October 2, 2011

Balance of Forces

Theatre of Operations



Balance Of Forces

Green ArmyNon-AlignedBlue Army
Command and Control
Finance, Logistics and Supply
Governments Countries who have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol (192) [Note 1] Countries who have signed not ratified (1) or who have not signed (3) the Kyoto Protocol [Note 1]Countries that have withdrawn (1) [Note 1]
Non-Government OrganizationsEnvironmental
International Development

Regulated Industries Renewable Energy
Nuclear
Energy Efficiency

Fossil fuels
Chemical
Tobacco
Mining
Fishing
Research and Development
Scientific Bodies [Note 2]

Free market think tanks
[Note 3]
Climate Researchers97%3%
Synthesis ReportsIPCC
US Global Change Research Program
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment


National Academies of Science32


General Science8
Earth Sciences85 [Note 4]
Meteorology and Oceanography61 [Note 5]
Paleoclimatology2

Biology and Life Sciences7

Human Health7

Miscellaneous5

Communications
Media Hubs

News Corporation
Network HubsConsensus Websites
Contrarian Websites
Field Operations



Industry front organisations, spokespersons and "white coats". [Note 3]
Washington Lobbyists [Note 8]Renewables (138)
Fossil Fuels (2,672)
Foot soldiers and insurgents

Tea Party (Mayer, 2010)


Notes

  1. Wikipedia.  List of Kyoto Protocol signatories, 7 July 2017.
    Signed and ratified: 192 parties.
    Signed but not intending to ratify: United States.
    Former parties: Canada renounced the convention effective 15 December 2012.
    UNFCCC members but not signatories: Andorra, Palestine, South Sudan.
  2. Wikipedia (2011):
    Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement, no scientific body of national or international standing rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.
  3. Exxon Secrets

  4. Wikipedia (2011):
    American Association of Petroleum Geologists
    American Geological Institute
    American Institute of Professional Geologists
    Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences
    Geological Society of Australia
  5. Wikipedia (2011):
    American Association of State Climatologists
  6. Goodell, Jeff.  As the World Burns, Rolling Stone Politics, 6 January 2010.
    [According] to the Center for Public Integrity, the number of lobbyists devoted to climate change had soared by more than fivefold since 2003, to a total of 2810 — or five lobbyists for every lawmaker in Washington. …
    Only 138 of the lobbyists were pushing for alternative energy — the rest were heavily weighted toward the old fossil-fuel mafia, most of whom oppose tough carbon caps.



Contents


Balance of Forces

The Personalities of God

Right Wing Authoritarianism and Integrative Complexity

References


What Is God's Personality?


America's Four Gods


The Baylor Religion Survey


Figure 13:
Categories of America's Four Gods
(p 26)


Type A: Authoritarian God

Individuals who believe in the Authoritarian God tend to think that God is highly involved in their daily lives and world affairs.
They tend to believe that God helps them in their decision-making and is also responsible for global events such as economic upturns or tsunamis.
They also tend to feel that God is quite angry and is capable of meting out punishment to those who are unfaithful or ungodly.


Type B: Benevolent God

[Believers] in a Benevolent God [also] tend to think that God is very active in our daily lives. [However,] the Benevolent God is mainly a force of positive influence in the world and is less willing to condemn or punish individuals.


Type C: Critical God

Believers in a Critical God feel that God really does not interact with the world.
Nevertheless, God still observes the world and views the current state of the world unfavorably.
These individuals feel that God’s displeasure will be felt in another life and that divine justice may not be of this world.


Type D: Distant God

… These individuals tend towards thinking about God as a cosmic force which set the laws of nature in motion.
As such, God does not “do” things in the world and does not hold clear opinions about our activities or world events.


The Four Personalities of God
(Adapted from Figure 14, Atheists removed)
High Engagement (57%)
Authoritarian33%
Benevolent24%

Low Engagement (43%)
Distant26%
Critical17%

High Anger (50%)
Authoritarian33%
Critical17%

Low Anger (50%)
Benevolent24%
Distant26%


Parental Bonding Instrument
High Control / High CareHigh Control / Low Care
Low Control / Low CareLow Control / High Care


(p 27)

(Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion and Department of Sociology, Baylor University, September 2006)


Does God Have a Heart?


Andrew Newberg and Mark Waldman

The Cultural Evolution of God

In Western culture, the authoritarian notion of God dominated human through until the 1400s, when a series of events undermined the power of the [universal] church.
The Black Plague wiped out half the population of Europe [undermining] religious authority [and as science] gained favor … God retreated farther into the heavens.
In a minority of Jewish, Islamic, and Christian texts, God's wrath also [receded,] to be replaced by [conceptions] of a more benevolent and mystical force.

[In the 16th and 17th centuries, Europe was wracked by religious wars] between competing Christian theologies [and the] Catholic Church splintered as people [sought] a more personal God.
[Some of these fled to the New World, seeking] the freedom to practice religion as they saw fit …
(p 117)


The War Between the American Gods

According to the Baylor study, more than half of Americans are intolerant of non-Christian values …
Two other studies … found that 17-18% of Americans … believed that their religion should be the only true religion in the world.
[29%] said that we should … try to convert people of other religious faiths [to Christianity. …]
(p 121)

[Nevertheless, if] you put all the surveys together, there appears to be a slow decline in religious intolerance, especially over the last five years …

[In] each new generation Americans shift their allegiance from Christianity to other faiths or systems of belief. …
[Indeed,] Protestantism has been slowing declining since 1965.
(p 122)

(How God Changes Your Brain, Ballantine, 2009)


Right Wing Authoritarianism And Integrative Complexity


Right-wing authoritarianism


Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) … is defined by three attitudinal and behavioral clusters which correlate together:

  1. Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submissiveness to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.
  2. Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness directed against deviants, outgroups, and other people that are perceived to be targets according to established authorities.
  3. Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the traditions and social norms that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities, and a belief that others in one's society should also be required to adhere to these norms.


… The "right wing" in right-wing authoritarianism does not necessarily refer to someone's politics, but to psychological preferences and personality.
It means that the person tends to follow the established conventions and authorities in society.
In theory, the authorities could have either right-wing or left-wing political views.

Milton Rokeach's dogmatism scale was an early attempt to measure pure authoritarianism, whether left or right.
The scale was carefully designed to measure "closed mindedness" without regard to ideology.
Nevertheless, researchers found that it correlated with British political conservativism.

In a similar line of research, Philip Tetlock found that right wing beliefs are associated with less integrative complexity than left wing beliefs.
People with moderate liberal attitudes had the highest integrative complexity in their cognitions.

There have been a number of other attempts to identify "left-wing authoritarians" in the United States and Canada.
These would be people who submit to leftist authorities, are highly conventional to liberal viewpoints, and are aggressive to people who oppose left-wing ideology.
These attempts have failed because measures of authoritarianism always correlate at least slightly with the right.
There are certainly extremists across the political spectrum, but most psychologists now believe that authoritarianism is a predominantly right-wing phenomenon.

Although authoritarians in North America generally support conservative political parties, this finding must be considered in a historical and cultural context.
For example, during the Cold War, authoritarians in the United States were usually anti-communist, whereas in the Soviet Union, authoritarians generally supported the Communist Party and were opposed to capitalism.
Thus, authoritarians generally favor the established ways and oppose social and political change.

(Wikipedia, 8 September 2011)


Integrative complexity


Integrative complexity … refers to the degree to which thinking and reasoning involve the recognition and integration of multiple perspectives and possibilities and their interrelated contingencies. …

Integrative complexity is a measure of the intellectual style used by individuals or groups in processing information, problem-solving, and decision making.

Complexity looks at the structure of one's thoughts, while ignoring the contents.

[Integrative] complexity has two components: …
  • Differentiation refers to the perception of different dimensions when considering an issue.
  • Integration refers to the recognition of cognitive connections among differentiated dimensions or perspectives.

(Wikipedia, 5 November 2011)


References

No comments:

Post a Comment