Coincidence that is statistically impossible seems to us like an irrational event, and some define it as a miracle. But, as Montaigne has said, "the origin of a miracle is in our ignorance, at the level of our knowledge of nature, and not in nature itself." Glorious miracles have been later on discovered to be obedience to the laws of nature or a technological development that was not widely known at the time. As the German poet, Goethe, phrased it: "Things that are mysterious are not yet miracles." The miracle assumes the intervention of a "higher power" in its occurrence that is beyond human capability to grasp. Yet there are methodical and simple ways to "cause a miracle" without divine revelation and inspiration. Instead of checking it out, investigating and finding the source of the event, we define it as a miracle. The miracle, then, is the excuse of those who are too lazy to think.

Information encountered after an event can influence subsequent remembering. External information can easily integrate into a witness's memory, especially if the event was poorly encoded or the memory is from a distant event, in which case time and forgetting have degraded the original memory. With reduced information available in memory with which to confirm the validity of post-event misinformation, it is less likely that this new information will be rejected. Instead, especially when it fits the witness's current thinking and can be used to create a story that makes sense to him or her, it may be integrated as part of the original experience. This process can be explicit (i.e., the witness knows it is happening), but it is often unconscious. That is, the witness might find himself or herself thinking about the event differently without awareness. Over time, the witness may not even know the source of information that led to the (new) memory. Sources of misinformation in forensic contexts can be encountered anywhere, from discussions with other witnesses to social media searches to multiple interviews with investigators or other legal professionals, and even in court.

Correlations are powerful because the insights they offer are relatively clear. These insights are often covered up when we bring causality back into the picture. For instance, a used-car dealer supplied data to statisticians to predict which of the vehicles available for purchase at an auction were likely to have problems. A correlation analysis showed that orange-colored cars were far less likely to have defects. Even as we read this, we already think about why it might be so: Are orange-colored car owners likely to be car enthusiasts and take better care of their vehicles? Or, is it because orange-colored cars are more noticeable on the road and therefore less likely to be in accidents, so they're in better condition when resold? Quickly we are caught in a web of competing causal hypotheses. But our attempts to illuminate things this way only make them cloudier. Correlations exist; we can show them mathematically. We can't easily do the same for causal links. So we would do well to hold off from trying to explain the reason behind the correlations.

Most mice in the wild are eaten or die before their life span of two years is over. They die from external causes, such as disease, starvation, or predators, not due to internal causes, such as aging. That is why nature has made mice to live, on average, for no longer than two years. Now we have arrived at an important point: The average life span of an animal species, or the rate at which it ages, is determined by the average time that this animal species can survive in the wild. That explains why a bat can live to be 30 years old. In contrast to mice, bats can fly, which is why they can escape from danger much faster. Thanks to their wings, bats can also cover longer distances and are better able to find food. Every genetic change in the past that made it possible for a bat to live longer was useful, because bats are much better able than mice to flee from danger, find food, and survive.

Moral excellence, according to Aristotle, is the result of habit and repetition, though modern science would also suggest that it may have an innate, genetic component. This means that moral excellence will be broadly set early in our lives, which is why the question of how early to teach it is so important. Freud suggested that we don't change our personality much after age five or thereabouts, but as in many other things, Freud was wrong. Recent psychological research shows that personality traits stabilize around age thirty in both men and women and regardless of ethnicity as the human brain continues to develop, both neuroanatomically and in terms of cognitive skills, until the mid-twenties. The advantage of this new understanding is that we can be a bit more optimistic than Aristotle and Freud about being able to teach moral excellence.

The size of a species is not accidental. It's a fine-tuned interaction between a species and the world it inhabits. Over large periods of time, size fluctuations have often signalled significant changes in the environment. Generally speaking, over the last five hundred million years, the trend has been towards animals getting larger. It's particularly notable in marine animals, whose average body size has increased 150-fold in this time. But we are beginning to see changes in this trend. Scientists have discovered that many animals are shrinking. Around the world, species in every category have been found to be getting smaller, and one major cause appears to be the heat. Animals living in the Italian Alps, for example, have seen temperatures rise by three to four degrees Celsius since the 1980s. To avoid overheating, chamois goats now spend more of their days resting rather than searching for food, and as a result, in just a few decades, the new generations of chamois are 25 percent smaller.

Lectins are large proteins that serve as a crucial weapon that plants use to defend themselves. The lectins in most plants bind to carbohydrates as we consume the plant. They also bind to sugar molecules found in the gut, in the brain, between nerve endings, in joints and in all bodily fluids. According to Dr. Steven Gundry, these sticky proteins can interrupt messaging between cells and cause toxic and inflammatory reactions. Brain fog is just one result of lectins interrupting communication between nerves. An upset stomach is another common symptom of lectin overload. Dr. Gundry lists a wide range of other health problems including aching joints, dementia, headaches and infertility that have been resolved in his patients once they eliminated lectins from their diets. Dr. Paul Saladino writes that the hypothesis that lectins are involved in Parkinson's disease is also gaining support, with animal studies showing that ‘lectins, once eaten, may be damaging the gut and travelling to the brain, where they appear to be toxic to dopaminergic neurons'.

Technology changes how individuals and societies understand the concept of privacy. The fact that someone has a new ability to access information or watch the actions of another does not justify doing so. Rather, advances in technology require citizens and policy makers to consider how privacy protections should be expanded. For example, when cameras first became available for commercial and private use, nations and citizens struggled over whether new laws should be enacted to protect individuals from being photographed without their permission. The reconsideration of privacy brought about by this new technology re-affirmed a distinction between private and public spaces. It was determined by most cultures that people automatically gave consent to being seen – and thus recorded – once they voluntarily stepped into a public space. Although some people might be uncomfortable with the spread of surveillance cameras, citizens in most cultures have adjusted to the fact that giving up the right not to be observed in these circumstances causes less harm to the community than failing to have surveillance.