What are the best nontraditional songs to play on holidays?

For nearly 30 years, I’ve listened to Dead Man’s Party by Oingo Boingo every Halloween. Despite a past debate, I think it’s the ultimate Halloween track. While playing it repeatedly this year, I wondered whether my Halloween tradition could extend to other holidays. Instead of the normal holiday favorites, I wanted songs with a similar chaotic upbeat/off-kilter vibe.

Here’s my list of the best high-energy, nontraditional songs for other major holidays:

New Year’s

I’m starting with the most difficult one for me. My initial choice was the somewhat obvious New Year’s Day from U2; the song demands attention from the opening riff and literally sounds like a new dawn breaking.

However, I chose the Talking Heads’ Burning Down the House instead. The literal imagery of burning down the old house makes it a high-adrenaline track to blast as we leave behind the old year and welcome the new one.

Fourth of July

Yes, I know I could choose Born in the U.S.A. by Bruce Springsteen or R.O.C.K. in the U.S.A. by John (Cougar) Mellencamp. Both are excellent high-energy songs but they are literal and I’m looking for nontraditional.

My answer is Rock Lobster by The B-52’s. While the song isn’t strictly about the 4th of July, it’s an upbeat summer-themed track packed with absurd imagery and frantic energy. The song matches the theatrical, fun loving weirdness of Dead Man’s Party.

Thanksgiving

A shoutout to Alice’s Restaurant by Arlo Guthrie. Because it came out in 1967, most of you probably haven’t heard it before. Give it a listen; it’s a sprawling, 18-minute storytelling blues song about Thanksgiving. Nontraditional for sure but not high energy enough for this list.

Maybe controversially, I chose She Don’t Use Jelly from The Flaming Lips; a catchy song about bizarre food habits (a girl who puts Vaseline on her toast, a guy who uses tangerines for hair gel, and another who likes maggot cheese). Play this song while everyone is talking about their favorite foods for the holidays.

Christmas

Not surprisingly, there are a ton of high-energy nontraditional songs about Christmas:

• I Won’t Be Home For Christmas by blink-182
  Blink’s signature pop-punk style; this song leans into the stress, irritation, and absolute chaos of family holidays.
• All I Want for Christmas by My Chemical Romance
  A raucous, distorted cover of Mariah Carey’s classic, trading slick pop production for raw emo-rock energy.
• Father Christmas by The Kinks
  Punk, before people knew about punk. It’s about a department store Santa getting mugged by kids demanding cash instead of toys.

All good options but my choice has to be Christmas Wrapping by The Waitresses. It’s about a year of missed connections, ending in a chance encounter at a grocery store. The song captures the joyful spirit of the holiday season without being literal.

Let the debates begin in the comments. What do you think are the best nontraditional holiday songs?

The post Best Nontraditional Holidays Songs appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

The so-called Batman Effect encourages altruism by forcing people out of mental autopilot and triggering prosocial behavior – even if it happens unconsciously.

In a study conducted in Italy, researchers tracked people’s willingness to give up their seat to a visibly pregnant woman on a crowded subway. Over a total of 138 rides, 67.21% of passengers offered their seats to the pregnant woman when a person dressed as Batman was in the same subway car while only 37.66% did so without the character present. The Batman Effect doubled the rate of altruism.

Interestingly, 44% of those who offered their seat to the pregnant woman later reported that they had not seen Batman. Unlike the invisible gorilla effect, the subway riders were not concentrating on something else and must have only noticed Batman unconsciously. This suggests there may be ways to boost kindness and prosocial behavior only with environmental clues.

These results reinforce an earlier study in which children persisted at tedious tasks longer when they thought of themselves as superheroes. Instead of reciting “I can do it,” the children instead referred to themselves in their third person using “Dora the Explorer can do it” or “Batman can do it.” In this case, the Batman Effect gave the children the inner strength needed to keep trying rather than getting overwhelmed.

Both of these studies highlight priming; the signals our environment constantly sends us activates different parts of our personalities. Seeing Batman, even unconsciously, primes us to act more generously because we associate the superhero costume with heroics. Similarly, referring to oneself as a superhero allowed the children to psychologically borrow their strength.

You can leverage the Batman Effect in your own life. Here are some ideas:

• When facing something daunting, switch to the third person perspective.
  Instead of “What in the world do I do now?” think about how someone you admire would approach the challenge.
• Prime your environment by putting a motivation poster in your workplace.
  Even though you may not “see” the poster after a few weeks, the visual clue is influencing your subconscious.
• Use the novelty rule to break the monotony of your routine.
  Micro-disruptions can make you more receptive to the world around you.

While none of us will ever be comic book superheroes, the Batman Effect encourages us to be more altruistic and have greater inner strength.

So, repeat after me … “I am Batman!”

The post The Batman Effect Encourages Altruism and Inner Strength appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

Learning to cook vs. following a recipe is an example of first principles thinking.

For those who may not be familiar with it, first principles thinking is “designed to relentlessly pursue the foundations of any given problem from fundamental truths.” First principles was recently re-popularized by Elon Musk.

Following a recipe allows you to create a meal, but a recipe doesn’t help you figure out what to do when something goes wrong. A recipe isn’t useful if you open the fridge and realize you forgot to go grocery shopping. Following a recipe doesn’t tell you how to adapt to your guests’ special dietary needs.

In contrast, cooks understand the basic principles that control how food tastes, looks, and smells. They can open the fridge, survey available ingredients, and make a meal without a recipe. When things inevitably don’t go as planned, they have the confidence to adjust. This doesn’t mean that cooks don’t ever consult a recipe – they might use one as inspiration but adapt it to their own taste.

You can see first principles thinking in most cooking competitions. Contestants typically have to create a dish from ingredients they don’t know ahead of time. Since it’s impossible to follow a recipe, successful dishes show the judges how well the contestants can cook.

Julia Child revolutionized American cuisine using first principle thinking. When she was learning to cook traditional French cuisine, she rejected accepted culinary truths and instead relied on multiple experiments in her kitchen. When faced with complex French dishes, Child broke them down into basic, repeatable physical actions; for example, how to properly sear meat. In her books and television shows like The French Chef, Julia Child taught home cooks to rely on sensory feedback – like watching for juices to pearl on a steak – instead of using specific cooking times.

In a very real sense, Julia Child was asking people to learn to cook rather than just following a recipe.

There’s nothing wrong with following a recipe; it’s like playing an instrument using sheet music. Cooking is something else; it’s like writing a new song or improvising a beat based on a tune you’ve heard. Cooking is first principles thinking.

The post Learning to Cook vs Following a Recipe appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

Did Sherlock Holmes practice mindfulness?

I’ve read just about every Holmes story (really!) and there’s no mention of mindfulness or meditation. Holmes certainly never sat cross-legged on a cushion or uttered ‘om’ in any of the stories.

However, in her book Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes, psychologist Maria Konnikova describes Holmes as the archetype of mindfulness. Many cognitive psychologists agree, pointing out Holmes’ habits and mental discipline support the three tenants of mindfulness:

1. Intention: Shift from running on auto-pilot to purposeful awareness.
2. Attention: Direct your focus to the present moment.
3. Attitude: Maintain an open, curious, and entirely non-judgmental stance.

They may be right.

In the story “A Scandal in Bohemia,” Holmes demonstrates both intention and attention:

“You see, but you do not observe. The distinction is clear. For example, you have frequently seen the steps which lead up from the hall to this room… I know that there are seventeen steps, because I have both seen and observed.”

Later in the same story, Holmes talks about the third tenant, attitude: “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

This is being mindful without using the word explicitly.

In multiple stories, Dr. Watson notes Holmes had the ability to disengage his mind from a stressful case. Holmes would sit perfectly still for hours, play the violin, or look at architecture. In “The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans,” Watson described it as Holmes’ power of “throwing his brain out of action and switching all his thoughts on to lighter things.” Psychologists call this distancing and it’s a mindfulness technique used to keep from being emotionally overwhelmed.

One of my favorite passages in “A Study in Scarlet” reinforces mindfulness:

“A fool takes in all the lumber of every sort that he comes across, so that the knowledge which might be useful to him gets crowded out, or at best is jumbled up with a lot of other things, so that he has a difficulty in laying his hands upon it. Now the skillful workman is very careful indeed as to what he takes into his brain-attic.”

Mindfulness advocates selective attention and filtering out mental distractions. Sadly, I seem to remember more trivia than I care to admit.

So, did Sherlock Holmes practice mindfulness? Probably not. But he certainly was mindful.

The post Did Sherlock Holmes practice mindfulness? appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

Whenever you feel like you’re stuck in a rut, you can use the novelty rule to break up the monotony.

Most adults settle into routines, both in their personal and professional lives. These routines are everywhere: people take the same route to work, they eat the same item from their favorite restaurant, or they shop at the same grocery story going through the aisles in the same order. While structure can be reassuring to some, the endless repetition feels mundane to most; almost as if life is on autopilot.

Conventional wisdom suggests the antidote to monotony is to make big changes. Cut your hair. Go on vacation. Take a class. While these sudden changes seem to work for a while, your hair grows back, you have to come back from vacation, and the class comes to an end. The routines get reinstated and the monotony returns.

In contrast, Liz Moody encourages people to break up their everyday routines by introducing an element of newness to them. Take a slightly different route to work or park in a different spot. Add an adventurous appetizer to your usual order. Explore the aisles of the grocery store in a different pattern or try a different store. Small changes can make big differences.

Moody calls this the novelty rule: incorporating even tiny bits of novelty can break the monotony of daily routines and make life feel more engaging. This changes how we experience time, because when we feel like we are engaged, life isn’t passing us by. The novelty rule makes old routines feel new.

Research supports introducing new elements to your life. When you’re learning new ways of doing things or you’re faced with novel situations, the hippocampus in your brain activates. This stimulates the release of dopamine – the so-called ‘feel good’ chemical – which makes us feel more satisfied, uplifted, and sharp. Stimulating the hippocampus regularly promotes neuroplasticity, which can improve recovery from injuries and slow down mental aging.

In short, you don’t need to go on a tropical vacation to feel recharged – just make some small changes in your daily routines. You can use the novelty rule to alleviate monotony.

The post Use the Novelty Rule to Alleviate Monotony appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

The Carly Simon paradox is inspired by her 1972 song lyrics, “You’re so vain, you probably think this song is about you.” 

Carly claims the subject of the song is vain for thinking the song is about them. However, assuming the song is about them, they aren’t really vain – are they? And if the person who the song is about doesn’t think the song is about them, they aren’t vain either.

What’s makes this even more confusing interesting is that Carly has never revealed who the song is about. Which means there might be multiple people who think they are the subject of the song. It’s like Schrödinger’s cat.

The Carly Simon paradox is a self-referential paradox which occurs when a statement creates a logical contradiction or an infinite loop.

The most common version of a self-referential paradox is “This statement is false.” If the statement is True, then its claim must be accurate. Since it claims “This statement is false,” the statement must actually be False. If the statement is False, then its claim must be incorrect. This means the statement is not false, making it True. Because neither True nor False works, the statement is self-contradictory and breaks traditional binary logic.

Another similar paradox is the rule that “All rules have exceptions.”  If the rule is true, it must have an exception. If so, that makes the statement false — but that itself an exception, making it true again.

Yes, this is confusing. That’s the point.

I spent some time trying to design another self-referential paradox inspired by song lyrics. The best I could come up with comes from Rick Astley’s 1987 song lyrics, “Never gonna give you up, Never gonna let you down.” If you ask Rick for his copy of the movie UP, according to the lyrics, he can’t give it to you. However, in not giving you the movie, he lets you down.

From the buttered cat to the birthday paradox, apparently I’ve been writing about paradoxes a lot lately. Hopefully by explaining them, I’m not making them more confusing. If am confusing, we could call that the blogging paradox.

The post Carly Simon paradox appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

Have you noticed there’s less color in our lives?

Vibrant colors like bright reds, blues, and greens seem to be fading from popular use and are being replaced by more subdued grays, beiges, blacks, and neutral tones. This is happening in almost every industry – from automobiles to interior design, fashion and makeup, and even films. Every corporate brand seems to have become bland.

This loss of color isn’t just observational. In 2020, researchers at the UK’s Science Museum Group analyzed more than 7000 everyday objects in its collection and found the number of colorful items dropped from 40% in 1900 to just 15%. In addition to being less colorful, the items also became more uniform in size and shape.

I believe there’s less color in our lives due to some combination of modern minimalism, risk aversion, and sensory overload.

Modern minimalism in architecture and design might be the most to blame. Gone are the days of the “painted lady” Victorian homes, avocado green appliances, and the bright pastel cars of the 1950’s. Cars, in particular, have made a significant shift; only 20% of today’s cars are non-grayscale colors compared to 40% in 2004. This lack of diversity is despite the same number of colors being offered to consumers.

The transition is perhaps most evident in technology. In the 1980’s, Apple’s brightly colored logo encouraged us all to “Think Different.” These days, the designs from Apple – and nearly every other tech company – are monochromatic.

For major purchases like homes and cars, manufacturers likely choose neutrals to broaden appeal and reduce the risk the items don’t sell. Similarly, since buyers resell homes and cars more frequently than in the past, they may believe neutral colors are safer and improve resale value. After all, a black or silver car is easier to sell than a bright yellow one.

Another theory is that, in this digital age, our brains are “forced to process aggressive color palettes, moving text, and high-contrast user interfaces.” Muted, less colorful, environments offer a calming visual white noise which acts as a balance against sensory overload.

Regardless of the underlying reason, the prevalence of more neutral colors is symbolic of a more homogenous world and less expression of individual personality.

Perhaps in response, dopamine dressing –wearing mood-boosting bright colors like cobalt blue, emerald green, or fiery red – has gained popularity. Accent walls, colorful art, and introducing vibrant, textured textiles have started to reappear in designs. Color seems to be slowly returning to our lives.

If you are unsure of what color to choose, may I suggest Pacific Teal?

The post Less Color In Our Lives appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

Yes, this is a very unique blog about redundant extra words.

As a words matter guy, I’m often struck by seemingly common phrases which don’t make logical sense. The phrase ‘I could care less’ is five times more prevalent in American English than the correct phrase ‘I couldn’t care less.’

Lately, I’ve been hearing a lot of people use the phrase ‘very unique.’ Sigh.

Unique means being the only one of its kind or being without an equal. In both cases, it doesn’t add any extra meaning to include the modifier very. Once you’re one of a kind, you can’t be even more than the only one.

Unique is an example of an absolute adjective (sometimes called a non-gradable adjective) that shouldn’t take modifiers to show degree. It’s either true or not (mathematically binary). Other absolute adjectives include complete, perfect, empty, final, and impossible. You can’t be very perfect, very empty, or very final either.

Very is an example of an intensifier, used to modify an adjective to double down on the meaning. Very hot implies a much higher temperature than just hot. The problem happens when you apply an intensifier to an absolute – the extra word doesn’t boost anything or change the meaning.

Other intensifiers include really, quite, totally, absolutely, completely, extremely. These are all unnecessary when used before an absolute adjective such as in the following phrases:

• Totally full
• Absolutely essential
• Completely empty
• Extremely pregnant
• Truly impossible

The first words for all five of these are empty modifiers and should be deleted.

Does that mean absolute adjectives like unique and empty should never have modifiers before them?

English purists would probably demand no modifiers but convention has it that you can use limiters. Limiters include words like almost, virtually, practically, and nearly. This means almost full and practically empty are accepted even if very unique is not.

Yet another example why English is difficult to learn.

If you want to avoid the redundant extra words of an intensifier on an absolute adjective, you can drop the word very and stick with unique. Or be unusual and show off your rare vocabulary by choosing a almost unique word like distinctive.

The post A very unique blog about redundant extra words  appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

I recently met with a former close colleague to catch up and celebrate the birth of his first child. During a wide-ranging 4-hour (!) conversation, my friend dropped an intriguing nugget:

First born girls look more like their fathers than their mothers so their fathers are more likely to accept them, as historically men have preferred to have boys.

While my first reaction was to discard this idea entirely, I quickly found that some evolutionary psychologists have proposed that if babies looked like their fathers, it could boost the father’s confidence in paternity and increase his investment in the child, helping the baby survive and be more successful. In fact, there is some scientific evidence that when fathers perceive a child as looking like them (whether or not that’s objectively true), they report more emotional and financial investment. However, resemblance is ultimately subjective when children are young; people tend to see whichever parent they expect or want to see. Mothers are especially more likely to say the baby looks like the father, even when outside judges do not agree, but fathers are not particularly objective either.

Research that breaks down resemblance by child sex and age finds more complex patterns than first born girls looking like their fathers. For newborns, boys and girls resemble their mothers more than their fathers. Between 2 and 3 years of age, boys tend to resemble their fathers more while girls continue to resemble their mothers. However, this impact is no stronger for first born children than it is for all children.

Said another way, despite repeated claims in the popular press, there is no strong peer‑reviewed evidence that first born girls resemble fathers but later born girls do not. Instead, a form of confirmation bias is likely happening: humans are good at spotting family resemblance, fathers care about resemblance as a cue to paternity, and people notice and talk about cases where firstborns resemble fathers.

All of this combines to keep the story alive that first born girls look like their fathers – but they are no more likely to do so than any other kid.   

The post Do First Born Girls Look Like Their Fathers? appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.

As my mantra is “Words Matter,” I’m fascinated by the etymology of words, how different cultures use language, and when people misuse English. I’ve covered spelling bees, written about mondegreens and eggcorns, and advocated for the banishing of overused words.

So, it’s probably not surprising I’m fascinated with jokes that contain a play on words. Here’s one I heard recently:

A woman was holding a funeral for her husband when a man she didn’t recognize sat in the row directly behind her. Near the end of the service, the man leaned forward, gently tapped her on the shoulder, and asked the widow, “Would you mind if I said a word to everyone?”

She replied, “Please do.”

The man stood up, cleared his throat, and said “Plethora.” Afterwards, the man sat back down.

The widow smiled through her tears turned to him and said “Thank you. That means a lot.”

A minute or two later, the man leaned forward again and asked “Would you mind if I added another word?”

“No, go right ahead,” she encouraged.

The man stood up, said “Bargain,” and sat down.

The widow dabbed her eyes turned again and said “That means a great deal.”

A moment later, another man approached the widow and asked “May I also say two words?”

Surprised, the widow nodded yes. The second man nervously approach the microphone and tentatively said “Water pit.”

After he sat back down, the widow walked over to him, smiled kindly, and whispered “Thank you for the words. I know you meant well.”

Words matter. Even when you’re telling a joke.

The post Words Matter, Joke Edition appeared first on Manage By Walking Around.