<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Avocado Jungle &#187; blogshare</title>
	<atom:link href="http://avocadojungle.com/tag/blogshare/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://avocadojungle.com</link>
	<description>truth in understanding</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 08:29:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>From Scott Adams&#8217; blog: The Power of Ridiculous Reasons</title>
		<link>http://avocadojungle.com/2009/05/the-avocado-jungle/from-scott-adams-blog-the-power-of-ridiculous-reasons</link>
		<comments>http://avocadojungle.com/2009/05/the-avocado-jungle/from-scott-adams-blog-the-power-of-ridiculous-reasons#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 23:13:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Avocado Jungle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blogshare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scott Adams Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordpress.locuststreetdigital.com/AVJTest/?p=210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Avocado Jungle blogshare: In his blog, Scott Adams tells us that we're predisposed to accept ridiculous reasons. Then he suggests this could be useful in ending global conflict...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the Avocado Jungle we have some favorite blogs that are good enough often enough that we decided we’d like to share them with you regularly… our own personal best-of. We call it a <a href="http://wordpress.locuststreetdigital.com/tag/blogshare/">blogshare</a>. The following comes from Scott Adams’ hilarious blog at <a href="http://dilbert.com/blog/">dilbert.com/blog</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/the_power_of_ridiculous_reasons/">The Power of Ridiculous Reasons</a><br />
Scott Adams<br />
April 28, 2009</p>
<p>The human mind is wired to accept ridiculous reasons as if they are legitimate. Studies have shown that people are more likely to agree to a favor if the word &#8220;because&#8221; is used in the request. It doesn&#8217;t seem to matter what follows that word. As long as the sentence is in the form of a reason, people accept it as though some actual reason is present. (See the book Influence.)</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve often used this method. I think I&#8217;ve mentioned these uses before, but I will reiterate to set up my larger point.</p>
<p>Guys tend to argue over who picks up the check after dinner. In cases where I know this situation is likely to arise, I prepare a ridiculous &#8220;because&#8221; reason that I trot out when the moment is right. After allowing the other guy or guys to make their ceremonial attempt at paying, I say something like &#8220;I&#8217;ll pay today because this is the seven month anniversary of when you bought your car. Congratulations.&#8221; I&#8217;m exaggerating slightly, but it isn&#8217;t hard to come up with some trivial reason why you should pay. The funny thing is that any reason you offer will settle the discussion. It works every time.</p>
<p>Another situation in which the ridiculous reason works is when a large dinner group is being served and only half of the people have their dishes. Everyone sits there staring at their food as it cools, trying to be polite. In these cases I say loudly &#8220;According to etiquette, you can start eating as soon as three people have been served.&#8221; Everyone instantly digs in. I think I read that rule of etiquette somewhere, but it&#8217;s clearly a random number. There is nothing special about three. Ridiculous reasons win again.</p>
<p>I mention these examples because I think the world needs another ridiculous rule to solve some big problems. And it&#8217;s no fair saying my new rule is ridiculous because that&#8217;s exactly the point. The new rule would be this: Any land controlled by a country for 50 years straight is legitimately theirs. It&#8217;s like a statute of limitations for armed resistance.</p>
<p>Obviously the people living in the disputed lands will reject this rule when it kicks in. It&#8217;s really for the benefit of others who might be inclined to help the continued struggle for independence. Most struggles depend on outside help. This rule allows the outside helpers to withdraw without being dishonorable.</p>
<p>While the 50 year rule is clearly arbitrary and ridiculous, our minds allow us to accept such things as if they are real rules. So in time it might influence the inhabitants of the disputed lands to accept their situation. Realistically, if a country is controlled for 50 years, it&#8217;s probably going to stay controlled. Continued resistance doesn&#8217;t benefit anyone.</p>
<p>Consider all of the international struggles that involve lands conquered more than 50 years ago, or approaching that. The partisans need a reason to stop fighting that doesn&#8217;t sound like they are a bunch of quitters. Honor is at stake. The 50 year rule is the non-reason reason.</p>
<p>I am aware that this rule, if followed, would sanction enormous unfairness, subjugation, apartheid, and worse. But those things would happen with or without the rule. The only difference is how many innocent people die trying to change a situation that is unlikely to change.w</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://avocadojungle.com/2009/05/the-avocado-jungle/from-scott-adams-blog-the-power-of-ridiculous-reasons/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>From &#8220;Parenting On The Edge&#8221;: All Work And No Play</title>
		<link>http://avocadojungle.com/2009/05/the-avocado-jungle/from-parenting-on-the-edge-all-work-and-no-play</link>
		<comments>http://avocadojungle.com/2009/05/the-avocado-jungle/from-parenting-on-the-edge-all-work-and-no-play#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 20:48:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Avocado Jungle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blogshare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Madeleine Brand's Parenting On The Edge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parenting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[school]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordpress.locuststreetdigital.com/AVJTest/?p=206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Avocado Jungle blogshare: In her blog, "Parenting On The Edge," Madeleine Brand tells us we should go easy on the homework and let the little kiddies play.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>At the Avocado Jungle we have some favorite blogs that are good enough often enough that we decided we&#8217;d like to share them with you regularly&#8230; our own personal best-of. We call it a <b><a href="http://wordpress.locuststreetdigital.com/AVJTest/tag/blogshare/">blogshare</a></b>. The following comes from Madeleine Brand&#8217;s blog &#8220;Parenting On The Edge&#8221; at <a href="http://madeleinebrand.com">madeleinebrand.com</a>.</i></p>
<p><a href="http://web.me.com/mabrand/Parenting_On_the_Edge/Parenting_On_The_Edge_Blog/Entries/2009/5/3_All_Work_and_No_Play.html">All Work And No Play</a><br />
<b>Madeleine Brand</b><br />
May 3, 2009</p>
<p>I cracked open my NYT Mag today and found an article with real relevance. Not the creepy Quentin Tarantino photo spread. I mean the essay by Peggy Orenstein about how kindergarten should be about play, not work. As in homework. Studies have shown time and again that homework does not help kids until they get to middle school and beyond. It makes no difference, and yet most of our kids in public schools get homework beginning at age 5. You may say &#8211; well, it can’t hurt. But Peggy cites studies that show it does. In one, the children who were in the heavy testing/homework laden classes when they were little did worse academically in their teens than children who simply played. That may be because playing is really work &#8212; children are learning how to think, how to be imaginative, and how to develop their social skills.</p>
<p>For more on this idea, listen to the podcast “What to Expect from Preschool.”</p>
<p>And the astute Parenting on the Edger will remember that Peggy Orenstein was my guest on the first podcast. She wisely advised me to put on my clothes every day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://avocadojungle.com/2009/05/the-avocado-jungle/from-parenting-on-the-edge-all-work-and-no-play/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
