Prelude to Post of Dr. William G. McCown Q&A

My chiropractor is a Calvinist and believes in predetermination. He also told me he has a gambling problem and therefore doesn't gamble. He can't have fun gambling because once he starts, he can't stop.

Cool. That proves my theory. I've got powerful heuristics.

Alaleroy you continue to impress me my making comments with great potential for moving the discussion forward in a productive fashion. This particular question, however, is on a sensitive subject, so I'm going to refrain from posting any personal opinion whatsoever on the topic. I will tell you what I've read.

In the book Best Possible Odds, Dr. McCown quoted several researchers that did indeed find a strong link between religious beliefs and a predilection for problem gambling. He also devoted several subheadings to case studies of people that continued gambling in the face of extreme losses becasue they were, "good people and they knew god would save them". Link or no link, the correlation between problem gambling and religious beliefs was so strong that the SOGS (South Oaks Gambling Screen) had to be revised in areas of the Bible Belt, especially Louisiana, because of false positives and the distorted thinking prevalent in those areas. We cannot draw a direct line of causation between the religious beliefs and the cognitive distortion, nor did the scientists doing the studies. We know a much higher percentage of the people in those areas were extremely religious, we also know an extremely high (compared to baseline) percentage of those people had issues related to gambling. We do not know that one causes the other.

In the book Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk by Peter L. Bernstein, he goes into great detail about the history long and ongoing fight between divine predetermination and probabilistic mathematical thinking. He even credits the rise of probability math to the fall of the church's iron grip on the heats and minds of all. Only in societies where religion took a back seat did probability math take center stage. The book is about math and risk assessment and the title, "Against The Gods" is no accident.

In the Book Randomness by Deborah J. Bennett, she details the accounts of people that were stoned to death, or burned at the stake for merely suggesting that, "some things could just happen". Accounts go back thousands of years, all the way to the Jewish Talmud and the practice of casting lots.

The concept that all is god's will certainly seems to preclude a belief in and understanding of randomness. Or at least, that's what all the books on the subject that I have read are saying. I have my own opinions, which I will keep to myself. If you'd like more information on these subjects I recommend the following books:

Best Possible Odds, Dr. William G. McCown
Randomness - Deborah J. Bennett
Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk by Peter L. Bernstein

The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies---How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths by Michael Shermer. or his older book...Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time

~FK

You aren't just saying that because of some Daniel Kahneman study are you?

There's one in every audience!! Normally, they're called "ring men."

It is no secret that our minds act similarly to filters, and they do this without our intent. Perceptions that match previous perceptions are "given effect," (assimilated) while discordant perceptions are "repressed." This dates back to Freud's theory of repression. I.e. unpleasant new knowledge gets "stored" similarly to unpleasant internal thoughts.

Even though this process is not intentional, it is highly individualized. I.e. it would happen differently for person A than for person B. It would happen differently in the "Bible Belt" than it would in Macau, and it would happen diffently in a casino than it would outside.

Indeed, it would happen differently at casino A than at casino B, and, inside casino A, it would be happening differently for different people. So I question the usefulness of second-hand annecdotal evidence in developing a useful theory. Since EVERYONE has a mind that "distorts" new knowledge, the people reporting the "distortions" would necessarily be "distorting" the "distortions."

Well, well, well . . .

Well, well, well, well, . . . welly, . . . well, well . . .

Its always good to find out just who the LVA teacher's pet is.

In the spirit of good fellowship and hedonics DonDiego offers some tips from How to Become a Teacher's Pet to assist alanleroy in his enterprise:

__Act confident, . . . and ask good questions. [Oh, never mind. alanleroy's already got his one down.-DD]

__Compliment [the teachers]--when they have a nice outfit on, tell them. Some female teachers are obsessed with shoes, so you can ask if hers are new.

__Never ask your teacher his/her age. It is extremely rude and disrespectful; but do ask when their birthday is so that you can plan something for them for that day.

__Be Nice. Try to stay away from the goofballs of the class.

And a warning:

__If your teacher is the opposite sex, try and tone it down, or else it might seem as if you're flirting, and it will creep them out. [Nowadays this may apply to a teacher of one's own sex. Why, heckfire, . . . alanleroy's already creeping DonDiego out!-DD]

Don "The Dunce" Diego

Are those new shoes you're wearing DD?

I like the pocket protector. It's very nice.

Where do you get pocket protectors? My shirt pockets are wearing out from pulling out and putting away pens and my notebook so many times during playing sessions.

You realize you can buy new shirts. Put all those gambliing winnings to use.