I discuss the "rise and fall" of microfinance, an idea that people hoped would help cure poverty. In the process I argue there are 4 levels of thinking about randomized controlled trials. Here's the podcast episode I'm referencing: http://rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs136-david-roodman-on-why-microfinance-wont-cure-global-pov.html

John Paulson gave $400 million to Harvard, and critics said that was a terribly inefficient way to help the world. I agree -- but here's why I'm reluctant to criticize Paulson and others like him. READ MORE: 1. Vox criticizing Paulson: http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8723189/john-paulson-harvard-donation 2. Slate criticizing Patricia Arquette: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2015/02/23/patricia_arquette_on_pay_equality_insulting_to_feminism.html 3. Buzzfeed criticizing Aziz Ansari: http://www.buzzfeed.com/katieheaney/im-not-impressed-by-aziz-ansaris-feminism

I discuss the latest episode of my Rationally Speaking podcast, on moral hypocrisy: http://rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs139-eric-schwitzgebel-on-moral-hypocrisy-why-doesnt-knowin.html Here's a paper on what I called the "Telescoping effect" but is also called psychophysical numbing: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1007744326393

A reader asks, "How should we confront the fact that it's sometimes more productive to believe false things?" My answer is that, yes, in principle, having false beliefs can benefit you. But in practice I rarely think self-deception is a good strategy, for two reasons: 1) It doesn't work that well 2) It sets you up for biases you can't predict ahead of time But you don't have to obsess over unhelpful, or unpleasant truths. I find there's usually some third way, an alternative to being paralyzed by the truth AND to believing a comforting lie. One example is a technique I call "worker-me and CEO-me."