Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Unequally Yoked

7 Quick Takes (6/21/13)

Last updated on: June 21, 2013 at 1:04 am   by Leah Libresco

7 Quick Takes (6/21/13) 2013-06-21T01:04:02-04:00 Leah Libresco

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

— 1 —

The Monsters Inc prequel comes out today, and I’ve been super-dubious about it for a long time.  Pixar has broken my heart recently (especially with Brave), and the plot of scrappy underdogs bands together with popular enemy and wins college seemed a lot more cliche than the original story.  But then I read this io9 feature on some of the choices the animators made, and now I’m totally enraptured.  For example:

“Monsterfication” is the word the design team used to describe the aesthetic of the Monsters University world. Sets art director Robert Kondo explains that the movie’s designers constantly asked themselves, “What would it be like to be a monster architect?” Some of the design challenges in creating the MU campus were practical. For example, since monsters come in all sizes, from Mike Wazowski through the giant football-playing slug creature, how do monster doors work? If you look closely at the campus buildings, you’ll notice doors within doors. There are smaller doors with handles the smaller monsters can reach, framed by larger and larger doors. Even the stairs and drinking fountains are designed for monsters of varying sizes. Plus, flying monsters don’t have to enter some buildings on the ground floor, instead landing on perches outside the top floor windows. Aquatic monsters have their own, submerged portions of campus.

— 2 —

And if you want to be enthused about the process of world and character building, you’ll probably like Eliezer Yudkowsky’s essay “How to Write Deep Characters.”

A good rule of thumb is that to create a 3D character, that person must contain at least two different 2D characters who come into conflict. Contrary to the first thought that crosses your mind, three-dimensional good people are constructed by combining at least two different good people with two different ideals, not by combining a good person and a bad person. Deep sympathetic characters have two sympathetic parts in conflict, not a sympathetic part in conflict with an unsympathetic part. Deep smart characters are created by combining at least two different people who are geniuses.

E.g. HPMOR!Hermione contains both a sensible young girl who tries to keep herself and her friends out of trouble, and a starry-eyed heroine, neither of whom are stupid.  (Actually, since HPMOR!Hermione is also the one character who I created as close to her canon self as I could manage – she didn’t *need* upgrading – I should credit this one to J. K. Rowling.)

And if you want to know some of what Yudkowsky knows about writing science fiction and fantasy, you should check out Orson Scott Card’s How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy.  Yudkowsky cites it, and non-author me just had a very enjoyable reread of it on the way to the airport.

— 3 —

In real life, it’s been my privilege to know a great number of enjoyable characters.  And one of them is the Secular Students Association Communications Director Jesse Galef.  Previously, he sorted his books into the four Hogwarts Houses, and shelved them accordingly, and now, he’s explained why you should precommit to eating any cupcakes you have the ability and desire to eat.  His post is a nice, lay introduction to three popular frameworks for decision theory, and his reasoning is too, well, delicious to spoil here.

— 4 —

Over at The American Scholar, there’s an interesting memoir-essay by a survivor of the Burundi civil war, who is baffled and horrified by his American classmates love of first person shooter video games.  It’s ultimately an essay about the power of the stories we tell — what gets normalized, how do we make new experiences fit into the arcs and genres we’re accustomed to?  But I’m also interested by the way the narrator also reasons by analogy and stories, understanding his new friends by looking for analogues in the cast of characters he grew up with.

— 5 —

Since I was blogging on empathy (the ability to bring others to life in our heads as deep, accurate characters), I have to link to io9’s roundup of empathy research (with a special focus on how we could possibly increase our susceptibility).  But some of the findings surprised me:

What Chakrabarti and his colleagues found was that if you were asked whether your best friend should have a candy bar now or $100 next week, you were likely to make a similar choice to the one you’d make for yourself. But if you were trying to decide for a total stranger, especially someone from a different group, you’d be more likely to choose the immediate reward instead of the bigger reward later on. This isn’t just because you want the stranger to be ripped off — it’s because you have less empathy for the stranger, and thus have a harder time imagining the future reward materializing for him or her.

I would have predicted that I’d be more likely to not hyperbolically discount for a stranger, since both rewards were so far removed from me that I could think about both of them as time-independent.  Huh.

— 6 —

Oh, and I did manage to sneak a link to a Matilda song in my post on rule-breaking to learn, which is all the excuse I need to stick in my favorite song from that musical (“When I Grow Up”).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0tRDhEmdO4

— 7 —

And finally, I’ll be emailing everyone today who signed up to play in the Ideological Turing Test, to let them know if they’ve been selected.  (I want a fair amount of diversity on both teams).  While you wait for them to write their essays on sex and death, you may want to check out this historical ideological turing test that Bryan Caplan spotted.

Dawes, Singer, and Lemons (1972)… recruited students who were “hawks” and “doves” with regard to the Vietnam War and asked them to write opinion statements that the typical dove on campus as well as the typical hawk on campus would endorse.  Then they recruited a second group of hawks and doves, asked the hawks to agree or disagree with the hawk statements written by hawks and doves, and asked doves to agree or disagree with dove statements written by hawks and doves.  Hawks rejected more hawk statements written by doves than hawk statements written by hawks, and doves rejected more dove statements written by hawks than dove statements written by doves.  Both hawks and doves rejected statements mostly on the grounds that they were too extreme.

 

For more Quick Takes, visit Conversion Diary!

7 Quick Takes

Previous Post



June 20, 2013

I'm all verklempt...

Next Post



June 28, 2013 9 Quick Takes (6/28/13)


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 7 Quick Takes Apologetics Atheism Book Conversion Debate Tactics Debates Epistemology/Philosophy Housekeeping Ideological Turing Test Marriage Morality in Practice Parsing Catholicism Possibly Heretical Radio Reviews/Recommendations Sequence Index Spiritual Practice Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2017 March 2017 January 2017 December 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the mother of Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Elizabeth Sarah Ruth Mary

Related posts from Unequally Yoked

Catholic

7QT: Fake Bears, Faker Weapons, and Austen

Unequally Yoked

Catholic

7QT: Moms, Pacifist Pilots, and other superheroes

Unequally Yoked

Catholic

7QT: Remixes, Underwear, & Fake Fingers

Unequally Yoked

Catholic

7QT: The Peculiar Virtues of Daredevil, Pool Table...

Unequally Yoked

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic

Creation, Preservation, and Teleology in Catholic Theology

As I write this, it is very early Monday morning. Like millions...

The Parable Of The Sower And The Word...

One of Christ’s most famous parables is that of the sower who...

Rejecting Doom: Christian Hope And Human Action

Christianity is a religion of hope. We are to have hope and...

Why I Choose the Eucharist Over the Sermon

Choose the Eucharist, Not the Sermon What are we supposed to get...

5 Design Elements Found in Spiritually Rooted Homes

Putting Spirituality Into Home Decor Our homes are more than our living...

Credo: A Story of God Told with the...

About 10 years ago, I began to imagine a personal "Credo" that...

view all Catholic blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube