tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13439323.post1850064184712463173..comments2024-02-09T23:19:03.162-08:00Comments on Seeds of Longevity: Justifying Simplicity in the Face of Complexitychrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10404520347687352090noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13439323.post-25487719976359433082011-03-24T23:15:48.087-07:002011-03-24T23:15:48.087-07:00Hey Michael, thanks for commenting. Great question...Hey Michael, thanks for commenting. Great questions. I see that I have an in text citation but not a reference for the social exclusion in low SES. I will rectify this immediately. I think there is no question that people of low SES are more socially excluded. <br /><br />If you search on social capital you will find a large amount of research that substantiates that part of my argument. However, I do not think there is much, if any research that establishes social exclusion in low SES to low self regulatory capacity. This would be a hypothesis I would like to explore. However, there is a strong link to academic performance, SES and social capital. I believe this makes my argument plausible. But I am eager to get your thoughts on that. <br /><br />As far as state-run health care is concerned would love to have that discussion at some point but I think it would be too much typing for this format.<br /><br />Thanks for your criticisms,<br /><br />Chrischrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10404520347687352090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13439323.post-53981204559154789032011-03-15T09:16:53.954-07:002011-03-15T09:16:53.954-07:00Your primary message seems to be that complex mess...Your primary message seems to be that complex messages can be made simple, but I think that a complimentary point is that THE PROBLEM (i.e., healthy living/diet) ITSELF is complex. Thus, it is not simply a matter of 'presentation', but a matter of complexity itself. To that end, I'm curious as to why anyone should believe that any central authority (with the same limitations of perfect knowledge as any other 'expert') should be given the task of providing THE message. That is to say, why should this be the state's job to tell people how to eat. (To clarify, I'm not arguing here about the proper role of gov't, but whether the state is even fit for such a function any better than other sources of information). <br /><br />To further make the point, in your opening you describe a number of sources of information. If I understand you right, I assume that this--in your mind--should be organized and presented from a central authority. It touches on a much larger issue as to the role of state-run/funded health all together.<br /><br />So, Q#1: To what extent is the state a better source of information than other sources. (By the way, I'm not setting up a straw-man argument that suggests that we should listen to anyone, but instead, focusing on why should this be centralized AND believe that we get better information?).<br /><br />Furthermore, to your point w/the limits of self-regulation. I'd like to see some data that shows that low SES are more socially excluded and thus have lower self-regulation capacity. I know the link b/t social exclusion and self-regulation. It is the first connection that I challenge. <br /><br />Q#2: Is there any merit to the idea that Low SES are more socially excluded?Michael Kitchenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14306174972822954977noreply@blogger.com