Sure. We have schemas, or organized thoughts in our memories. Schemas can be molded with our parents, such that we learn “My dad is abusive toward me because I’m a terrible person”. These types of schemas are built even though the child is not responsible at all for their own abuse. But the reality is that many children find it more likely that they are the problem compared to their guardians being the problem.

That same child could have a wonderful teacher in school, someone who is caring, understanding, curious about the child’s interests, and consistent. The child could then learn “I’m safe here with this teacher and unsafe with my own guardians”. That’s how you get different schemas built in different contexts.

You probably know this already, down in your heart. You probably have people that you like to be around, people that are a bit kinder and a bit more consistent than others. And you also probably have people that you don’t like to be around, people that are unkind and inconsistent.

If you want to learn more about this contextual way of looking at attachment styles, you can check out Piaget’s schema theory and contextual behavioral sciences.

Humans, like mammals, like it when we belong. This is pre-verbal and pre-cultural, in the sense that all babies feel good when someone sees them with kind eyes and feel bad when they’re left alone.

However, on top of these pre-verbal drives, we learn about the world through our experience and our thoughts. If our guardians are kind and consistent, we learn to expect that and we ourselves become kind and consistent. If our parents are unkind and inconsistent, we learn that.

By the time we become adults, we bring many of those learnings into relationships. We may be kind and consistent with our partners. Or we may be unkind and inconsistent.

As with many things, we can change. In fact, you can have one attachment style in one context and another attachment style in another context. This depends on the specific schemas or thoughts and experiences that you have.

If we define democracy as voting, then you’re right. However, to understand what I’m saying it’s important to understand what I mean by democracy. I’m using democracy to mean inclusive institutions that invest in their citizens to increase their capabilities and therefore their freedoms.

And you’re right: America is exceptionally un-democratic. You’re actually doubly right: there are democratic backsliding pressures around the world.

It’s a matter of time to see what the more powerful pressures will be: democracy or authoritarian populism.

The evidence powerfully suggests one answer. If you want to know more about this, check out Christian Welzel’s articles on democracy!

This Peter Thiel piece of shit doesn’t understand human development. He says freedom and democracy are not compatible, and yet we have decades (and in some cases centuries) of data showing that democracies make people freer.

If I could kindly suggest to that asshole to read one book, I’d suggest he reads Christian Welzel’s Freedom Rising. The book is packed with data that shows how democracies create freedom.

For example, democracies invest in their own people.

• Democracies invest in education, so that people can choose what kind of life to live.
• Democracies invest in healthcare, so that people can live without freedom-limiting disease.
• Democracies invest in research, so that people can solve technical problems with ease and spend more time doing things they can choose to do.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. In many, many ways, democracy leads to freedom, true actual freedom.

I like that you had the TM C and R.

What democracies do is create freedoms for everyone, true freedoms.

The freedom to choose one’s path of life? Sure! Democracies create that freedom through good, cheap, universal education!

The freedom to be as healthy as possible? Sure! Democracies create that freedom through good, cheap, universal healthcare!

The freedom to have technology help us solve problems? Sure! Democracies create that freedom through effective investments in research and development!

These are just a tase of what democracies do to create true freedom.

This is as great as it is sad. Nintendo, could you really not be a good company on your own? Did you require democracy and consumer advocacy for you to care about user-replaceable batteries in all of those products?

Midgley’s Ethical Primate changed my life.

So did Hayes’ A Liberated Mind.

So did Welzel’s Freedom Rising.

Currently reading Archer’s Explicit Instruction and Groshell’s Just Tell Them.

I’m sorry to hear you’ve had such frustrating experiences with coffee. I wonder if my experience could help you in navigating your experience.

When I order coffee I always see how they do it.

I don’t do it to complain. In fact, even if they get my order wrong I rarely ask for a change, because whatever they give me is usually alright.

I see how they do it because I’m curious. I like to know what their process is like. I like to know what machines they use. I like to know how they organize work in the coffee shop. I like to see their technique.

Because of this curiosity, I usually understand quite well why my coffee ends up the way it does.

Yes, I am a customer. Yes, I could insist that my drink has to be different. But I prefer to accept that life is unpredictable and that we are all human. And it’s usually alright.

Here’s a video that could help: https://youtu.be/OXbQx2hfA5k

Hi, Aralakh!

I’m responding to you here, but really I wanted to talk about something you asked about in another thread. That other thread got shut down, but I learned that before I typed out my response.

You asked how to learn for understanding instead of for coverage. Here’s my response:

Sure. It helps to know what learning is: a change in long term memory. In particular, you’re structuring your memory so that you can think in a structured way.

So, how do you change your long term memory? First, start by paying attention to what you want to learn. If it’s a hard topic, pay attention to a small part of it. Read just a chapter, or just a page, or just a paragraph.

How much should you chew? Just a page? Just a paragraph? The whole book? Your experience will tell you. Try something and see how it goes.

Once you have read something small enough, put it aside and try to recall it. Write it out or talk out loud. Try to explain it. Try to interpret it. Try to get a sense of how much you understand of it.

Then go back to the text and compare what you said to it. See if you got the main ideas.

This is the basic understanding procedure.

Here are some ways of enhancing the procedure.

• Establish goals for yourself. This is very, very important. Do you want to understand the main ideas? What are those main ideas? Do you want to develop a skill? What is it? Without goals, it’s hard to self-regulate as a learner. Check out the research on this self-regulation: Metacognitive Judgments and Control of Study and * Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview*
  • A method that I like to establish goals is to have a constantly-changing, bottom-up list of Knowledge, Skills, Understandings, and Transfers I want to learn. Knowledge are just facts. Skills are basic things you learn to do. Understandings integrate and make sense of isolated facts. Understandings are developed over time. Your Understandings will probably change over time, which is why the list is bottom-up: you build is as you go. Transfers are authentic and complex applications of Skills, and they require Knowledge and Understandings. So before study session, I try to make a list of K, S, U, and T, to compare my actual recall to those. These ideas come from Understanding by Design for this, as well as Embedding Formative Assessment’s short section on Big Ideas.
• Learn about cognitive load theory. This will help you learn how much to chew. In particular, learning about the generation effect, element interactivity, the expertise reversal effect, and the spacing effect will help you loads. Going into learning without cognitive load theory is tough. Going into learning with cognitive load theory is powerful. There’s talks by Sweller, the originator of CLT, and there’s nice chapters on the implications of CLT for learning: Schmoker’s Just Tell Them and Rosenshine’s Principles In Action.
• Structure your recall sessions through Visible Thinking Routines. Practice the Core Thinking Routines. The books on VTR are good. Just know that VTR were developed in constructivist land, but constructivism is inefficient in learning, compared to Explicit Instruction (Archer and Schmoker) and Direct Instruction. In other words, if you want to learn efficiently then have clear goals, take small steps, generate evidence of where you are, and compare where you are to where you want to be so that you can know how to get there! VTR are amazing in both constructivist and direct instruction lands. They work for both (1) novices who are chewing very little and (2) experts who are innovating with entirely new thoughts.

Hope that helps! Let me know if you have questions :)

lol

meta is speedrunning enshitification

impressive

they skipped past the “get people to use your product” part of enshitification.

@dessalines@lemmy.ml

“Deletes surveillance-capitalist social media to improve life. Immediately builds self-hosted social media and productivity systems to further improve life”

Ah. I see what you’re saying. You’re saying the heat from the hot water compensates for the increase in sweating.

I suppose it’s worthwhile investigating the relationship between the energy in the water and the energy lost through sweating. And indeed some people have studied that:

“Yes, the hot drink is hotter than your body temperature, so you are adding heat to the body, but the amount that you increase your sweating by—if that can all evaporate—more than compensates for the the added heat to the body from the fluid.”

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-hot-drink-on-a-hot-day-can-cool-you-down-1338875/

I agree that time is part of the equation, but the equation is actually larger:

• time + expectation to do something by X time + inability to make that happen + other variables

Some cultures think that you should drink the opposite temperature. But if you look at what happens when you drink hot stuff, it doesn’t sound that crazy. Hot stuff makes you sweat. Sweat, when hot by dry air molecules, releases energy. That process cools you down.

I agree. My characterization is a simple abstraction. We can, like you mention, be more precise about the mechanisms through which post-traumatic growth comes about.

Indeed, it is not what OP described.

Post-traumatic growth is not

• positivity -> positivity

nor

• negativity -> negativity

but rather

• negativity -> positivity.

Ironic, isn’t it? How can positivity come out of negativity?

Ironically this exists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-traumatic_growth

This, on its own, is not a sign of ADHD and can be explained by other mechanisms.

Here are a few alternative mechanisms:

• Maxing out your cognitive load. We can only think so much, so if you think beyond your capabilities, you get overwhelmed and can’t think well. This happens to everyone, regardless of whether they have ADHD or not. Check out Sweller’s cognitive load theory. He has some talks online.
• Adenosine buildup. This is a molecule that gets produced while you think. Your brain slowly gets filled with this molecule and it is one of the ways in which you end up feeling tired. You can actually trick your brain into thinking there’s no adenosine; you can drink coffee! Coffee fills your brain with caffeine, which crowds out adenosine. Caffeine, over time, will leave your body, but adenosine will only leave when you rest. That is why reading can feel difficult late at night and easy after a good night’s sleep.

Which ones? I don’t.

I know a counter example.