#association-based cognitive processing | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gabrielsbubblegumbitch · 3 months

Note

DROP YOUR DX FOR VOX !!!!! Please and thank you.

I would like to preface all my posts on headcanons related to psychology and mental illness with a disclaimer: diagnosing mental conditions, especially personality disorders, can be extremely challenging. It's a complicated process that relies heavily on a psychologist's interpretation of facts, making it susceptible to biases. Personality disorders cannot be diagnosed based on surface-level observations and are not just labels that we can assign to people like in the case of MBTI. Additionally, I am not a clinician with any expertise in diagnosing people. Therefore, the following post should not be taken as a reliable professional opinion. It's simply my interpretation of the internal mechanisms that may be responsible for the behavior of certain characters in my fan fiction. Furthermore, I want to make it clear that I have no intention of stigmatizing people with personality disorders by associating them with villains. A personality disorder does not determine someone's character or make them a bad person. Some characters may be evil because of the choices they make, not as a result of their mental conditions.

(I've already posted some stuff here so I'm not going to repeat myself.)

Okay, so, Vox has Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). It's crucial to distinguish this from "common narcissism" (people often described as "narcissists" by others just because they are egotist assholes; kinda ableist, you shouldn't do it because it's extremely stigmatizing towards people suffering with actual NPD) . While those individuals typically function well, those with NPD exhibit all the traits – grandiosity, egocentrism, attention-seeking, intense power fantasies – but as it's a disorder, these traits lead to inflexible and maladaptive patterns of behavior and cognition.

NPD has its roots in intense feelings of shame, low self-compassion, and self-loathing. In my interpretation, Vox has always felt inadequate. His father inherited an enormous amount of money, establishing a media conglomerate in the 20's. Vox's mother, captivated by the world of movies, used them to escape her reality as a trophy wife. Despite her dreams of becoming an actress, Vox's father, possessive and protective, prevented her entry into the entertainment industry. As a compromise, he made their son a child actor, with the condition that it would be temporary. When Vox grew older, he was expected to transition to learning business and other skills, ultimately to take over the family's empire.

So, Vox was never enough for either of his parents. His father thought of him as annoying and unserious due to his talkativeness and exaggerated behaviors, attributing it to growing up surrounded by actors. As for his mother... Vox turned out to be a terrible actor, struggling to convey emotions that weren't bombastic and over-the-top. Being a teenager is humiliating enough, but imagine being a teenager bad at something and forced to do it for a worldwide audience, when the whole production crew is annoyed with you. Fortunately, he grew up to be devilishly handsome (not to be a simp, I just believe someone must be handsome to endure the ethereal punishment of having their face swapped for a TV screen) and entertaining, leading them to make him a TV host and media personality.

Anyway, NPD is all about creating a perfect self and projecting it to the world when you're deeply ashamed of your true self. It means that, no matter what you're doing, you're constantly concerned about how it looks to other people. You constantly play an exhausting game, trying to win gold stars of social admiration for every-fucking-thing, guided by superficial ideals of wealth, perfection, beauty, and, above all, power. One reason Alastor's existence bothers Vox so much is the fact that he cannot comprehend the idea of someone choosing radio over his "objectively better and correct" medium. Vox lacks the ability to understand nuanced sentiments, which ironically makes him thrive in Hell. In this anarchocapitalist, lawless society, survival of the fittest prevails, and this is a game he excels at playing.

Generally, the best approach for individuals with NPD is to pull them out of delusional thinking by confronting their beliefs about the world and themselves with reality (it should be performed by qualified therapist, especially when someone hasn't completed any kind of therapeutic process yet). However, in Hell, Vox's behavior was no longer in violation of social norms; on the contrary, it was highly rewarded. Consequently, he completely lost his shit, became unhinged, and began acting on all his previously suppressed urges. He finally fulfilled all narcissistic power fantasies and became (almost) untouchable. Now, he's ready to kill anyone who questions him, seeing it as threatening to his fragile image of the perfect self.

He exhibits strong bipolar tendencies. Most of the time, he's power-tripping in a semi-maniacal state. Periodically, he undergoes deep, depressive episodes, locking himself up in his apartment and avoiding interaction.

Constantly guarding this fragile image of the perfect self that he built is exhausting. The bigger this image gets, the more fragile it becomes, like a house of cards. And guarding it becomes more and more exhausting. But there's nothing scarier than the idea of the facade falling apart and people seeing him as he is: imperfect and vulnerable, damaged and ashamed, rotten and evil. Deep down, he knows he's unlovable, and it hurts. He knows that true love exists; he craves this ultimate form of admiration and devotion, but it requires vulnerability and honesty, which he's not capable of. He's only vulnerable with Valentino, and only occasionally when he's intoxicated or when Val fucks every last thought out of his body. He's very much a controlling top insecure about his masculinity, so the latter happens rarely.

Also, drugs. Oh, do this man enjoy some coke. Other drugs and booze, not so much; they make him feel less in control. But getting coked up, going out, causing a scene, killing some poor souls, and relishing this feeling of being completely untouchable? Feels so good.

When it comes to Alastor, he hates him because he's jealous. Despite all his efforts—building a perfect persona, a perfect company, perfect entertainment—this stinky, outdated, and boring radio demon gets so much attention and admiration that should be his. Moreover, he feels that Alastor can see right through his bullshit. He's so paranoid about it that he's almost certain Alastor knows about his childhood traumas, about his death, about all his truths, and could one day broadcast it for all people of Hell to hear. So, he needs him dead.

Note: these headcanons (especially Vox's past) are very important part of my fanfiction. Please feel free to use them in your fics but I'll appreciate if you tag me 🩷

Velvette hc | Valentino hc | Vees + Angel hc | VoxVal hc

#vox #vox hazbin hotel #Valentino #valentino hazbin hotel #voxval #staticmoth #headcanon #character analysis #ask

308 notes · View notes

my-autism-adhd-blog · 9 months

Text

Hi everyone,

I found this interesting article about autism and memory. I don’t know about you all, but my memory is not very good. According to this article:

Researchers have been aware that memory deficits or impairments can make it challenging for autistic children to socialize and engage with their peers effectively. But the exact nature of how memory deficits could manifest among autistic children was poorly understood, until now. In a recent study published in the journal Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, a team of California-based researchers found that autistic children tend to face difficulties in remembering people’s faces and certain types of information.

“Social cognition cannot occur without reliable memory,” senior author Vinod Menon, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine said in a press release.

“Social behaviors are complex, and they involve multiple brain processes, including associating faces and voices to particular contexts, which require robust episodic memory,” Menon added. “Impairments in forming these associative memory traces could form one of the foundational elements in autism.”

The entirety of this article will be below if anyone want to read it. I hope you found it interesting and helpful. ♥️

#autism #actually autistic #autism & memory #my memory is terrible #memory issues #i’m sure some of you can relate #feel free to reblog/share if you’d like

200 notes · View notes

science-lover33 · 8 months

Text

Unraveling the Wonders of the Neuron and Brain (Part 1)

Hey there, Tumblr fam! Today, let's dive deep into the intricate world of neurons and the brain. 🧠✨

Anatomy of a Neuron

Neurons are the building blocks of the nervous system, responsible for transmitting information throughout your body. They have a unique structure, consisting of three main parts:

Cell Body (Soma): This is like the neuron's control center. It contains the nucleus, which houses the cell's DNA and controls its activities.

Dendrites: These branch-like extensions protruding from the cell body are the neuron's antennae. They receive signals from other neurons or sensory receptors, transmitting these signals to the cell body.

Axon: Think of the axon as the neuron's transmission line. It's a long, slender, cable-like structure that carries signals away from the cell body, toward other neurons or target cells.

At the end of the axon, you'll find axon terminals, where neurotransmitters are released to communicate with the next neuron or target cell.

Physiology of a Neuron

Neurons are all about transmitting information through electrical impulses and chemical signals. Here's a quick rundown:

Resting Membrane Potential: Neurons have a resting state where the inside is negatively charged compared to the outside due to the uneven distribution of ions (like sodium and potassium) across the cell membrane. This creates a potential difference called the resting membrane potential.

Action Potential: When a neuron receives a strong enough signal (usually from dendrites), it can generate an action potential—a rapid change in membrane potential. This electrical signal travels down the axon like a wave.

Synaptic Transmission: When the action potential reaches the axon terminals, it triggers the release of neurotransmitters into the synapse, the tiny gap between neurons. These chemicals bind to receptors on the next neuron, initiating a new electrical signal.

The Marvelous Brain

Now, let's shift our focus to the brain—the command center of your entire nervous system. 🌟

Your brain consists of various regions, each with specific functions. Here are a few key areas:

Cerebrum: This is the largest part and is divided into two hemispheres, each responsible for various cognitive functions like thinking, memory, and sensory perception.

Cerebellum: Located at the back of your brain, it plays a crucial role in balance, coordination, and fine motor skills.

Brainstem: Situated at the base of the brain, it controls basic life-sustaining functions like breathing and heart rate.

Hippocampus: Essential for memory formation and storage.

Amygdala: Involved in processing emotions and emotional memories.

And there's so much more to explore!

References:

Bear, M. F., Connors, B. W., & Paradiso, M. A. (2016). "Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain." Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Purves, D., et al. (2017). "Neuroscience." Sinauer Associates, Inc.

Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H., & Jessell, T. M. (2012). "Principles of Neural Science." McGraw-Hill Education.

These references will provide you with in-depth insights into the fascinating world of neurons and the brain. Remember, your brain is a universe waiting to be explored! 🌌💡🔬

Stay curious, Tumblr pals! 😊🧠

#neuroscience #biology #science #college #education #school #student #medicine #doctors #health #healthcare #neurology #brains #psychology #psychiatry

155 notes · View notes

hug-your-face · 2 months

Text

Insight today while washing the lettuce and thinking of my friend who doesn't want to vote.

They are an otherwise intelligent, responsible, generous person, who appears to be socially conscious. They have worked hard and long for their position in their profession. They express concern for the planet. They get twitchy if you use too many paper towels.

But they don’t want to vote for Biden for reasons, and quote "doesn't like the whole system where the parties take turns swinging things back and forth" unquote.

I have been dumbstruck at their attitude for about two months now. I've been thrashing back and forth trying to reconcile this person I love with their attitude:

If you care abt the planet enough to conserve paper towels, don’t you care enough to stop a Repub administration from raping the land?

If you don’t like how things can swing back and forth, don't you want an administration that's going to work to shore up, rather than dismantle, more lasting democratic systems of governance?

If you understand the value of the long game, why are you only satisfied with instant results from a single election rather than viewing that election as a single move in an ongoing process?

The insight came to me as I used an extra set of paper towels to dry my lettuce:

These people are not motivated by outcomes. They are motivated by how their choices make them FEEL.

Not how the outcomes of their choices will make them feel. But how the action associated with their choices makes them feel.

In terms of outcomes for the environment, saving paper towels doesn't do shit compared to pushing for restrictions on oil companies. But using half a paper towel is an instant dopamine hit: "Ahhh, I am caring for Mother Earth. I care. I am a good person. Ahh yes that's the stuff."

This model fits for voting too. We know that The Only Votes That Count Are Those Cast. We know that Dems Go Where The Votes Are Not Where The Votes Aren't. We know that voting in every election, every time, in numbers, is a very low-effort way to contribute to moving the Overton window farther left.

But in the moment, for people who are motivated by how their action associated with their choice makes them feel... the absolute best move for their dopamine supply is to abstain: "I am NOT supporting an old fart; I am NOT supporting genocide; I am Challenging The System; I am a good person. Ahh yes, that's the stuff."

At the time, when I challenged my friend on their position, they held up their hands and said "look, I'm not saying I have any answers, I'm just saying I don’t like how the system works."

They didn't like how participating in the system made them FEEL in the moment.

For those of us who think this is madness, hey, we aren't off the hook entirely. We are basing our choices and actions off of outcomes, true. But there's probably a feeling/dopamine component in there too. "I am holding my nose and voting Blue; I am doing my part to actually affect the future even if I hate some things abt my choice; I am a good person."

So maybe the difference isn't in the motivation (my feelings and self-image) but in what motivates us (my action vs the outcome of my action).

I don't have an answer to the question at this time and this post is already long enough. But I'll think on it. And I invite you to do so as well:

For these people (who seem to be a sizable part of the population), how to outweigh the choice where their action preserves their self-image, doesn't cost them dopamine for having to take a "bad" action, and maybe even gives them a happy boost for "not being part of a flawed system?"

For these people, how to help them connect more to the outcome?

Off the cuff, I can't think of any means other than cognitive-behavioral therapy. :/

EDIT: Apparently there's a term for this and it's called Emotivism -- ethics isn't abt effects but abt feelings.

#mine #long post #psychology #cognitive psychology #affective cognitive #ethics #politics #environment #ref

42 notes · View notes

apollodarling-writes · 6 months

Note

I've being wondering about this for a while. I didn't think it, but turns out silva and kikyo do actually love each other. So killua probably grew up seeing those expressions of "love" and thinking that's normal for a relationship. How do you think that would affect his relationship with reader? And if it isn't too much, how do you think his overall experience with his family effects it? Because I highly doubt after everything he's gone through that his relationship with the reader would be perfectly normal. What're your thoughts?

before i delve into killua’s experiences, i wanna go into the psychology of a developing brain. especially during the most critical stages — from birth to five years old. according to vygotsky’s theory of child development, a child’s environment and external factors play a huge role in how a child develops as a person. he proposed that as a child, your brain is continuously learning and soaking up information. for example, right from wrong, how to treat other people, whats socially acceptable, etc etc. essentially, vygotsky believes that this stage of development is critical for how your brain functions as an adult, and that external influences play the biggest role.

now that we have that mini psychology lesson out of the way, let’s hop into how i think killua’s environment and seeing how his family treated each other affected him.

i dont know much about kiyoko and silva’s marriage so i can’t really speak on that, but based on the fact that they love each other and their kids, i can assume and speak on a few things.

firstly, killua grew up in an assassin family. he was trained from a very, very young age — most likely from when he could walk — and was required to develop an immunity to all poisons and be able to complete missions quickly and efficiently. from that, i can gather that he was trained very harshly and most likely learned to associate love with pain of some sort. i have no doubt that developing an immunity to all poisons was painful and extremely distressing for a child. this would likely shut down some pathways and cognitive processing that a child in a normal household would have.

i would also like to take illumi and kiyoko’s influence in killua’s life into consideration. illumi was extremely overprotective and manipulative, and even placed a needle in killua to control him. kiyoko was overbearing with her love for killua and, to my knowledge, always had an eye on him in some form.

now that we’ve taken developmental psychology into account, his family’s influence and behavior, and his assassin training, i can now go into how it affects him in his love life.

it has definitely affected him in some form, but also he now has gon to show him whats healthy. killua very clearly has expressed his distaste for his family, but i think that this is so deeply rooted in his brain that it would affect him for the rest of his life. and even if he did realize that it was wrong, i don’t think he would want to stop — self-indulgence at its finest. i think he rationalizes it as “my family did it this way so why would it be that bad” and “different people have different tatses”.

as for how it affects his relationship with the reader, he would be completely out of reach. both on a physical scale and a psychological scale. as an assassin, hes immune to all poisons and the reader has no chance of physically overpowering him — the only option would be to run but even then you wouldn’t be able to forever. you also have no hopes of “fixing” him. theres a very clear distinction, depending on how the reader was raised and their own tastes for love, between his views on love and theirs. at that point, you would have to live with his overbearing, self indulgent, over protective, and manipulative behavior. you’d honestly be trapped. just hope stockholm syndrome kicks in fast.

#male yandere #tw yandere #yandere hxh #yandere drabble #yandere killua #yandere killua hcs #hunter x hunter killua #killua x y/n #killua x you #killua x reader #hxh killua #killua zoldyck #killua hunter x hunter #killua headcanons #killua hxh #tw aged up #aged up killua #aged up characters

95 notes · View notes

maaarine · 9 months

Text

How Loneliness Reshapes the Brain (Marta Zaraska, Quanta Magazine, Feb 28 2023)

"Neuroscience suggests that loneliness doesn’t necessarily result from a lack of opportunity to meet others or a fear of social interactions.

Instead, circuits in our brain and changes in our behavior can trap us in a catch-22 situation: While we desire connection with others, we view them as unreliable, judgmental and unfriendly.

Consequently, we keep our distance, consciously or unconsciously spurning potential opportunities for connections. (…)

However, a study that the team published in 2022 revealed that although threatening social situations trigger more amygdala activity in people suffering from social anxiety, they do not have that effect on lonely people.

Similarly, people with social anxiety have diminished activity in the reward sections of their brain, and that does not appear to be true for lonely people.

“The core features of social anxiety were not evident in loneliness,” Lieberz said.

Those results suggest, she said, that treating loneliness simply by telling lonely people to go out and socialize more (the way you can treat a phobia of snakes with exposure) will often not work because it fails to address the root cause of the loneliness.

In fact, a recent meta-analysis confirmed that simply providing lonely people with easier access to potential friends has no effect on subjective loneliness.

The problem with loneliness seems to be that it biases our thinking.

In behavioral studies, lonely people picked up on negative social signals, such as images of rejection, within 120 milliseconds — twice as quickly as people with satisfying relationships and in less than half the time it takes to blink.

Lonely people also preferred to stand farther away from strangers, trusted others less and disliked physical touch.

This may be why the emotional well-being of lonely individuals often follows “a downward spiral,” said Danilo Bzdok, an interdisciplinary researcher at McGill University with a background in neuroscience and machine learning. (…)

Bzdok and his team showed that some regions of the default network are not only larger in chronically lonely people but also more strongly connected to other parts of the brain.

Moreover, the default network seems to be involved in many of the distinctive abilities that have evolved in humans — such as language, anticipating the future and causal reasoning.

More generally, the default network activates when we think about other people, including when we interpret their intentions.

The findings on default network connectivity provided neuroimaging evidence to support previous discoveries by psychologists that lonely people tend to daydream about social interactions, get easily nostalgic about past social events, and even anthropomorphize their pets, talking to their cats as if they were human, for example.

“It would require the default network to do that too,” Bzdok said.

While loneliness can lead to a rich imaginary social life, it can make real-life social encounters less rewarding.

A reason why may have been identified in a 2021 study by Bzdok and his colleagues that was also based on the voluminous UK Biobank data.

They looked separately at socially isolated people and at people with low social support, as measured by a lack of someone to confide in on a daily or almost daily basis.

The researchers found that in all such individuals, the orbitofrontal cortex — a part of the brain linked to processing rewards — was smaller.

Last year, a large brain-imaging study based on data from more than 1,300 Japanese volunteers revealed that greater loneliness is associated with stronger functional connections in the brain area that handles visual attention.

This finding supports previous reports from eye-tracking studies that lonely people tend to focus excessively on unpleasant social cues, such as being ignored by others. (…)

While interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy, promoting trust and synchrony, or even ingesting magic mushrooms could help treat chronic loneliness, transient feelings of solitude will most likely always remain part of the human experience.

And there is nothing wrong with that, Tomova said.

She compares loneliness to stress: It’s unpleasant but not necessarily negative.

“It provides energy to the body, and then we can deal with challenges,” she said.

“It becomes problematic when it’s chronic because our bodies are not meant to be in this constant state. That’s when our adaptive mechanisms ultimately break down.”"

#article #health

103 notes · View notes

femmefatalevibe · 2 years

Text

Femme Fatale Guide: How To Achieve Goals & Find Pleasure In The Process

It’s great to be happy and all in the process of reaching a goal. However, especially when it gets tough, I think it’s easier and more practical to reframe this idea and ask yourself: How can I make the process of reaching this goal more enjoyable? How can I lower my emotional resistance when taking action towards the goal?

HOW TO ENJOY THE PROCESS & ACHIEVE YOUR GOALS:

Like motivation, happiness is a fleeting feeling that can come and go over time. So, if you attach the idea of being happy to the actions necessary to work towards achieving a goal, you’re likely going to experience cognitive dissonance at times and, especially with a long-term goal, you can emotionally burn out with this mentality.

Seek ways to put your mind at ease and discourage mental resistance allows you to be more mindful and strategic about staying in a positive, focused state throughout the process of achieving the goal. It gives you the power to create habits, systems, and behavior changes that ease any overwhelm – instead of tying your outcome tied (and making it a slave to) your emotions.

Attach the feeling of your achievement to every action you’re taking towards reaching this goal: When first setting a goal, figure out your “Why” or purpose for wanting to achieve this goal. Whether your goal is to get a certain grade, live a healthier lifestyle, lose weight, be more productive, exercise, wake up earlier, etc., you need to be honest with yourself about the reason you want to achieve this outcome. Once you clarify the purpose behind your goal, focus on the feeling that the idea of achieving this goal brings. Internalize this feeling, and keep it at the forefront of your mind. Before starting any task related to this specific goal (i.e. hearing your alarm clock, putting on your running shoes, sitting down at your desk ready to read a textbook or type on your laptop), prime your mind and indulge in all of the emotions you’ve attached to the outcome of this goal. It works like the law of assumption – you’re motivating and pre-conditioning your mind into action based on these positive feelings. Your actions become innately rewarding.

Find and focus on the fulfilling aspect of the process: A practical way to make the process of attaining a goal more enjoyable is to focus on the aspects of the task at hand that you enjoy or find fulfilling in some way. Think to yourself: What small wins or sense of accomplishment can I get from this one small task or action, even if it won't satisfy my end goal in one day/focus session? In the case of a work or school project, are you expanding your mind with new knowledge, gaining a new skill, having any interesting conversations, or learning about an interesting/ useful topic? Does working out or eating healthier give you more energy now and for the rest of the day? Does waking up earlier ease your anxiety about running out of time in the morning? Focus on the positive to push through the resistance so you can take one step at a time. Engage fully with the task in front of you. Put one foot in front of the other until you complete this isolated productivity session. Make every step more enjoyable to ease the resistance!

Pair productivity with an enjoyable activity: Especially on days where you’re tired, hungover, or just unmotivated for any reason, give yourself a positive incentive to complete a certain task. This method is called habit stacking. It involves stacking an activity you already do with another action to intertwine these two behaviors in your mind. In this case, you’re creating an association between a healthy indulgence and an undesirable or resistance-heavy task or action. Here are some pleasure habits to consider stacking with your goal-oriented tasks:

Can you listen to an upbeat playlist that gets you in the zone?

Is there an outfit that you can wear to feel your most confident?

Can you make your favorite coffee, tea, or beverage to enjoy while studying/working?

Is there a lunch or dinner option you can look forward to after completing the task?

Use healthy bribery to push through the process when necessary. Ritualize pairing a particular pleasurable habit alongside each task or action you need to consistently take to reach your goal. Over time, your mind will link this chosen indulgence with your necessary activity, so you can use it as a cue to focus and stay disciplined every time you engage with this aspect of the process.

Keep records of your progress: Use data as your inspiration to keep going until you reach your goal. This visual representation of your progress allows you to see how the process positively impacts your daily life and should serve as motivation to keep going until you achieve your goal. Track your progress (tasks completed, word count written, step count, inches or pounds lost, money earned, workouts completed, pages read, mornings you didn’t press the snooze alarm, etc.). Look at these data points once every week or two to see how far you’ve come or any small positive changes since you started working toward your goal. This quantitive information leaves you no room for negative biases or interpretation, so it’s simpler to use it as practical motivation than something more qualitative. Seeing that you’re objectively getting closer to your goal makes it feel more attainable and allows you to enjoy the process of personal growth. Only compare current yourself to your past self. As you make progress, the process becomes more enjoyable when you see that your consistent efforts are enabling the achievement of your goal to become more statically realistic.

Celebrate the small wins: Every small step or action taken toward your goal deserves praise. Create certain small milestones (ex: a certain number of days you want to consistently workout, cook dinner, read 10 pages of a book, or achieve a specific word count, PowerPoint slides created, textbook chapters read, etc.) and decide on rewards you promise to give yourself after achieving these smaller milestones. We all need treats to look forward to in order to stay motivated in the long term. Remember: Strategic indulgence supports, not hinders, disciplined action.

When you want to quit, consider its implications: When you need an extra push of motivation to start, focus, or persist toward achieving a goal, use reverse psychology to your advantage to push through the process. Each time you intend to set and achieve a goal, you have two options: remain the same or take considered action to level up your life. Consider what would happen if you decided not to pursue or continue working toward this goal. Indulge in all the ways this would hinder your aspirations, relationships, sense of self-respect, and identity. Ruminate on this negativity to reset your motivation and the true purpose of why you’ve made this goal is a non-negotiable in your life. This exercise – make it a journey prompt or write out pros and cons lists on whether to continue pursuing the goal - is savage, but it can help you gain clarity as to whether this goal is of true importance and how it will influence your life. If you find that the goal is worth achieving, getting into this way of thinking can help you reframe how you perceive the goal’s purpose in your life and even help you strategize more tactics to help you achieve it or other tangential goals, relationships, or habits you want to pursue to maximize this specific, desired outcome.

615 notes · View notes

d4rkpluto · 1 year

Text

𝔢𝔵𝔭𝔩𝔞𝔦𝔫𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔪𝔶𝔢𝔯𝔰-𝔟𝔯𝔦𝔤𝔤𝔰 𝔱𝔶𝔭𝔬𝔩𝔬𝔤𝔶 𝔦𝔫𝔡𝔦𝔠𝔞𝔱𝔬𝔯

don't be surprised that me someone who is obsessed with archetypes is posting about mbti...but please buckle up for the post because it's a handful, and i'll make the post as easy as possible to understand!

♇ if you just want to support here is my paypal!

♇ anyways, [i'll be using sentences that i've learned as well] the mbti is used to understand yourself, the relationships your in along with your personal growth; the mbti is about your cognition which means your intelligence, how you process and understand information.

♇ people need to understand that the typology cannot predict how someone is going to consciously behave, for example, someone sees an intj and the first thing they think is that "omg that person is definitely going to be so emo".

♇ however, the mbti does predict the subconscious micro-expression [which means someone's true emotion] and body language. keep in mind, anyone can change behaviour, so yes, mbti's can change depending on the personal growth of someone, someone's mbti might fully form when they're like a middle aged adult, in my opinion.

♇ the mbti typology believes that we understand information in two ways, which are functions called ⬎

the judging and perceiving functions.

♇ the perceiving function ⟶ understanding information that is experienced first handedly by the person, and putting the information together afterwards.

♇ the judging function ⟶ understanding information without having to experience it first handedly, and putting the information together afterwards or even the same time they come in contact with the information.

♇ everyone judges information by a logical and a rational mindset, along with value based and a honest criteria which is involved with the four modes of cognition [intelligence] everyone has.

↳ and those four modes are:

♇ sensing, intuition, thinking or feeling, which can either be introverted or extroverted. every type has four of the functions [sensing, intuition, thinking or feeling] in descending order, meaning from strongest to weakest. which also refers to how much someone uses four of the functions they have; and the plethora of the descending combinations gives rise to the 16 types.

♇ let's begin with the perceiving functions ⬎

which include SE, SI, NE AND NI.

SE ⟶ extroverted sensing.

SI ⟶ introverted sensing.

NE ⟶ extroverted intuition.

NI ⟶ introverted intuition.

♇ beginning with the sensory functions [SE AND SI].

⟶ with SE which is the extroverted sensing.

⟶ extroverted sensing [SE] react to events first handedly, [like their own experience], before they believe or understand in something.

⟶ they see things as it is and don't overthink the answer in front of them. for example, they're the type to look at a maths question and think that all "solutions/problem solving" can lead to the same answer.

⟶ people with extroverted sensing are action-oriented and need to experience things themselves in order to understand it, like i have mentioned before.

⟶ onto with SI which is introverted sensing.

⟶ introverted sensing [SI] react to events as patterns they have seen before, for example, if someone has already seen two individuals who belong to loud and violent houses react to situations in a defensive way, and the [SI] individual meets another person who has the same background as the other two people they have communicated before and notice that the new individual behaves the same way. they'll understand that people from abusive households are normally protective over themselves out of trauma.

⟶ [SI] individuals build personal associations to data, they'll look at something like "this solution is bad" and "this solution is good" because of the outcomes they have seen or heard before; which is different than a [SE] native, who would rather want to interact with the solution before they come up with an answer. [SI] people who are selective and consistent; they only want information that is useful for them.

⟶ they're people who go by previous examples, and are likely people who can identify patterns in large source of information, and dont need first hand experience to know when something is true.

♇ now with the intuition functions [NE AND NI]

⟶ starting with NE which is extroverted intuition.

⟶ extroverted intuition [NE] are people who see countless of possibilities with their intuition, every probability or likelihood they see they will take it into account. they're the "anything is possible" group.

⟶ [NE] individuals see possible connections, which causes their work to grow more bigger and bigger as they're expansive people, like [SE], [NE] natives have no specific preferences they'd like to work on, and find every idea useful. these natives tend to be very action-oriented as well.

⟶ they are people who need to first handedly go through situations for them to make the dots/connections; which could sometimes not give them the upper hand when they're trying to solve something compared to an [SI] who will already make the patterns due to events they have read or heard before.

⟶ now onto NI which is introverted intuition.

⟶ introverted intuition [NI] are people who could be perceived as people who arent as expressive to situations openly, but will feel a lot on the inside. they're the type of people to form a logical concept from information that is relevant or they think is relevant.

⟶ like [SI] the [NI] individuals only see information or patterns that makes sense to them and and they do care about other people's thoughts and additional information within their research.

⟶ they're specific and are likely to understand things easily while finding further links and connections. they're reflective about the information they gather, so when they do receive details, they'll see if it makes sense or not.

⟶ people can either have SE & NI or SI & NE; it can never be "i have SE & SI or i have NI & NI".

information about perceiving functions finished.

♇ moving onto judging functions.

which includes TE, TI, FE AND FI. ⬎

TE ⟶ extroverted thinking.

TI ⟶ introverted thinking.

FE ⟶ extroverted feeling.

FI ⟶ introverted feeling.

♇ beginning with the thinking functions [TE AND TI]

⟶ with TE which is extroverted thinking

⟶ they're people who most likely focus on their own judgement, they will decide what makes sense to them and what doesnt make sense to them; what is logical and what is not, which will normally be based on their own experiences with the issue. they're focused on the end product, so they'll likely do the same thing to see if the outcome changes.

⟶ they think of ideas that are effective, and are objective to the route they're taking, they're people who like information that can be proven to them. if they can't see it, they wont believe it. it's their basic understanding of logic.

⟶ [TE] individuals can be considered as quite annoying because they normally don't listen until they have to go through a specific situation all the time/or go through much life lessons to understand what to or not to do.

⟶ with TI which is introverted thinking

⟶ [TI] individuals like to make everything make sense to them, which could be time consuming because for example, they would like to learn something so simple, will learn it, but during the process they would want to know every step, even the irrelevant steps which makes it time consuming.

⟶ they can only go forward in life when they do understand something, they're people who are likely to be anxious when they dont know information they think is relevant to them, compared to [TE] natives who wouldnt mind learning the details when they're going through a route.

⟶ [TI] people are considered less impactive than [TE] folks as they're people who only want to learn the depth of a topic and not other possibilities that can surround the topic.

⟶ onto FE which is extroverted feeling

⟶ [FE] natives judge on what they see on the outside, for example they're the type of people to judge people based on their appearance or based on their first impressions compared to other functions. they wouldnt really be like "oh i just need to know the depth of this person" if someone presents themselves as rude, the [FE] person will always think of the other person as insolent, no redemption.

⟶ people who have [FE] are usually those who are mainly like "it can only either be these two options" nothing else. they're normally like that when they experience something physically first and if their mind thinks something is negative they will always perceive that thing is negative while deeming the opposite thing of that instrument positive.

⟶ they're people who are clear about their intentions so other people can understand what they are striving for. could sometimes lead to them failing since people will always know what they're up to.

⟶ onto FI which is introverted feeling

⟶ [FI] people judge the weight of something after they deeply understand the matter. and when they understand the deepness to an information they decide what part of the information is useful for them.

⟶ like the [TI] system, [FI] is very specific and particular about everything, like they cant just go on with life knowing 2+2 equals 4, they'll need to understand why 2+2 equals 4.

⟶ evidently, they're people who take the time to understand something which can sometimes take it longer for them to understand a subject compared to other people but when they finally understand it, they become very efficient to the subject and find ways to simplify it for other people so everyone else can learn.

⟶ people can either have TE & FI or TI & FE; it can never be "i have TE & TI or i have FI & FE".

⟶ information about the judging function finished.

⟶ TWO THINKING AXIS ⬎

♇ SE AND NI ⟶ see the issue and would like to explore different possibilities of it or live through it.

♇ SI AND NE ⟶ see the issue and would rather focus on that single issue before they apply it to other things.

TWO JUDGING AXIS

♇ TE AND FI ⟶ see the problem and would solve it with how other people might've solved it before, but would solve the problem with multiple tools they'll think that can work on the issue.

♇ TI AND FE ⟶ see the problem and would rather solve it with a tool that might've worked in other scenarios. wouldnt think to use other tools if they know the one they have right now is useful.

SO...WHAT MAKES AN MBTI...AN MBTI?

♇ the order of the functions i have mentioned: SE, SI, NE AND NI that belong to the thinking functions and TE, TI, FE AND FI that belong to the judging functions make the mbti!

♇ including what function is the strongest to what function is the weakest.

♇ the axis pairs will either be the first and fourth function or the second and third function.

⟶ SE AND NI being function pairs.

⟶ SI AND NE being function pairs.

⟶ TE AND FI being function pairs.

⟶ TI AND FE being function pairs.

♇ for example, let's use ISTP ⬎

⟶ I = introversion.

⟶ S = sensing.

⟶ T = thinking.

⟶ P = perceiving.

↳ the first two functions determine the middle letters of the MBTI TYPE CODE.

♇ the functions within the ISTP TYPE CODE

⟶ TI SE NI FE ⬎

♇ the TI AND SE within the ISTP function make up for the two missing middle letters in the type code: I _ _ P because they are the first two functions!

⟶ because TI is the _ _ T _ in ISTP because it is about introverted thinking.

⟶ and SE is the _ S _ _ in ISTP because it is about the extroverted sensing.

"but pluto what makes up for the first letter in the code?"

♇ good question! what makes up for the first letter in the code is the second letter in the strongest function and the strongest function for ISTP is TI and what is the second letter for TI? It's "I" which causes the function to now become from _ S T P to I S T P.

♇ if the TI was a TE it would commence the function to become E S T P.

"okay but what about the last letter in a type code?"

♇ you'll have to look back at the first extroverted function in the type code for your mbti, and for ISTP it is ⟶ TI SE NI FE. the first extroverted function in the type code is SE which means EXTROVERTED SENSING.

♇ SE belongs to the perceiving function which implies that the last letter for I S T _ will be I S T P.

♇ if the SE was replaced and FE was the first extroverted function for the type code, the type would have changed from I S T P to I S T J. because FE belongs to the judging function!

↳ lets use an extroverted mbti now.

⟶ E = extroversion.

⟶ N = intuition.

⟶ F = feeling.

⟶ J = judging.

♇ the functions within ENFJ TYPE CODE are ⬎

⟶ FE NI NE TI ⬎

♇ the FE AND NI within the ENFJ function make up for the two missing middle letters in the type code: E _ _ J because they are the first two functions!

⟶ because FE is the _ _ F _ in ENFJ because it is about extroverted feeling.

⟶ and NI is the _ N _ _ in ENFJ because it is about the introverted sensing.

"but pluto what makes up for the first letter in the code?"

♇ good question! what makes up for the first letter in the code is the second letter in the strongest function and the strongest function for ENFJ is FE and what is the second letter for FE? It's "E" which causes the function to now become from _ N F J to E N F J.

♇ if the FE was a FI it would commence the function to become I N F J.

"okay but what about the last letter in a type code?"

♇ you'll have to look back at the first extroverted function in the type code for your mbti, and for ENFJ it is ⟶ FE SI NE TI. the first extroverted function in the type code is FE which means EXTROVERTED FEELING.

♇ FE belongs to the judging function which implies that the last letter for E N F _ will be E N F J.

♇ if the FE was replaced and NE was the first extroverted function for the type code, the type could have changed from ENFJ to ENFP. because NE belongs to the perceiving function!

♇ i hope this helped you guys understand how the myers briggs typology works even more! this is just me opening up before i post about the mbtis!

♇ if you just want to support here is my paypal!

♇ masterlist

pluto

♇

#d4rkpluto #mbti #extroverted sensing #introverted sensing #extroverted thinking #introverted thinking #extroverted intuition #introverted intuition #extroverted feeling #introverted feeling #myers briggs #pluto #ISTP #ENFJ #myers briggs typology #myers briggs typology indicator

332 notes · View notes

chaisshitposts · 6 months

Note

Hiii Chai,

Recently I came across a video gamma mindset technique which is mainly to generate gamma waves within 2 minutes. The person who was doing was able to do that post doing the pysch k posture. Can you do a research about this why bcoz gamma waves are common in Buddhist monks as they are deep meditators and it will be generated while having OBE like astral projection or lucid dreams. Ia there any relation between psych k and gamma waves, I was amazed

Thank you love!

I'll be honest, I had no idea what some of this meant so I had to Google those first— but I did some research as you've asked -> I had no idea what gamma waves involved but apparently they're the fastest brain waves that occur when conscious and alert. The website linked here states that, "Gamma brain waves have the highest frequency among all brain waves. They are associated with high levels of thought and focus. They can have different effects depending on their levels in your brain:‌

If your brain produces high levels of gamma waves, you tend to be happier and more receptive. You may also have a higher intelligence quotient or IQ and better concentration.

If your brain produces low levels of gamma waves, you may develop learning and memory problems. You may experience lower concentration, attention span, and mental ability. Lower levels of gamma waves can even lead to learning disabilities and mental disorders."

That same website then goes on to list off various benefits that come from gamma waves, "‌Gamma waves are associated with higher brain functions like cognition and memory. A recent study has shown that gamma waves can improve your working memory.

Studies have also revealed that increased gamma brain wave activity can help you achieve the highest concentration levels. Gamma waves can also promote higher states of awareness and increased brain function during meditation. ‌

Gamma waves have the following benefits:

They can improve your cognition and problem-solving ability

They help you with information processing

They can improve your memory

They can help increase your attention span

They can increase your awareness and mindfulness

They may boost your brain’s immunity and function.

Being the curious bee I am, I went on YouTube and decided to see if there was anyway to activate gamma waves— took me a couple minutes before I stumbled on the 'Gamma Mindset.' The dude talked like a salesman but fortunately he offers a free 'masterclass' where ya sign up with an email and name. Sooooo, I got it, and in the 'masterclass' it includes a 40 minute video. Naturally, I started watching it, and he does muscle testing of different statements and then he says he's going to give the patient the Gamma Mindset technique— guess what it was? Psych-K but while lying down.

🧎I already knew that Psych-K was the whole brain state but I had no idea that it also amped up gamma waves in our brains which could explain why it works so fast to subconsciously reprogram.

I always encourage everyone to do their own research! However, based on my research— it seems that Gamma Waves are produced through doing Psych-K aka the whole brain state posture.

#— chai's asks. !! ~#— anonnie. !! ~

41 notes · View notes

insaniquariumfish · 9 months

Text

The fact that fetishes can be the result of conditioning does not mean that people choose to have them, or that people can just stop having them in the same way that you can stop eating a food or stop watching a show, and I think that is a very disingenuous take on the issue.

By that logic, any behavior that is conditioned is a choice, and if someone possesses a conditioned trait, then it is their fault because they just aren't bothering to choose not to have it. So if someone, for example, develops an anxiety disorder in response to living in a high stress environment, it would be their fault that they developed it, and it would keep being their fault every day that they continued to have it because they were neglecting to just choose not to have it, by this logic.

And even if we assume that all fetishes are indeed the result of conditioning, that does not mean that the work of reversing said conditioning is easy or that this process can be completed quickly. That is not true of reversing conditioning when it comes to other issues, and there is no reason to believe that fetishes would be an exception. In my opinion, reversing conditioning is not something that we can reasonably expect the average person to be able to do without some form of support from a mental health professional.

Additionally, it does not follow from "fetishes are conditioned" that people choose to develop them. First of all, the rat in the experiment that I saw mentioned very obviously did not choose to associate wearing a jacket with sexual pleasure. I think it is clear that these associations can easily be formed as a result of happenstance through no fault of the person who develops them.

It also does not follow from "fetishes can be the result of conditioning" that "all fetishes necessarily must be the result of conditioning." This is the same logic as saying that you saw someone cry because they fell and broke their nose, so every time a person cries it must be because they fell and broke their nose. While I do believe that fetishes are sometimes the result of conditioning, I do not think there is any compelling reason to believe that that fact is able to fully explain the phenomenon.

We already know that at least some forms of sexual response can be innate and unconditioned. The reason why people watch pornography, for example, is because it is innately arousing to most people to watch others engage in sexual acts. It is not outside the realm of possibility that what is innately arousing or attractive to a given person could deviate from the norm, and that they could be innately aroused in response to something that the average person would not be innately aroused by. The fact that some brains naturally function differently from what is typical in certain respects is pretty well established at this point. Again, there is no reason to suggest that fetishes, or even paraphilias, are an exception in this regard.

And saying something like, "well, if a guy jerks off to foot fetish porn all the time, then of course he will develop a foot fetish," begs the question, why did he select foot fetish porn to jerk off to in the first place? Wouldn't a person who doesn't have a foot fetish not be interested in content that was created for foot fetishists? We can ask the same of all fetishes, and also of praphilias. Why would a person seek out beastiality content or engage in sexual contact with an animal to begin with if they weren't already attracted to animals? Yes, there can be other reasons, such as desperation or a desire for power or some form of cognitive impairment, but again there is (so far as I am aware) no evidence-based reason to assume that such things must always be behind deviant sexual behavior, and that innate attraction/arousal cannot ever play a role. In fact, so far as I am aware, most studies investigating whether people can "unlearn" pedophilia suggest that they cannot, which implies that pedophilic desire is innate, because a conditioned attraction would show signs of reversibility in response to treatment in at least a portion of cases.

I think this subject is much more complex and much less rooted in personal choice than people are comfortable acknowledging. I think it is comforting to believe that people who possess traits which are upsetting and objectionable must choose to possess them, because the notion that they are a choice means that we are ourselves protected from the possibility of ever having them, since we would never make such choices. The idea that the only reason one is not aroused by gore or attracted to children turned on by violence is because they happen to have a healthy and normally functioning brain, that they owe luck, and not their own virtuosity, for their lack of deviant desires, can be very distressing. So I understand why people are hesitant to approach this subject from the perspective with which I do. However, I do consider my perspective to be more plausible than the alternative based on the reasoning I have expressed.

#sexuality #unpopular opinion #unpopular take #radical feminism #radblr

59 notes · View notes

grislyintentions · 1 month

Text

|| HC- Diviner's Fate ||

In reference to the Glimpses into the Beyond manuscript penned by Fuxuan herself, she spares little effort in reminding/warning other diviners that any actions that imply attempts to predict Yaoshi's fate will be treated as an unforgivable felony.

Despite the considerable leniency that is offered to those who attempt to predict the fates of other Aeons (still illegal), the Ten-Lords Commission equates acts of trying to predict Yaoshi's as a crime equal to the Ten Unpardonable Sins. Diviners found guilty of said transgression will be punished strictly- provided they are still alive after committing said crime as those who have tried have all met tragic fates of their own.

Given these factors, there are two possible outcomes that befall Diviners who attempt to predict Yaoshi's fate:

Mental Collapse (Subsequent development of Acute Megalophobia)

Divination is by no means true omniscience. It is a practise of making calculations based on recorded instances of data and the Diviner's ability to map out multiple possibilities based on the movements, logic as well as thought processes from it.

As witnessed in March's story quest, the Matrix of Prescience is used by diviners to draw information from the past to predict the future by literally placing the observing person in said variable scenarios to derive accurate outcomes, albeit heightened by Fuxuan's third eye.

The Matrix actively draws the future it observes from Chaos.

So how does one even begin to calculate and predict the fate of Aeons who fill the skies like celestial bodies? A being that is incomparably huge, move according to their own Path with a transcendent mind? How does one even define chaos of such magnitude?

Both devices as well as the living mind has their limits. To withstand, hold and interpret something of this magnitude is realistically impossible to accomplish without breaking something in the process either by fragmenting of memory or mental collapse in efforts to preserve one's well being ie: amnesia, memory repressing etc.

In such a scenario, it is likely that diviners may experience a similar phenomenon. Their added ability to literally "visualise" observations may also cause the Matrix of Prescience to backfire and create a massive toll mentally. And they could thus develop an accute fear of vastness when bombarded with everything at once (fear of outer space, bodies of water, atmosphere so on so forth). TLDR: A living hellscape they cannot avoid. Resuming divination duties would be impossible with the emotional association, PTSD and trauma. ON TOP of having to be punished for committing what is essentially a crime.

Victim of Parasitism (Eventual Brain Death)

To essentially divine an Aeon's fate is to quite literally observe and visualise oneself walking down their path. While it might seem achievable at first, this places the human psyche in a very tenuous position.

They have to possess a certain level of emotional understanding in order to navigate the accurate steps. When tied with their own cultural complicated feelings towards Yaoshi, it can all form a level of cognitive dissonance and dissociation in order to process things.

With reference to how the "Aeons" in Herta's simulated universe could capture notice of the Trailblazer from his actions, why would this then be a stretch? Especially when the Luofu is a place already filled with Yaoshi's blessings, along with those who actively pay homage to their practises, it is all too easy for the Aeon to take notice of repeated engagement from a certain device.

Diviners who try to place themselves in the mindset of an all too generous Aeon will likely be further poisoning themselves with not only knowledge but also a stronger unfiltered emotional connection with Yaoshi.

With parasitic comparisons of my Yaoshi portrayal, I like to think that the diviners may suffer a similar fate to the ants who have the unfortunate displeasure of crossing the path of the Ophiocordyceps unilateralis.

Once infected by the fungi, ants would often alter their behavioural patterns by searching for areas best suited for fungal growth. They then attach themselves to leaves, remaining there to their deaths from which the fungi spores grow and release from the spores in their head. This is something that has devastated multiple ant colonies.

Similarly for diviners, they will remain unawares to the facts that mara symptoms have begun to develop at an erratic rate within them. In the ensuing days to come, they may experience a radical change in ideology, compelling them to follow down Yaoshi's path or join up with the Disciples of Sanctus Medicus.

Those who fight to retain their own lucidity may experience the soul crushing endeavor of losing their mental faculties periodically, feeling their bodies and mind revolt against them. It is a slow, terrifying and debilitating experience that may cause them to take the only means out rather than give in to Yaoshi. Thus, also succeeding temporarily in accomplishing the Aeon's goal of relieving them from 'suffering'. They cannot escape not even in the end.

#charac: yaoshi #[a lot of people bash divination practises #but this is the very same concept present with strategising as a whole. its not omniscience. its pattern prediction and can be applied #in a lot of things not just spiritually. but in defense tactics etc too.#thats why fuxuan is placed in such a prominent position together w jingyuan during militaristic approaches]#[please take w grain of salt! i just like to think thonks and fling spaghet gbgbg]#brain injury cw #parasitism cw #suicide tw

16 notes · View notes

shutupvestler · 10 days

Text

it's funny that both L (canonically) and Light (according to my observation could be in a spectrum but the autistic features they both spread off are quite distinguished from each other because Light's characteristics could imply that he is in a spectrum revolve around a mental aspects meanwhile L's features show themselves on a more physical level. For example, L has sensory processing issues which are very common among neurodivergent people. L has a ritual that could be solely based on a power of self-convincing (here I'm referring to the fact that L refuses to sit normally stating that if he would sit normally his iq goes down to 40 % meanwhile in reality his favorite spouse for sitting could be the reason of many issues, including decreasing cognitive capacity due to brain being deprived of enough amount of oxygen due to the troubles of blood flowing. Also to the elements of ritualism could be seen in the way of how he treats food sometimes. I think, in this case, it works for him as a way of stimming when he is overwhelmed, which is also well-known among autistic people. Hyper-fixation. L clearly showed that he has a strong hyper-fixation on a certain food which could be associated with ADHD but it was proven that many times people who were diagnosed with autism had adhd alongside. Such hyperfiction on food that mostly presents fast carbohydrates that serve for the quick releasing of dopamine could suggest that L also struggles with the natural receiving of this hormone which also could apply to neurodivergence.

In addition to my previous post with Light I would like to add that even if Light was canonically on the spectrum, he definitely would be a high-masking

#death note #dn lawliet #l lawliet #yagami light #autism #character analysis #character study

15 notes · View notes

whetstonefires · 1 year

Text

Thinking endlessly about how the classical Athenians were like, so, on the one hand, many administrative tasks on which our civic apparatus relies require expertise.

But on the other hand, if we appoint leaders to necessary positions on the basis that they're the ones who are best suited to that work due to knowing all about it, that's putting real power in their hands, for an extended period instead of a safe little increment, which sets up our nice democracy of Every Free Adult Native Male Who Can Afford Armor to collapse very quickly into a narrow oligarchy.

But the fact remains that administration actually is skilled labor, especially on the tens-of-thousands-of-people scale they were dealing with, and also involves situations where it's impractical to run every step of a process through a committee. Not that they really wanted to acknowledge this but they were stuck with it a bit. If nothing else, people have day jobs, they can't always be voting.

But fulltime governators for whom this is their day job have too much power.

And the way they solved this was, most of the institutional memory and expertise and even exercise of force in the name of civic order was invested in slaves.

Mint workers? Executive accountancy clerks? Cops? All state property.

Very Important Job of distinguishing counterfeit coinage: public slave. Fifty lashes if he shirked or fucked up or cheated. Considerable authority in the context of the job. Could live quite a comfortable life. Absolutely no chance of his using this role as a springboard for building a political base and usurping authority, because he didn't have legal status.

This freed the actual executive positions up to be filled by people given one-year terms by lottery who had the authority to make (routine) calls but no personal power associated with the office; they didn't have to know shit to do the job and this kept them interchangeable.

Except generals, apparently. The Athenians were like, okay generals really do have to know what the fuck they're doing or we'll all die, but we can't make military service the defining feature of citizenship, and then put ourselves under the command of a non-citizen.

(Not even because like they couldn't entrust a slave with so much power, although being under threat of a lashing if people don't like your decisions probably isn't great for making strong strategic and tactical calls; it's the cognitive dissonance.)

So they had ten elected generalships, with less term limitation, and it was in fact a good avenue by which to build a political career.

But like, what the fuck huh?

#hoc est meum #slavery #it was a pretty stable system as these things go #but i just feel like the fact that they outsourced these features of governance #to slaves #in order to maintain their democratic institutions #without the corruption of letting anyone hold enough power to Be The Polis #is like. we should keep that in mind. when analyzing how our modern systems function #huh?#classics #yes this is an oversimplification #but in the same way that you can't analyze sparta without the messenes i think you have to understand #the athenian democracy in terms of the public slaves #who allowed them to defray the logistical burden of the system #otherwise you risk going If People Would Just Not #on the basis of a precedent where they also didn't Just Not

43 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 5 months

Text

By: Rob Henderson

Published: Nov 19, 2023

Many have discovered an argument hack. They don’t need to argue that something is false. They just need to show that it’s associated with low status. The converse is also true: You don’t need to argue that something is true. You just need to show that it’s associated with high status. And when low status people express the truth, it sometimes becomes high status to lie.

In the 1980s, the psychologists Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo developed the “Elaboration Likelihood Model” to describe how persuasion works. “Elaboration” here means the extent to which a person carefully thinks about the information. When people’s motivation and ability to engage in careful thinking is present, the “elaboration likelihood” is high. This means people are likely to pay attention to the relevant information and draw conclusions based on the merits of the arguments or the message. When elaboration likelihood is high, a person is willing to expend their cognitive resources to update their views.

Two paths to persuasion

The idea is that there are two paths, or two “routes,” to persuading others. The first type, termed the “central” route, comes from careful and thoughtful consideration of the messages we hear. When the central route is engaged, we actively evaluate the information presented, and try to discern whether or not it’s true.

When the “peripheral” route is engaged, we pay more attention to cues apart from the actual information or content or the message. For example, we might evaluate someone’s argument based on how attractive they are or where they were educated, without considering the actual merits of their message.

When we accept a message through the peripheral route, we tend to be more passive than when we accept a message through the central route. Unfortunately, the peripheral route is more prevalent because we are exposed to an increasingly large amount of information.

The renowned psychologists Susan Fiske and Shelley Taylor have characterized humans as “cognitive misers.” They write, “People are limited in their capacity to process information, so they take shortcuts whenever they can.”

We are lazy creatures who try to expend as little mental energy as possible.

And people are typically less motivated to scrutinize a message if the source is considered to be an expert. We interpret the message through the peripheral route.

This is one reason why media outlets often appoint experts who mirror their political values. These experts lend credibility to the views the outlet espouses. Interestingly, though, expertise appears to influence persuasion only if the individual is identified as an expert before they communicate their message. Research has found that when a person is told the source is an expert after listening to the message, this new information does not increase the person’s likelihood of believing the message.

It works the other way, too. If a person is told that a source is not an expert before the message, the person tends to be more skeptical of the message. If told the source is not an expert after the message, this has no effect on a person’s likelihood of believing the message.

This suggests that knowing a source is an expert reduces our motivation to engage in central processing. We let our guards down.

As motivation and/or ability to process arguments is decreased, peripheral cues become more important for persuasion. Which might not bode well.

However, when we update our beliefs by weighing the actual merits of an argument (central route), our updated beliefs tend to endure and are more robust against counterpersuasion, compared to when we update our beliefs through peripheral processing. If we come to believe something through careful and thoughtful consideration, that belief is more resilient to change.

This means we can be more easily manipulated through the peripheral route. If we are convinced of something via the peripheral route, a manipulator will be more successful at using the peripheral route once again to alter our initial belief.

Social consequences of our beliefs

But why does this matter? Because by understanding how and why we come to hold our beliefs, we can better understand ourselves and guard against manipulation.

The founders of the elaboration likelihood model wrote that, “Ultimately, we suspect that attitudes are seen as correct or proper to the extent that they are viewed as beneficial for the physical or psychological well-being of the person.”

In his book The Social Leap, the evolutionary psychologist William von Hippel writes, “a substantial reason we evolved such large brains is to navigate our social world… A great deal of the value that exists in the social world is created by consensus rather than discovered in an objective sense… our cognitive machinery evolved to be only partially constrained by objective reality.” Our social brains process information not only by examining the facts, but also considering the social consequences of what happens to our reputations if we believe something.

Indeed, in his influential theory of social comparison processes, the eminent psychologist Leon Festinger suggested that people evaluate the “correctness” of their opinions by comparing them to the opinions of others. When we see others hold the same beliefs as us, our own confidence in those beliefs increases. Which is one reason why people are more likely to proselytize beliefs that cannot be verified through empirical means.

In short, people have a mechanism in their minds. It stops them from saying something that could lower their status, even if it’s true. And it propels them to say something that could increase their status, even if it’s false. Sometimes, local norms can push against this tendency. Certain communities (e.g., scientists) can obtain status among their peers for expressing truths. But if the norm is relaxed, people might default to seeking status over truth if status confers the greater reward.

Furthermore, knowing that we could lose status if we don’t believe in something causes us to be more likely to believe in it to guard against that loss. Considerations of what happens to our own reputation guides our beliefs, leading us to adopt a popular view to preserve or enhance our social positions. We implicitly ask ourselves, “What are the social consequences of holding (or not holding) this belief?”

But our reputation isn’t the only thing that matters when considering what to believe. Equally important is the reputation of others. Returning to the peripheral route of persuasion, we decide whether to believe something not only if lots of people believe it, but also if the proponent of the belief is a prestigious person. If lots of people believe something, our likelihood of believing it increases. And if a high-status person believes something, we are more prone to believing it, too.

Prestigious role models

This starts when we are children. In her recent book Cognitive Gadgets, the Oxford psychologist Cecilia Hayes writes, “children show prestige bias; they are more likely to copy a model that adults regard as being higher social status- for example, their head-teacher rather than an equally familiar person of the same age and gender.” Hayes cites a 2013 study by Nicola McGuigan who found that five-year-old children are “selective copiers.” Results showed that kids were more likely to imitate their head-teacher rather than an equally familiar person of the same age and gender. Young children are more likely to imitate a person that adults regard as being higher status.

People in general favor mimicking prestigious people compared to ordinary people. This is why elites have an outsized effect on culture, and why it is important to scrutinize their ideas and opinions. As a descriptive observation, the opinions of my friend who works at McDonald’s have less effect on society than the opinions of my friend who works at McKinsey. If you have any kind of prominence, you unavoidably become a model that others, including children, are more likely to emulate.

Indeed, the Canadian anthropologist Jerome Barkow posits that people across the world view media figures as more prestigious than respected members of their local communities. People on screen appear to be attractive, wealthy, popular, and powerful. Barkow writes, “All over the world, children are learning not from members of their own community but from media figures whom they perceive as prestigious… local prestige is debased.” As this phenomenon continues to grow, the opinions and actions of the globally-prestigious carry even more influence.

Of course, people don’t copy others with high-status solely because they hope that mimicking them will boost their own status. We tend to believe that prestigious people are more competent; prominence is a heuristic for skill.

In a recent paper about prestige-based social learning, researchers Ángel V. Jiménez and Alex Mesoudi wrote that assessing competence directly “may be noisy and costly. Instead, social learners can use short-cuts either by making inferences from the appearance, personality, material possessions, etc. of the models.”

For instance, a military friend of mine used to be a tutor for rich high school students. He himself is not as wealthy as them, and disclosed to me that he paid $200 to replace his old earphones for AirPods. This was so that the kids and their families would believe he is in the same social position as them, and therefore qualified to teach.

Prestige paradox

Which brings us to a question: Who is most susceptible to manipulation via peripheral persuasion? It might seem intuitive to believe that people with less education are more manipulable. But research suggests this may not be true.

High-status people are more preoccupied with how others view them. Which means that educated and/or affluent people may be especially prone to peripheral, as opposed to central, methods of persuasion.

Indeed, the psychology professor Keith Stanovich, discussing his research on “myside bias,” has written, “if you are a person of high intelligence… you will be less likely than the average person to realize you have derived your beliefs from the social groups you belong to and because they fit with your temperament and your innate psychological propensities.”

Students and graduates of top universities are more prone to myside bias. They are more likely to “evaluate evidence, generate evidence, and test hypotheses in a manner biased toward their own prior beliefs, opinions, and attitudes.”

This is not unique to our own time. William Shirer, the American journalist and author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, described his experiences as a war correspondent in Nazi Germany. Shirer wrote, “Often in a German home or office or sometimes in a casual conversation with a stranger in a restaurant, beer hall, or café, I would meet with outlandish assertions from seemingly educated and intelligent persons. It was obvious they were parroting nonsense they heard on the radio or read in the newspapers. Sometimes one was tempted to say as much, but one was met with such incredulity, as if one had blasphemed the Almighty.”

Likewise, in a fascinating study on the collapse of the Soviet Union, researchers have found that university-educated people were two to three times more likely than high school graduates to say they supported the Communist Party. White-collar professional workers were likewise two to three times more supportive of communist ideology, relative to farm laborers and semi-skilled workers.

Educational divides within the US today are consistent with these historical patterns. The Democratic political analyst David Shor has observed that, “Highly educated people tend to have more ideologically coherent and extreme views than working-class ones. We see this in issue polling and ideological self-identification. College-educated voters are way less likely to identify as moderate.”

One possibility for this is that regardless of time or place, affluent members of society are more likely to say the right things to either preserve status or gain more of it. A series of studies by researchers at the University of Queensland found that, “relative to lower-class individuals, upper-class individuals have a greater desire for wealth and status… it is those who have more to start with (i.e., upper-class individuals) who also strive to acquire more wealth and status.”

A more recent set of studies led by Cameron Anderson at the University of Berkeley found that social class, measured in terms of education and income, was positively associated with the desire for social status. People who had more education and money were more likely to agree with statements like “I enjoy having influence over other people’s decision making” and “It would please me to have a position of prestige and social standing.”

Social status loss aversion

Who feels most in danger of losing their reputations, though? Turns out, those same exact people. A survey by the Cato Institute in collaboration with YouGov asked a nationally representative sample of 2,000 Americans various questions about self-censorship.

They found that highly educated people are the most concerned about losing their jobs or missing out on job opportunities because of their political views. Twenty-five percent of those with a high school education or less are afraid of getting fired or hurting their employment prospects because of their political views, compared with 34 percent of college graduates and an astounding 44 percent of people with a postgraduate degree.

Results from a recent paper titled ‘Keeping Your Mouth Shut: Spiraling Self-Censorship in the United States’ by the political scientists James L. Gibson and Joseph L. Sutherland is consistent with the findings from Cato/Yougov. They find that self-censorship has skyrocketed. In the 1950s, at the height of McCarthyism, 13.4 percent of Americans reported that “felt less free to speak their mind than they used to.” In 1987, the figure had reached 20 percent. By 2019, 40 percent of Americans reported that they did not feel free to speak their minds. This isn’t a partisan issue, either. Gibson and Sutherland report that, “The percentage of Democrats who are worried about speaking their mind is just about identical to the percentage of Republicans who self-censor: 39 and 40 percent, respectively.”

The increase is especially pronounced among the educated class. The researchers report, “It is also noteworthy and perhaps unexpected that those who engage in self-censorship are not those with limited political resources… self-censorship is most common among those with the highest levels of education… This finding suggests a social learning process, with those with more education being more cognizant of social norms that discourage the expression of one’s views.”

Highly-educated people appear to be the most likely to express things they don’t necessarily believe for fear of losing their jobs or their reputation. Within the upper class, the true believers set the pace, and those who are loss-averse about their social positions go along with it.

Interestingly, there is suggestive evidence indicating that education is negatively associated with one’s sense of power. That is, the more education someone has, the more likely they are to agree with statements like, “Even if I voice them, my views have little sway” and “My ideas and opinions are often ignored.” Granted, the correlation is quite small (r = -.15). Still, the finding is significant and in the opposite direction of what most people would expect.

Research by Caitlin Drummond and Baruch Fischhoff at Carnegie Mellon University found that people with more education, science education, and science literacy are more polarized in their views about scientific issues depending on their political identity. For example, the people who are most concerned about climate change? College-educated Democrats. The people who are least concerned? College-educated Republicans. In contrast, less educated Democrats and Republicans are not so different from one another in their views about climate change.

Likewise, in an article titled “Academic and Political Elitism,” the sociologist Musa Al-Gharbi has summarized related research, writing, “compared to the general public, cognitively sophisticated voters are much more likely to form their positions on issues based on partisan cues of what they are ‘supposed’ to think in virtue of their identity as Democrats, Republicans, etc.”

High education and low opinions

It’s also useful to understand how highly educated people view others and their social relationships. Consider a paper titled ‘Seeing the Best or Worst in Others: A Measure of Generalized Other-Perceptions’ led by Richard Rau at the University of Münster. Rau and his colleagues were interested in how various factors influence people’s perceptions of others.

In the study, participants looked at social network profiles of people they did not know. They also viewed short video sequences of unfamiliar people describing a neutral personal experience like traveling to work. Researchers then asked participants to evaluate the people in the social media profiles and videos. Participants were asked how much they agreed with statements like “I like this person,” and “This person is cold-hearted.” Then participants responded to various demographic and personality questions about themselves.

Some findings weren’t so surprising. The researchers found, for example, that people who scored highly on the personality traits of openness and agreeableness tended to hold more favorable views of others.

More sobering, though, is that higher education was consistently related to less positive views of other people. In their paper they write, “to understand people’s feelings, behaviors, and social relationships, it is of key importance to know which general view they hold about others… the better people are educated, the less positive their other-perceptions are.”

So affluent people care the most about status, believe they have little power, are afraid of losing their jobs and reputation, and have less favorable views of others.

In short, opinions can confer status regardless of their truth value. And the individuals most likely to express certain opinions in order to preserve or enhance their status are also those who are already on the upper rungs of the social ladder.

There may be unpleasant consequences for this misguided use of intellect and time on the part of highly educated and affluent people. If the most fortunate members of society spend more time speaking in hushed tones, or live in fear of expressing themselves, or are more involved in culture wars, that is less time they could spend using their mental and economic resources to solve serious problems.

Smart people are usually better at finding the truth. But they’re also better at knowing which way the ideological winds are blowing, and thereby producing and accepting absurdities.

Explains why so many well-off college students with AirPods, a standard order at Starbucks and an Amazon account pretend to want communism, yet can't survive 5 minutes without Wi-Fi or TikTok.

#Rob Henderson #luxury beliefs #social status #social consequences #human psychology #loss aversion #religion is a mental illness

12 notes · View notes

thistlecatfics · 1 year

Note

do you have opinions on cbt

Hahaha everyone has opinions on CBT. For the radical queer trauma therapist circles I run in I’m actually pretty pro-CBT. For the average person involved in mental/behavioral health, I’m probably anti-CBT.

[For context, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is a famously evidence based type of therapy which works by targeting thoughts/cognitions. It theorizes that thoughts cause behaviors which cause feelings which cause thoughts all around and around in a spiral of doom for which the easiest intervention is targeting the thoughts. It can be very regimented, hence it’s easily studied, hence why it’s so “evidence based.” You basically identify “cognitive distortions” like catastrophizing (I failed my exam and so I’m going to fail out of school and live in a cardboard box) and reality-check them (it’s one exam in one class and I can still pass the class if I get a decent grade on my final). You also identify the thought/feeling/behavior spiral (thought=I failed -> I will be homeless, feeling=fear, shame, behavior=avoiding the professor and anything associated with the class.) It’s definitely bigger and more complicated than that, but you get the idea.]

For a lot of people with anxiety and with OCD especially, it can be so life changing.

For a lot of people, especially people who are trauma survivors or whose presenting problems are connected to trauma, it can feel like gaslighting.

(Fun fact! Part of the reason TF-CBT (trauma focused CBT) has such solid evidence behind it is that it ignores the wild survival bias in its studies. People who have a lot of trauma or really intense PTSD tend to drop out. Those who stay mostly have success with it and provide happy little data points)

I think certain parts of CBT can be so useful – noticing thoughts, identifying cognitive distortions, checking in with reality – and I think using the triangle with clients (the little triangle of “thoughts,” “emotions,” “behaviors”) can be super useful, and I do it fairly often.

Personally, I find a lot of my clients can do (most of) the mental/cognitive work on their own – what they really need help with from a trained professional is actually a felt sense of safety and emotional processing which require therapeutic flexibility and other modalities -- and a longer period of work.

Some people like a very concrete, structured approach, especially if they’re new to therapy or skeptical of the value of therapy. Also, a lot of people only can access therapy for a short time and a lot of people only want to be in therapy for a short time, and you can make changes quickly with CBT. Also, from the therapist end, there are a million free CBT trainings and workshops you can do vs. most other modalities where you have to pay $1000s for trainings (on top of getting a graduate degree).

Insurance companies and payers in general LOVE CBT because it’s structured, evidence-based, and short-term. You also require clients to do homework, which is basically like extra therapy time you don’t have to pay the clinician for. You can also train people in it pretty easily. I think it’s important to understand *why* CBT is held up as the best/standard therapy type now, and it has a lot less to do with CBT itself and more to do with service provision and structural factors around paying for therapy and with what can be effectively researched.

I’m reading Richard Schwartz’s “No Bad Parts” right now about Internal Family Systems therapy, and I’m now thinking of CBT within that framework. Basically, CBT is an effective part of the overall therapy system but it’s being asked to do too much, and so is overfunctioning and causing problems. We really should just let it settle into its own niche.

It’s not my therapy niche! But it has a place.

(If you were asking about Cock and Ball Torture therapy that would probably fall under the category of “experiential” therapy. Not sure it’s really been studied, but I’m sure there would be enthusiastic participants.)

#cognitive behavioral therapy

46 notes · View notes