Imprecise emotions allow to trick your sweetheart

A recent study [1] discussed on this blog page found a relationship between awe inspiring experiences and decision making. That is not absolute new, however. A similar study in the seventies similarly found an association between sexual desire and feelings of anxiety [2]. On a bridge, probably not as much anxiety arousing as this one in the picture, but height enough to feel uncomfortable, men were interviewed by an attractive women following a typical psychological questionnaire. At the end of the interview the women gave her telephone number to the male test person. Significantly more callbacks were counted from those who were asked at the height bridge compared to an ordinary bridge. Obviously the anxiety emotion, the raised heart beat for instance, caused by the bridge was interpreted as sexual attractiveness and some of the men felt it worthwhile to re-experience that emotion.

 That is good news for all those who want someone to fall in love. Simply choose a bridge or something else awe inspiring enough to arouse your sweetheart’s emotions, put on a lovely smile, and your sweetheart is likely to believe he or she is in love with you. I recall that Niagara Falls are a preferred honeymoon destination. Probably for the same reason.

 The question is what all this has to do with fauceir theory. The answer: it is a typical example of imprecision. Emotions are psychological fauceirs that are slaves to our rationality fauceirs. As such, they are likely to do things that are from the outset adapted to the most common situations of our animal or primeval ancestors, that we would not always sanction rationally.

 Most exciting to me however was the following quote from the blog mentioned above.

 … it seems to me that atheists have a great appetite for awe-inspiring stories – in particular, stories about great scientific and engineering feats. Could this in part be a facet of life that in other circumstances could be filled by religion?

 That is sheer fauceirology. Of course, atheism is some kind of religion. Of course, it has to fill the same emotional gaps as any other religion; if not all atheists would become distressed. In some people atheism ensues more rational thinking. In those I would agree that atheism is more evolutionary advanced (in its fauceirological sense). Some atheists however seek refuge in demonism which cannot be considered as a higher level of evolution.


Rudd, M., Vohs, K. D. & Aaker, J. Awe Expands People’s Perception of Time, Alters Decision Making, and Enhances Well-Being. Psychol Sci (2012).doi:10.1177/0956797612438731


Dutton, D. G. & Aron, A. P. Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30, 510–517 (1974).

Creative Commons License

This work by Paul Netman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Fauceir theory is developed and © by Mato Nagel and available at


Universities are feudalistic structures

When created in medieval times universities copied most of the structures that ruled that time. In some places they even evolved straight from monasteries. In other more secular places they rather copied rules of conduct from the royal court. Even today most of these structure are present and in perfect shape and use. Still the universities’ hierarchy is strong and tightly related to titles that say nothing about a persons abilities but deserve respect: doctor, university lecturer, faculty member, professor, dean, rector. Please compare with aristocratic title such as squire, prince, duke, king.

Besides titles university authorities share dress code and ornaments with aristocrats. It is so ridiculous, so misplaced in our modern societies that I can say I would feel more comfortable in a clown’s costume or executing Santa, really.

But apart from those mind-bogging, rather intimidating ceremonies what else universities have in stock. The answer falls short. Universities are meant to promote research, but to my knowledge all big discoveries and big inventions through the last two centuries or so have been made outside universities’ ivory towers.

The list is incomplete—I’m certain—but I cannot think of all examples. Even such expensive projects such as space programs run outside universities in Russia and the US. Well, and last but not least fauceir theory.

You may ask why we still need universities despite their obvious inefficiency and their clinging on to archaic customs. The answer is simple we need them for education and data storage. That’s the only thing universities are really good at, but we shouldn’t allow them to spoil our lives. They belong to ancient fauceirs and are outdated as the sharia and inquisition to name only a few medieval fauceirs.

Creative Commons License

This work by Paul Netman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Fauceir theory is developed and © by Mato Nagel and available at reloaded

While the publication on this website were suspended, we feverishly worked to improve the main fauceir website available at We finally succeeded in building an entirely new web envionment based on django.

The environment includes several strategies to sort and search content. Besides a Wiki and hierarchical structure, called cladogram, even a blog is included. The former content is still available at till all the content is shuffled to the main website. Even some content presented in this blog will be edited and re-published there.