right vs left

Rightwingers are mostly religious. They're generally happier than lefties, not only the rich ones, because they believe that people have free choice. The good book says so. Free choice negates hopelessness which increases happiness. Free choice is also why they like lots of jails. People make decisions solely through their own power and should live with the consequences. This, says the righties, is called responsibilty. Responsibility can be lessened by forgiveness, the other religious thing that's amusingly not that big for them, or blame (eg. satan) but are not invoked unless it is in their own self interest. Wealthy people are generally right wing. Aside from not wanting to pay more taxes, they believe they are where they are because they chose/sacrificed/saved/scrimped/etc. to be where they are. Some believe they've been chosen (You will know them by their fruits Matthew 7:16.). Either way, they believe this is no fluke and lord help those who attempt to topple their gravy train.

Lefties are generally brighter. It takes a fair amount of reasoning to find flaws in society and they do so brilliantly. They can and do find victimhood in heaven. They are generally a miserable lot. They believe the system has oppressed those (sometimes themselves but also a group too stupid, in the lefties eye of course, to see for themselves) who have not "made it" in society. One is where one is because the system is skewed that way. If society were constructed different, we'd have a brand new batch of "losers" hence the lucky few should help because it is only dumb luck that they are in the position they are in. There is little personal responsibility, which leads to hopelessness and unhappiness, because the blame is held for the society/nature not the individual. They are not religious ,aside from Marx's opiate of the masses thesis, because they believe religion is a biased man made construct. Ironically, they are far more forgiving to individuals then their religious right counter parts, again because they believe in randomness.

how to spot a liar

Rt handers=> up and left to remember
up and rt to make up, may look right back at u to see if u are believing it. Lying generally makes most uncomfortable hence they seem physically uncomfortable and eager to leave. They may also position something between themselves and the listener. Also may change voice.
Lying=3 parts of the brain
recall= 1 part of brain.
How does one tell if someone is lying in poker?

Stimulating the brain with a very low electric current can enhance a person's maths ability for up to six months

Researchers at Britain's Oxford University studied 15 volunteers and demonstrated for the first time that electrical stimulation of the brain improved their performance in a series of maths assessments, and continued to do so half a year later.

"We're not advising people to go around giving themselves electric shocks, but we are extremely excited by the potential of our findings and are now looking into the underlying brain changes," said Oxford's Cohen Kadosh, who led the study.

"Electrical stimulation is unlikely to turn you into the next Einstein, but if we're lucky it might ... help some people to cope better with maths."

Scientists said last month they found that using electrodes to stimulate areas deep within the brain might be able to help patients with severe obsessive compulsive disorder who do not respond to other treatment.

For this study, 15 student volunteers aged 20 and 21 were taught symbols that represented different numerical values, and then timed to see how quickly and accurately they could complete a series of maths puzzles based on those symbols.

The teaching took place over six days and each day the volunteers were given either a placebo or a one milliamp electrical stimulus from right to left, or vice versa, across the parietal lobe -- a brain area important for processing maths. The stimulus was administered for about 20 minutes each day, Kadosh said in a telephone interview.

"You can feel it a little bit, but only for the first 15 to 30 seconds or so," he said. "And it's not at all painful. It's just like a tingling sensation in your skull." He said none of the volunteers reported any side effects from the stimulation.

The results published in the journal Current Biology showed volunteers who were given the electrical stimulation from right to left parietal lobes performed best.

This group was re-tested six months after the training and the scientists found they maintained a high performance level.

Christopher Chambers of Cardiff University's School of Psychology, who was not involved in the study, said the findings were "intriguing" and could have far-reaching implications.

"The results of this study ... have exciting ramifications for the use of brain stimulation techniques in other domains," he said in an email comment.

"The ability to tweak activity in parts of the brain, turning it slightly 'up' or 'down' at will, opens the door to treating a range of psychiatric and neurological problems, like compulsive gambling or visual impairments following stroke."

on truth

Truth is a slippery idea. He who claims to be or know the arbiter, whether it be Jesus, science etc. should always be looked at with a suspicious eye. Dogma leads to passion which leads to memes. The problems with memes is that they are like rats, difficult to rid of.

volatility and feeling pain in portfolio

"Brandes Investment Partners, the fund company, has recently done work based on insights from the Nobel prize winner Daniel Kahneman, known for his work on “prospect theory.” This theory demonstrates that investors feel losses twice as much as they do gains. As a result, the stress of losses can cause emotions to kick in and make investors abandon investments, even ones they intended to hang on to for the long term.
In his book, Fooled by Randomness, the mathematician and former trader Nicholas Taleb applied this theory to a portfolio that returns 15 per cent annually over 20 years, with 10 per cent volatility along the way. He calculated that someone with this portfolio would stand a 7-per-cent chance of losing money over the course of any given year, a 23-per-cent chance of losing money in a quarter, a 33-per-cent chance of losing money in a month, a 46-per-cent chance of losing money during a day and a 50-per-cent chance of losing money in any hour."

Why stuff is insatiable

What is stuff? All good and services? Yes, but what else. Stuff is a communication tool. It let's other humans know your rank in the hierarchy of the pack. Humans in the society pack are in constant movement, some moving up , some moving sideways and some moving down. I know this because they show me. Similarly like dogs communicating by pissing on trees. ( labour for money and money for stuff; labour for stuff). There are ALWAYS younger, stronger people rising to usurp our position in this pack. It is our instincts to compete with them. It is our instinct to gather more stuff to maintain our position. The downside with this is society uses a disproportionate amount of resources to create stuff w/c has very little use in the big picture of society other than to communicate rank. The upside is that society is motivated to create and this in of itself spurs employment and possibly innovation.
Stuff is all goods and services. Hence the economy is defined as the production and distribution of stuff. Money is then an IOU of stuff owed. If one lends "stuff owed" to someone, since one would have to spend part of ones life without all ones stuff, one generally gets more stuff to compensate with the now less time one has. Or simply less time with stuff-> more stuff with less time. People need a certain amount of stuff to sustain themselves and generally trade labour for stuff. According to the commies, the fair price of a particular item should be the sum of the labour to produce the item plus the material. The material costs should reflect the price of finding the material, maintaining the upkeep of the find, extracting the material and delivering the material. If an entrepreneur is able to produce and distribute an equal amount of stuff at a faster rate with equal labour (more efficient), he will invalidate the commies idea f value.

Dasein

Since space/time is a non separable entity, says Albert, we will hold space constant in this discussion. The present is a thin line between the past and the future hence the only true way to live in the present is to repeat the present. Consider music. Is it not a set of notes strung together. The whole set of notes is the music. To live in the present with the music is to repeat the note. Similarly consider a book. Is it not a set of letters strung together. To live in the present in the book, would we not have to reduce our reading/writing down to one word, word,word,word or maybe even one letter l,l,l. Alas the entire structure tends to become absurd. It may be self confirming but evolutionary nature has not evolved us to operate as such. Perhaps this is what Heidegger meant with dasein. Being in time is to listen to the a preferred set of notes vs a more consciously effort of reducing them.

Labor, money and FSC

We all have a problem, we must feed, shelter and clothe ourselves. Let us call food, shelter and clothing FSC. This has been a problem of human kind forever. I work this problem by doing the following. I trade labor for money. I trade money for FSC. Hence I trade labor for FSC by the transitive property. More briefly, Labor =money =FSC. I dislike labor but I need FSC. This is a problem. Murders have been and will continue to be done in the name of this problem. How can I solve my problem? Ideally I could get something else to do the labour, but I haven't any idea how to make a slave robot. What a beautiful world it would be to make labor obsolete for humans. FSC would no longer be a problem. My only other solution is to live off cash flow from capital. ...More

It appears we be through space/time we encounter an infinite amount of choices. Even a prisoner has many choices, should I behave, should I try to esc

It appears we be through space/time we encounter an infinite amount of choices. Even a prisoner has many choices, should I behave, should I try to escape, should I try to break these chains etc. Making these decisions is our freedom. Should one have the freedom to make bad choices is another question. Bad choices would lead to unhappiness but perhaps it is a probabilistic measure. In heaven there are infinitely less choices because allowing bad choices would lead to un-bliss like conditions. It seems ironic that people who choose wisely are allowed into heaven to continue their good choices yet bad people who have chosen badly are banned from the very place they need, a place to guide their choices.

values

Values are things I deem important=things I give meaning to. How do I give meaning? Ultimately by my conscious choice, that is a first person account of me being w/c is influenced by my biochemistry, others and the outside world (phenomena). Nietzsche-"We have measured the value of the world according to categories that refer to a purely fictitious world". ...More

choosing means not choosing

One must decide between A or B. Choosing A means not choosing B and not getting any of B's benefits or pleasures. This is called an opportunity cost. We can construct a counter-factual of non choice B and posit a comparison of A and B.  Can one become a great musician, or athlete without choosing. No, one must always forego something else to get this mastery. Watching tv, socializing etc are all choices and may have to be foregone in the pursuit of excellence. Choosing is hard because most people don't choose fanatically. They flow their choices from day to day often mastering nothing.

Godless world

There is a void when god dies. How is man to make it in a godless world? Is one now devoid of essence? Arther Schopenhauer thought life was brutal and the best thing is never being born, the second best thing is to die young. The only thing meaningful in this meaningless existence is the arts and music(ironic?). Nietsche's ubermensch has been defined as an overcoming. Man must overcome his existence in this godless world. How? Through self mastery. Consider time circular, and create a life that you deem to be a worthy to live over and over for infinity.This is self mastery.

godless immoralist

At first there was a God, a Christian God. There was construct in life, fear of hell, guilt from breaking the laws of God and hope that one's road would lead to eternal bliss. Then God died and so did the motivation for this construct. There appeared to be nothing. Nihilism in the sense that life is nothing, meaningless and without intrinsic value. Continue to be, thankful for the burden of guilt being lifted but noticing that there is now a hole in one's soul that one is no more important than a insect in the cosmic perspective. What difference does it make if one pisses his life away or becomes a god. In the end it all amounts to nothing. But along comes Niestche, What if you had to live your life over again ad infinitum, would u jump for joy or drop to your knees in despair? And Einstein's space/time model. Does space/time ever really disappear? The essence of one's life is what one chooses. Although existence precedes essence, one's choice of essence empowers one that it is he and only he that chooses this meaningful life. To choose one's path and to have it etched somewhere in spacetime for eternity in w/c a possible revisit adinfininum leads one to the conclusion that one must make one's life a master piece. The making of a self master is the journey. Construct is back.

Prescription Heroin Helps Addicts off Street Drugs

y Frederik Joelving

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) May 28 - Prescribing heroin to addicts who can't kick their habit helps them stay off street drugs, British researchers said Friday.

So far, doctors have had little hope of treating the 10% or more of heroin users who don't respond to methadone, the standard anti-addiction medication. Fueled by drug cravings, those users often spiral downward into crime and diseases spread by dirty needles and unhealthy living.

Short of actually getting addicts off the drug, "heroin clinics" can at least get them off the streets.

"What we are dealing with here is a very severe group of heroin addicts, where all of the treatments have been tried and have failed," said Dr. John Strang, an addiction expert at King's College London, who led the new study.

"They are like oil tankers heading for disaster," he added. "The question we were asking was, 'Can we change the trajectory of these tankers?' And the answer was, 'Yes we can.'"

To test how prescription heroin would work for this group, Dr. Strang and his colleagues invited 127 addicts into supervised injecting clinics. The researchers then randomly chose who would get heroin, injected methadone or typical swallowed methadone.

After six months, 101 addicts had stuck with their treatment. More than two-thirds of those on heroin had no sign of street heroin in their urine at least half the time they were tested; before the study, they had been using the street drug almost every day.

In comparison, less than a third of the addicts on either type of methadone had a similar number of "clean" tests.

At this point, said Dr. Strang, several users have continued in the program for more than two years. He did not have exact numbers, but told Reuters Health that some had been able to get jobs and reconnect with their families.

"These sorts of changes are typical of what we are seeing," he said. "People are not only physically getting better, but they're getting back into society."

The researchers had to treat about two addicts for each one who got off of street drugs at least half of the time.

An estimated 3.7 million people in the US have used heroin at some point in their lives, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Of current users, studies suggest that some 200,000 spend time in jails each year.

The most common drug treatment for heroin users is methadone. Although methadone decreases the cravings for its chemical cousin heroin, it doesn't produce the same high, according to experts. This could help explain why a substantial proportion of addicts in treatment backslide.

Before the new study, a handful of other reports had indicated that prescription heroin could help these people. But the scientific community wasn't completely convinced, in part because earlier urine tests weren't very sophisticated.

But this study "used a very novel urine test that can differentiate between street heroin and prescription heroin," said Thomas Kerr, director of the Urban Health Research Initiative at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. Street heroin contains papaverine, a remnant of the opium poppy that can be detected in the urine.

Now, he said, "the evidence is quite clear that there is a place for prescription heroin for the treatment of individuals who do not respond to methadone."

Only a few European countries prescribe heroin to addicts, and in the US this practice has been illegal since before World War I.

Many argue that giving addicts more of the substance they abuse makes little sense, and would be like treating an alcoholic with whiskey.

But Kerr said that analogy wasn't apt. "I would argue it's completely immoral and unethical to fail to treat those individuals and to allow them to suffer and allow the community around them to suffer," Kerr said.

Dr. Strang said he supported the UK Government's 2008 Drug Strategy, which proposes rolling out prescription heroin.

"Now that we know that it works, we have to debate whether or not we should use it," he said.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)60349-2/fulltext

Lancet 2010;375:1885-1895.

Adam and Eve chose freedom

Pre apple, all A/E's choices led to happiness. If the means to an ends is believed , then one path to happiness is suffice ie get rid of all choice=> lose our freedom and let God guide us . This is herd mentality. Although there are many choices to happiness, there are infinite more choices w/c lead to unhappiness, shame, greed etc. hence when A/E chose to eat the apple, their choices increased hence if freedom is choice, A/E chose freedom. It follows that more freedom increases our odds of unhappiness. But lack of choice to some degree leads to unhappiness. Clearly chosing a path is a reward in itself. Would this have to be sacrificed in the road to happiness? Our choices are our essence of being. To follow the herd is to rob ourselves from this essence unless following the herd was a well thought out choice.

Partial control of brain on hormonal system

Consider that glucose increase in the blood signals the pancreas to release insulin. In a Pavlovian like fashion, insulin is released, even when glucose is not present, via the PNS. That is the brain is controlling hormonal output. Now consider that interleukin is released by the immune system to among other organs also the brain. It tells the brain to increase fever, makes sleepy, basically feel awful. This is presumably done to tell one not to expend energy so that the immune system can diverge all possible energy to fighting the pathogen. What if one, due to psychological reasons, felt awful via biofeedback methods and increased the immune system. The immune system starts kicking out interleukin and one becomes "sick". What would be the long term results? Hyperalgesia, fibromyalgia, degenerative joints, hyper immunity w/c can lead to allergies?

what do u know

Researchers have shown that nearly all of us are overconfident, sometimes to the point of comedy. Eighty percent of students predict they will finish in the top half of their class. Seventy-five percent of mutual fund managers think they are above average at their jobs. Almost 90% of us think we're better than the typical driver.

The more you know, the more likely you are to overestimate your ability to predict the future. Philip Tetlock, a professor of political science at Berkeley, spent years surveying the views of top political scientists and analysts on world events and found that these supposed geniuses were usually wrong even when they were most confident. On predictions in which they indicated they had 80% or more confidence, they were correct only 45% of the time. Overall, they had no more ability to forecast the future than a coin flip.

Over medicinized in N.A. 2010 A.D.

The science of medicine should find chemicals that should promote longevity and decrease misery. It doesn't yet thrive to increase happiness. Mostly corporations are in the medicine business. Corporations objectives are to make profits. Although the axioms of the science of medicine would achieve this objective, this is not the only way to get people to takes pills.
For society, increasing one's life mayn't be good economically but decreasing one's misery helps by at least lessening the spread of the misery to others in society. However, it is a tenet in society to keep one alive as long as possible (without life support) ie life supersedes economics, happiness etc. Society's view on misery is not as high on the scale. Society would prefer one doesn't suffer but will tolerate one's suffering over the possible decrease in it's rule of law.
The idealized pharmacy is to ensure all who need pills, those who the pills will increase life and/or decrease misery, will be provided and educated on proper use of the pill. However, most pharmacies are not ideal. Their main objective is to sell as many pills as possible. Herein lies the over medication of the masses.
The corporate pillmakers, through the guise of science, have skewed the data such that in is difficult to know the truth of the pills. The main tools they have used and continue to use to encourage pill usage include i) burying data ii) buying influential people in the medical field through a quid pro quo system iii) advertising to a gullible public. iv) advanced statistics. v) creating new diseases and/or lowering parameters of what is considered a disease. The gov't has set up what the pillmakers can/can't say but they are under staffed, lazy and under paid. There is little incentive to be a hero.
Through these methods, the pill presciber will give the taker what the milieu the pill maker has created. It is pleasant for the pill presciber to go with the zeitgeist and painful to go against. Again, there is little incentive to be a hero. The only resistance to this pill pushing machine is patent expirations, gov't's affordability to pay, insurance unwillingness to pay, etc.
Even if the pill making companies were to step aside, pill prescribers and pharmacies are a capitation business. The prescriber ensures repeat business by giving pills. The pharmacy, too, can only exist if people are taking pills. The

sub·sis·tence

Consider humans basic subsistence needs. Call it X. With innovation and technos, surely we have reached X. Why then do we seem to work as hard as we did say fifty years ago?

long term potentiation

Recall cell body-> axon hillock-> electrical impulse down axon-> release neurotransmitters in synapse-> neurotransmitters bind to dendrite receptors-> electrical signal up dendrites-> cell body-> onwards if and only if axon hillock fires. Also recall- "In the most well understood form of LTP, enhanced communication is predominantly carried out by improving the postsynaptic cell's sensitivity to signals received from the presynaptic cell.- Malenka R, Bear M (2004). "LTP and LTD: an embarrassment of riches". Neuron 44 (1): 5–21. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.012. PMID 15450156.
A person who remembers everything would have a high "build" rate of receptors or whatever machinery needed to enhance this structure by deduction. It would also seem by deduction that a lot of building=remembering would lead to a lot of old debris ie collateral damage to the area BUT I think people with bigger memories also tend to dement less so than people with lesser memories. If this latter caveat is true, either there is less collateral "garbage" or the means to clean up the "garbage" is increased for the memory endowed person. Hence we have more building with less garbage (more building with less chance of error ie less garbage seems ridiculous, analogous to violating the second law of thermodynamics) or more building with better cleanup crews.
Hence, I slant toward if 1) enhanced communication is predominantly carried out by improving the postsynaptic cell's sensitivity to signals received from the presynaptic cell=> a pathway must be built? b/c it is new knowledge (is knowledge merely pathways of neurons in the brain?), contrasting with crews cleaning up already present pathways w/c just need to be cleaned.=> high memory achievers must be either faster builders/faster cleaners, average builders/faster cleaning, or faster builders/average cleaning.

truth

Deductively, a->b->c... means b, c... are TRUE. The issue is how do we know "a" is true? i) Revelation, though the bible... ii) authority, Oprah... iii) induction, specific to the general ie length vs temp graph, points plotted (premises)=> specific, and best fit straight line made (conclusion for ALL "a" s)=> general iv) from the mind eg. even though there were insufficient data points (taken from Brahe) for J. Kepler to deduce that the path of the planets, he neverless surmised correctly they were ellipses.
Lastly, pi theory, 25/8 Babylonian, 256/81 Egyptian, 339/108 Indian... each succession closer to the real value of pi, is analogous to pursuing "a" (JH Lambert proved pi is irrational), as we get closer ratio's to pi, we get clearer truths (better predictability, explanations and control of nature) of what pi is but we will never find an absolute ratio b/c it does not exist. PS pi is described as the ratio circumference/diameter BUT is irrational with integers, seems funny to me

Is God all knowing?

Consider a life cradle to grave in one second. I am all knowing of this life after one second. I am all knowing after one second. Now let the life appear to me to be 1/2 second but to the creature it is one second. According to my clock I have halfed my time of ignorance. Keeping the creature's perceived life to one second and making my perception to an infinitesimal span of time, do I not become all knowing? That is everything happens at once.

Consider a Christian sect, say Jehovah witnesses. Consider the lowest ranking member in this group, ie one is looked down on by the group but manages to hang in the group til the end. In respect to the group is not this person the meekest? Is this not what Nietzsche's slave morality complains about? It could easily be accepted that this member was sought of so lowly because he was indeed a marginal member BUT in true slave morality HE IS THE MOST MEEK.

misery is not miserly

The Study
According to Cynthia E. Cryder et al. sad people are bigger spenders. In a paper they published a few years ago “Misery is not Miserly: Sad and Self-Focused Individuals Spend More”, they found that sad and self-focused individuals spend as much as 300% more for the same type of commodity.

The researchers randomly assigned people to either watch a sad video or an emotionally neutral video, after which they were asked to purchase a commodity (i.e. bottle of water). Participants in the sad group offered about 300% more than the neutral group for the same item.

knowledge thus far

Firstly there is the axiom. Whether it is from revelation, inductive experimentation or a deducement from other facts, this is the start of other knowledge. Isaac Newton must have thought up his 3 axioms of motion ie 1) an object in motion continues in motion until some force acts on the object, through the observation that things on earth start off in one direction but slow down AND watching planets w/c appear never to slow down. This appears to be a general deduction from observation/maybe even natural revelation in which he posited his first law of motion. Clearly, there is no experimentation here.
2) F=ma can be derived from experimentation. Recall he did know of Galileo's though experiment ie "...Imagine two objects, one light and one heavier than the other one, are connected to each other by a string. Drop this system of objects from the top of a tower. If we assume heavier objects do indeed fall faster than lighter ones (and conversely, lighter objects fall slower), the string will soon pull taut as the lighter object retards the fall of the heavier object. But the system considered as a whole is heavier than the heavy object alone, and therefore should fall faster. This contradiction leads one to conclude the assumption is false." We note here too that it is derived from reason and not experimentation.
3) Lastly, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Again impossible to test b/c there are infinite amts of weights and material in w/c to test this. Is it true for steel on steel? Steel on lead? 10lbs on 50 lbs? From Newton's view, it is an assumption based on a limited amt of observations of his environment.
So here we have axioms entering knowledge from areas other than inductive experimention.

Why stuff is insatiable

What is stuff? All good and services? Yes, but what else. Stuff is a communication tool. It let's other humans know your rank in the hierarchy of the pack. Humans in the society pack are in constant movement, some moving up , some moving sideways and some moving down. I know this because they show me. Similarly like dogs communicating by pissing on trees. (Money is a derivative of stuff, it is stuff "owed" and work is a transitive trade=> labour for stuff). There are ALWAYS younger, stronger people rising to usurp our position in this pack. It is our instincts to compete with them. It is our instinct to gather more stuff to maintain our position. The downside with this is society uses a disproportionate amount of resources to create stuff w/c has very little use in the big picture of society other than to communicate rank. The upside is that society is motivated to create and this in of itself spurs employment and possibly innovation.
Stuff is all goods and services. Hence the economy is defined as the production and distribution of stuff. Money is then an IOU of stuff owed. If one lends "stuff owed" to someone, since one would have to spend part of ones life without all ones stuff, one generally gets more stuff to compensate with the now less time one has. Or simply less time with stuff-> more stuff with less time. People need a certain amount of stuff to sustain themselves and generally trade labour for stuff. The fair price of a particular item should be the sum of the labour to produce the item plus the material. The material costs should reflect the price of finding the material, maintaining the upkeep of the find, extracting the material and delivering the material. If an entrepreneur is able to produce and distribute an equal amount of stuff at a faster rate with equal labour (more efficient), he will sell more stuff.

sum of parts

      The present is a thin line between the past and the future hence the only true way to live in the present is to repeat the present. Consider music. Is it not a set of notes strung together. The whole set of notes is the music. To live in the present with the music is to repeat the note. Similarly consider a book. Is it not a set of letters strung together. To live in the present in the book, would we not have to reduce our reading/writing down to one word, word,word,word or maybe even one letter l,l,l. Alas the entire structure tends to become absurd. It may be self confirming but evolutionary nature has not evolved us to operate as such. Perhaps this is what Heidegger meant with dasein. Being in time is to listen to the a preferred set of notes vs a more consciously effort of reducing them.

Capital, labor and stuff

I trade labor for money. I trade money for stuff. Hence I trade labor for stuff by the transitive property. I dislike labor but I need stuff. This is a problem. If I can get enough capital, I could trade capital for money, hence trade capital for stuff. This would solve the problem. ( Recall economics=> the production and distribution of stuff. Econ. policy = what gets produced, how and who gets to consume it.)

verifier method

The verifier method boils down to seven steps: 1) amass knowledge of a discipline through interviews and reading; 2) determine whether critical expertise has yet to be applied in the field; 3) look for bias and mistakenly held assumptions in the research; 4) analyze jargon to uncover differing definitions of key terms; 5) check for classic mistakes using human-error tools; 6) follow the errors as they ripple through underlying assumptions; 7) suggest new avenues for research that emerge from steps one through six.

what motivates one to work

After hitting some "fair" monetary point, 3 things motivate people at work:
1) a sense autonomy and self direction
2) a sense of mastery ie getting better and better at something that matters
3) a sense of purpose ie what your doing matters to more than just myself
For enduring motivation, these 3 criteria supersede the carrot and stick method empirically. However, it is emphasized that the compensation should be at a level that the money doesn't really matter. This is backed by 50 plus years of behaviorial science. If people focus mostly on the reward, the job deteriorates. High stake short term incentives leads to bad work... Daniel Pink author of Drive
To employees, Pink offers advice on how "type X"es — his coinage for people who prefer external rewards — can enroll themselves in the burgeoning ranks of the "type I"s, driven mostly by inner rewards. The difference matters: Type I's have better long-term performance and well-being, he argues.
http://www.danpink.com/

John 9:25 He replied, "Whether he is a sinner or not, I don't know. One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!"

John 9:25 "He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see."

if god be for us who can be against us - Google Search

"If God is for us, who can be against us?' Romans 8:28-31"

self interest

"...consider what happened when the US Preventive Services Task Force announced last November that, based on the scientific evidence it weighed, it no longer recommends mammograms for women aged 40 through 49 years. The task force also recommended that women aged 50 years and older no longer receive annual mammograms but, instead, get them every other year. Public outcry and pushback from several medical societies and expert groups like the American Cancer Society swayed Senate Democrats to rewrite their pending healthcare reform legislation to guarantee mammogram coverage."