other subjects depending on the flexibility in one's thinking. In other words, such expressions can represent fundamental patterns instead of the specificity employed by a given writer or theorist. A comprehensive theory (a "Theory of Everything" if you will permit such an inclusion), must account for the place of earlier theories as well... as if to assume, without question, that all previous theories were in fact true because experiments used to validate the claims were also valid and irrefutable; which gives the scent of some sort of infallibility rule-of-thumb, might-is-right doctrine, or manifest destiny qualification.
A preferentially adhered to "pattern-of-two" portrait does not provide for a "correspondence principle" which is to be viewed as an irrefutable perspective because it supports some earlier two-patterned profile of similar thinking; though some might want to believe it is so because two-patterned perceptions in economics supports two-patterned perceptions in psychology and thus, vice-versa— but neither of them account for the overall distribution of other cognitive patterns and pertains to an isolated system of functionality within the territory of a defined set of created rules. In other words, it represents but a part of a much larger theory of "Quantimizing" the basic motions and designs of all thought patterns and is not applicable unless a concerted effort is meant to define a dichotomy such as the Peace/War example in economic terms. The preference for a two-patterned perspective is like interpreting the atom as having two parts (positive and negative) when clearly there are more... because there is a recurrence of singular, dual, and triple patterns; with shell configurations exhibiting higher values but nonetheless exhibit limitations... or conservations.
However, a pattern-of-two comparison formula can be used when associating classical and quantum mechanics together as described in the following Wikipedia article on the "Classical Limit"; and that furthermore, the short in-context reference to "relativity and other deformations" can be applied to the "deformations" occurring by way of an incrementally deteriorating environment and the "relativity" of recurring mental patterns whose changes are overlooked by being cloaked in the words and jargon of different eras, like the usage of the words "fast/slow" applied to a very old two-patterned cognitive paradigm. Yet, the language being used to find connections between economics and psychology is not only unable to remember the origin of its own impetus for development, but it is rather tunnel-visioned because it requires a set of blinders to be worn so as not to see, or if seen... to be dismissive of other dominant patterns of consideration. Instead of a three-shells game, it's a two-shells game like that of Peace and War acting as a bipolar pendulm.
The classical limit or correspondence limit is the ability of a physical theory to approximate or "recover" classical mechanics when considered over special values of its parameters. The classical limit is used with physical theories that predict non-classical behavior.
A heuristic postulate called the correspondence principle was introduced to quantum theory by Niels Bohr: it states that, in effect, some kind of continuity argument should apply to the classical limit of quantum systems as the value of Planck's constant normalized by the action of these systems tends to zero. Often, this is approached through "quasi-classical" techniques.
More rigorously, the mathematical operation involved in classical limits is a group contraction, approximating physical systems where the relevant action is much larger than Planck's constant h, so the "deformation parameter" h/S can be effectively taken to be zero. Thus typically, quantum commutators (equivalently, Moyal brackets) reduce to Poisson brackets, in a group contraction.
In quantum mechanics, due to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, an electron can never be at rest; it must always have a non-zero kinetic energy, a result not found in classical mechanics. For example, if we consider something very large relative to an electron, like a baseball, the uncertainty principle predicts that it cannot really have zero kinetic energy, but the uncertainty in kinetic energy is so small that the baseball can effectively appear to be at rest, and hence it appears to obey classical mechanics. In general, if large energies and large objects (relative to the size and energy levels of an electron) are considered in quantum mechanics, the result will appear to obey classical mechanics. It is less clear how the classical limit applies to chaotic systems, a field known as quantum chaos.
Quantum mechanics and classical mechanics are usually treated with entirely different formalisms: quantum theory using Hilbert space, and classical mechanics using a representation in phase space. It is possible to bring the two into a common mathematical framework in various ways. In the phase space formulation of quantum mechanics, which is statistical in nature, logical connections between quantum mechanics and classical statistical mechanics are made, enabling natural comparisons between them. Conversely, in the less well-known approach presented in 1932 by Koopman and von Neumann, the dynamics of classical mechanics have been formulated in terms of an operatorial formalism in Hilbert space, a formalism used conventionally for quantum mechanics.
In a crucial paper (1933), Dirac explained how classical mechanics is an emergent phenomenon of quantum mechanics: destructive interference among paths with non-extremal macroscopic actions S Â» h obliterate amplitude contributions in the path integral he introduced, leaving the extremal action Sclass, thus the classical action path as the dominant contribution, an observation further elaborated by Feynman in his 1942 PhD dissertation.
Relativity and other deformations
Other familiar deformations in physics involve the deformation of classical Newtonian into relativistic mechanics (special relativity), with deformation parameter v/c; the classical limit involves small speeds, so v/c→Ο, and the systems appear to obey Newtonian mechanics.
Similarly for the deformation of Newtonian gravity into General Relativity, with deformation parameter Schwarzschild-radius/characteristic-dimension, we find that objects once again appear to obey classical mechanics (flat space), when the mass of an object times the square of the Planck length is much smaller than its size and the sizes of the problem addressed.
Wave optics might also be regarded as a deformation of ray optics for deformation parameter λ/a. Likewise, thermodynamics deforms to statistical mechanics with deformation parameter 1/N.
Source: Wikipedia: Classical Limit
Let us provide some additional patterns-of-two examples so that no reader cannot begin to suggest that we are attempting to conceal the existence of a recurrence that they might wish to use as supportive evidence in their presumption for THE major pattern of mental organization nor that there aren't such a variety as to forego providing them with a necessary sampling (that they may not be aware of) in order that we may assert the existence of a recurring two-structured mental pattern from different perspectives. A sampling of hemispheric attributes and their patterned formulation by referring to page 6 in this series. The examples can be found about halfway down the page. One should also note that the inclined three-patterned left hemisphere appears to attempt to organize two-patterned information into groups of three and the right hemisphere appears to attempt to organized three-patterned information into groups of two.
Let's begin by providing various two-patterned lists associated with the left/right brain hemispheres:
Analytic Learners Like:
Global Learners Like:
|***With respect to the reference in the Left Hemisphere column about seeing in black and white, this author appears to have not taken into consideration the ideas of singularity, duality, and Triplicity.|
Many gifted children go unrecognised simply because they are operating with a brain dominance at odds with their parents and teachers.
Schools have traditionally valued children who learn well by sitting still, listening, speaking, reading and writing as directed, as being cleverer than those whose brain layout favours a different style of learning.
Logical, verbal, organised left-brain dominants (many of our teachers) find many right brain characteristics sloppy, careless, irrational and unfocused. So thousands of highly gifted, creative, original, very clever children are labeled as lazy, limited and "just average".
words and language
present and past
math and science
knows object name
"big picture" oriented
symbols and images
present and future
philosophy & religion
can "get it" (i.e. meaning)
knows object function
As an alternative view to dividing the brain in Right and Left, as an extension of the idea that men and women process information differently due to differences in the structures of their brain, take a look at the following two charts which illustrate the differences in Males and Females within the context of a religious perspective:
|According to the Bible, man and woman are alike in spirit, but not in soul and body. (For this reason the term "man" or "brothers" is often generic in the Bible when doctrinal teaching is in mind). The physical, anatomical differences between the sexes are well known. However man and woman are also quite different as far as the soul is concerned. One possible way of differentiating between men and women in terms of priorities and specialties is suggested by the following table. God has built a vast wealth of variety and diversity into the human gene pool. Many variations in physical characteristics as well as some personality and emotional characteristics are governed by genetic factors. In terms of behavior, there are wide ranges in what can be considered normal masculinity and femininity.|
Leads, takes charge
Initiates: Hunts, Ranges, Thrusts
Values logical thinking, Logos-centered mind
Bases decisions on reasoning more than emotions or intuition
Assertive, aggressive, outgoing towards the world
Provides outside support and protects (as a soldier)
Feels ill-at-ease in passive, receptive roles
May under-value importance of emotions and intuition
Specialist in "Doingness," "Withoutness"
Mechanistic, scientific, digital-thinking
Divided left and right brain
Nestles, nurtures, shelters, traps heals
Values emotions highly, relationship orientation
Heightened intuitive ability and perception
At ease in a passive, receptive role
Takes leadership with difficulty when male leader defaults
Natural concern for the present quality of life
Specialist in "Beingness" and "Withinness"
Artistic, creative, analog thinking
More unified left and right brain, holistic thinking
As with any information, one must take into account the sex, age, and overall demographics of the person(s) making the compilation.
|The human race is fallen, self-centered, corrupted and mortally damaged by the sin of Adam. All aspects of our humanity have been affected. For the sake of discussion one can make a table of what might be considered archetypal aspects of our fallen sexuality. The table below is suggested as a model for discussion purposes and is not a description of specific men or women, obviously!|
|NEGATIVE MASCULINITY||NEGATIVE FEMININITY|
Authoritarian, domineering, ruthless, despotic
Lords it over others
Devalues importance of emotions
Overly logical, methodical, rigid
Cold, indifferent, impersonal, unapproachable
Demands respect of subordinates
Intimidates others or rules them by fear
Unforgiving, and unwilling to be a team-member
Boring, unimaginative, overly self-controlled
Overly logical, unable to be spontaneous
Willing to compromise to gain position or power
A beast, tyrant or a despot
Irrational in rejecting logic, emotionally controlled
Gives love or affection but extracts a price
Selfishly concerned with appearances and prestige
Entraps others for her own purposes
Demands attention and recognition
A witch, sorceress or seductress
The following example is a re-adapted view of the brain's divisions, parts, and some would say functions, into an overall 3-patterned division with sub-divisions.
3 Section Division
General Primary Division
Constituent Parts Division
Functional Brain Division
|Cerebral Hemispheres||Cerebral cortex:
Information was liberally adapted from: