- Email: [email protected]
Who are the liars?
To join the debate, visit newscientist.com/letters
Who are the liars? From Philip Penton In the haste to focus on bankers, Dan Ariely’s discussion of cheating appears to have missed a major point (16 June, p 30). His experiment showing that people will cheat if they think they can get away with it has been writ large in society. The sub-prime crisis was largely fuelled by the infamous “no doc” mortgages, also known as liar loans. People who knew their mortgage applications wouldn’t be checked routinely inflated their reported income to match the requirements of the house they wanted to buy. This became institutionalised and endemic. If people had been unable to do this, it is arguable the sub-prime mortgage crisis would not have happened, or at least been much smaller. The liars in question weren’t bankers, but Joe Public. Bankers certainly should heed lessons from the psychology of cheating, the most important being that everyone does it. Micheldever, Hampshire, UK
Morality lesson From David Flint Ullrich Fischer’s letter (16 June, p 33) makes the standard liberal error of supposing that for liberals and conservatives alike “the most important moral precepts are to avoid harming fellow humans and render aid to those in trouble”. The evidence says otherwise. A survey of 132,000 people reported
by psychologist Jonathan Haidt in his book The Righteous Mind shows that liberals value avoiding harm and unfairness much more than conservatives do. Conservatives value loyalty, authority and sanctity more. You may disagree with the conservatives, as I do, but we will not be able to properly understand morality, politics or religion unless we recognise the full range of moral thinking. London, UK
Group sacrifice From Jonathan Tyler Rather than questioning the evolutionary purpose baldness serves in an individual (16 June, p 44), perhaps we should ask if older men sacrifice their hair for the good of the male species. If baldness is associated with advancing age, then this group
Long view
Is it alive? From Colin Cook Further to cosmologist Charley Lineweaver’s attempt to widen the definition of life, could the universe or Earth be considered to be living things (19 May, p 29)? This would depend on whether the universe is a fully integrated entity or just a collection of organised matter ensembles, one of which (Earth) contains smaller ensembles that are certainly alive. Similarly, Earth could be considered alive if it is deemed to be self-regulating to maintain its millions of species – as the Gaia hypothesis suggests. Basildon, Essex, UK From Mike Jaket Defining life as “anything that undergoes Darwinian evolution” infers constituent processes that give a steady structure, reproduction and so on, while not being too prescriptive. The overall process doesn’t include a fixed “evolutionary unit” that a cosmologist could search for. So, contrary to Lineweaver’s view, a Darwinian approach doesn’t invalidate the definition in any way. You could tighten it to “DNAencoded forms that undergo Darwinian evolution”, but then that may well be incorrect in the wider universe. Upper Coomera, Queensland, Australia
have inadvertently stumbled on the answer to the dark energy puzzle (2 June, p 36). Frank Zappa once wrote that the most abundant element in the universe is stupidity. Think of politicians, creationists or the TV viewing figures for The X Factor. I think he may have cracked it – after all dark matter is thought to be both dim and dense. How do I claim my Nobel prize? York, UK
is probably wealthier, more responsible and less self-centred than hirsute male youngsters. If both age groups were equally hairy, younger men wouldn’t get a look in with the ladies, hence baldness is nature’s way of giving youngsters a helping hand. Yes, you guessed, I am north of 40. Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, UK
Both right From Ted Pham So the answer to the question of whether life is inevitable or a fluke turns out to be inconclusive (23 June, p 32). If Nick Lane’s thinking is right, all we know for sure is that, using the example of life on Earth, it is both inevitable (simple forms) and a fluke (complex forms). Westminster, California, US
Dim and dimmer From Rich Hind It is always with great interest that I read your articles on particle physics, the cosmos, grand unified theories and so on, but I think I
From Ron Baker Well before the next transit of Venus is seen from Earth, 105 years from now (2 June, p 44), we shall, I hope, have observatories in various parts of the solar system. So, when will it be possible to observe a transit of Earth or Venus from Mars? Colchester, Essex, UK The editor writes: n Not sure about Mars, but something similar is planned for later this year – the transit of Venus as seen from Saturn (9 June, p 4).
For the record n In our description of the sea urchin depicted in Aperture (9 June, p 26) we wrongly described it as expelling its guts through its mouth. In fact, the animal was captured as it defecated. n New York lawyer Maura Grossman’s co-author on the study assessing new software for sifting legal documents (23 June, p 22) was Gordon Cormack of the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. Letters should be sent to: Letters to the Editor, New Scientist, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 1280 Email: [email protected] Include your full postal address and telephone number, and a reference (issue, page number, title) to articles. We reserve the right to edit letters. Reed Business Information reserves the right to use any submissions sent to the letters column of New Scientist magazine, in any other format.
7 July 2012 | NewScientist | 31
Who are the liars? From Philip Penton In the haste to focus on bankers, Dan Ariely’s discussion of cheating appears to have missed a major point (16 June, p 30). His experiment showing that people will cheat if they think they can get away with it has been writ large in society. The sub-prime crisis was largely fuelled by the infamous “no doc” mortgages, also known as liar loans. People who knew their mortgage applications wouldn’t be checked routinely inflated their reported income to match the requirements of the house they wanted to buy. This became institutionalised and endemic. If people had been unable to do this, it is arguable the sub-prime mortgage crisis would not have happened, or at least been much smaller. The liars in question weren’t bankers, but Joe Public. Bankers certainly should heed lessons from the psychology of cheating, the most important being that everyone does it. Micheldever, Hampshire, UK
Morality lesson From David Flint Ullrich Fischer’s letter (16 June, p 33) makes the standard liberal error of supposing that for liberals and conservatives alike “the most important moral precepts are to avoid harming fellow humans and render aid to those in trouble”. The evidence says otherwise. A survey of 132,000 people reported
by psychologist Jonathan Haidt in his book The Righteous Mind shows that liberals value avoiding harm and unfairness much more than conservatives do. Conservatives value loyalty, authority and sanctity more. You may disagree with the conservatives, as I do, but we will not be able to properly understand morality, politics or religion unless we recognise the full range of moral thinking. London, UK
Group sacrifice From Jonathan Tyler Rather than questioning the evolutionary purpose baldness serves in an individual (16 June, p 44), perhaps we should ask if older men sacrifice their hair for the good of the male species. If baldness is associated with advancing age, then this group
Long view
Is it alive? From Colin Cook Further to cosmologist Charley Lineweaver’s attempt to widen the definition of life, could the universe or Earth be considered to be living things (19 May, p 29)? This would depend on whether the universe is a fully integrated entity or just a collection of organised matter ensembles, one of which (Earth) contains smaller ensembles that are certainly alive. Similarly, Earth could be considered alive if it is deemed to be self-regulating to maintain its millions of species – as the Gaia hypothesis suggests. Basildon, Essex, UK From Mike Jaket Defining life as “anything that undergoes Darwinian evolution” infers constituent processes that give a steady structure, reproduction and so on, while not being too prescriptive. The overall process doesn’t include a fixed “evolutionary unit” that a cosmologist could search for. So, contrary to Lineweaver’s view, a Darwinian approach doesn’t invalidate the definition in any way. You could tighten it to “DNAencoded forms that undergo Darwinian evolution”, but then that may well be incorrect in the wider universe. Upper Coomera, Queensland, Australia
have inadvertently stumbled on the answer to the dark energy puzzle (2 June, p 36). Frank Zappa once wrote that the most abundant element in the universe is stupidity. Think of politicians, creationists or the TV viewing figures for The X Factor. I think he may have cracked it – after all dark matter is thought to be both dim and dense. How do I claim my Nobel prize? York, UK
is probably wealthier, more responsible and less self-centred than hirsute male youngsters. If both age groups were equally hairy, younger men wouldn’t get a look in with the ladies, hence baldness is nature’s way of giving youngsters a helping hand. Yes, you guessed, I am north of 40. Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, UK
Both right From Ted Pham So the answer to the question of whether life is inevitable or a fluke turns out to be inconclusive (23 June, p 32). If Nick Lane’s thinking is right, all we know for sure is that, using the example of life on Earth, it is both inevitable (simple forms) and a fluke (complex forms). Westminster, California, US
Dim and dimmer From Rich Hind It is always with great interest that I read your articles on particle physics, the cosmos, grand unified theories and so on, but I think I
From Ron Baker Well before the next transit of Venus is seen from Earth, 105 years from now (2 June, p 44), we shall, I hope, have observatories in various parts of the solar system. So, when will it be possible to observe a transit of Earth or Venus from Mars? Colchester, Essex, UK The editor writes: n Not sure about Mars, but something similar is planned for later this year – the transit of Venus as seen from Saturn (9 June, p 4).
For the record n In our description of the sea urchin depicted in Aperture (9 June, p 26) we wrongly described it as expelling its guts through its mouth. In fact, the animal was captured as it defecated. n New York lawyer Maura Grossman’s co-author on the study assessing new software for sifting legal documents (23 June, p 22) was Gordon Cormack of the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. Letters should be sent to: Letters to the Editor, New Scientist, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 1280 Email: [email protected] Include your full postal address and telephone number, and a reference (issue, page number, title) to articles. We reserve the right to edit letters. Reed Business Information reserves the right to use any submissions sent to the letters column of New Scientist magazine, in any other format.
7 July 2012 | NewScientist | 31