#i read abt that in one of those books abt socializing w little tricks to talk to people more easily | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gudspeed · 4 years

Note

do evens!

aahhh ok!! starting with 4 since i already did 2

4. Oversized sweaters: what sweater weather outfit are you looking forward to wearing?

ok i have these evergreen skate/work pants and i want to wear them w a black hoodie and a rust red beanie and some fun socks and my skate shoes. also just beanie weather and big ugly blue jacket weather !! (i have to wait until i move in december tho!!)

6. Ghost stories: what books are you reading?

i just finished split tooth by tanya tagaq and i started on the left hand of darkness by ursula k. le guin

8. Cold hands: anyone to hold them?

no <3

10. Crunchy leaves: what’s your favorite noise/sound to hear?

ocean waves crashing down hard

12. Hurricanes: what do you do on rainy days?

drink much more coffee than usual! and if i can i’ll try to sit by a window and enjoy it w some good bg music

14. Boots: Favorite pair of shoes/boots you own?

my skate vans! i got them done custom and i wear them p much everywhere

16. Black cat: what pets do you have/want?

i have two black labs! a really dumb old man and his very clingy little sister

18. October: Did you go trick-or-treating on Halloween when you were younger?

when i was really little we went, but after that we moved to the mountains and there’s no where to do it

20. Leaves: When the leaves change, what color looks the prettiest?

LOVE the orange ones just before they rot and turn brown

22. Caramel Apples: Favorite Halloween candy?

tbh im not a sugar person but i like reece’s, kitkats, and sourpatch kids

24. Pumpkin Pie: Share your favorite autumn recipe.

just when you brew your coffee put some cinnamon in the grounds, promise it will bring u happiness

26. Wind: Have you ever been outside your own country during Autumn? Tell us about your experience.

nope :(

28. Socks: What kind of socks do you like? Do you wear matching socks, fuzzy socks, tall socks, or no socks?

i wear either no-show socks or socks w cool patterns that u can see peaking out of my pant hems

30. Jacket: how do you feel about pumpkin flavoured things in general?

no <3 <3

32. Campfire: Do you like going outdoors for activities like camping, hiking, or mountain biking?

YES i was born and raised in the middle of the woods, literally all i do at home is go on hikes with my dogs and take drives into the mountains and just sit in nature all day long

34. Forest: What are five of your favorite things about autumn?

typically its easier to be social during this time, the novelty of being cold hasnt worn off so im not grumpy abt it yet, the first snows always feel special, and i love love love the mist that settles in the mountain valleys and makes things seem a lil magical

36. Tea: Favorite scary story or legend

i dont listen to those <3

38. Maze: Have you ever gone to a corn maze?

yes, its a cruel joke to play on someone who gets lost going straight

40. Boo: Do you believe in ghosts? If so, have you ever had an experience?

there’s ghosts everywhere my guy

42. Lights: Do you decorate your home for Halloween?

no i’m broke and don’t have time, money, or energy to spend doing something that’ll only last a month

44. Movies: Favorite scary movie

no <3

45. Novel: Favorite spooky novel

no <3 <3

#thank u for sending these in !#answered #Anonymous

0 notes

unproduciblesmackdown · 7 years

Text

you know whats a pain in the ass.......psych "experiments" (bitter quotation marks coz the scientific method doesnt mean you can shoot rubber bands at people in a restaurant & say it aligns w your hypothesis of if i do this then people will be annoyed, and then saying that it leads to the theory that Pain is more influential a force than environment and social mores to be endlessness polite to each other in an expensive restaurant) particularly the ones that ppl like to reduce to "these experiments prove that humanity is dumbassed/bad, but because you are shaking yr head at this fact it means it doesnt apply to you"

like the book you can get at any barnes & nobles or whatever thats like "the marshmallow experiment, or, why self control determines lifelong success so you better read this book to learn how to have better self control." that experiment was basically like, ppl putting little kids in a room with a marshmallow on the table, and telling them that they were going to be in the room alone for a few minutes, and when the adult came back the kid would be given an extra marshmallow if the first one hadnt been eaten yet. and then it was one of those things where like, they did periodic follow up surveys with these kids for the next 20 yrs or so to see how "successful" they were in life. and of course the takeaway is meant to be that the kids who Succeeded were the kids that didn't eat the marshmallow.

but the thing is that the details can just as much if not moreso be interpreted to show that the idea that those kids walked in with a "self-control" level that had already laid out their whole future was bullshit? i mean, first of all, how do you define the concept of "self-control," especially as a constant/measurable quality? like its something that sits in the brain like a rock, and kids have bigger rocks or smaller rocks that dont change over time. how would you know its an independent factor unaffected by any variable parts of its whole, or by external influences?

and anyhow, there was more to the experiment. like, some kids were given a "trick" to help them wait it out, i.e. to pretend that the marshmallow wasnt real/was just a picture or something. and those kids were able to wait for ages / without getting all fidgety about it nearly as much as the kids who didnt get that hint. another variation was that some of the kids, before the bit with the marshmallow, were deliberately given a precedent where the adult running the experiment "lied," aka said something was going to turn out one way if x happened, then showed the kid that it didnt happen the way they said it would. and natch those kids were way more likely to eat the marshmallow right off than wait for a promised second marshmallow. and these factors had really strong correlations, suggesting it "overrode" any concept of an Inherent Self-Control level any of those kids had.

so little kids can have vast more success immediately when given a Cheat vs the idea that yrs of development are needed to obtain an unshakable Self-Control. and if kids can be taught at once to distrust an adult, how can anyone assume that walking into that experiment that day, each kid had encountered adults with identical examples of reliability and truthfulness? and where is the Controlled factors when it comes to observing these kids over the course of their early lives. how are the qualities possessed by a kid when theyre 2-5yrs old or something going to remain constant for decades. how is "success" going to be defined? how is the confirmation bias of the interviewers going to be restricted? how are the state of these kids lives in their 20s supposed to be the be-all and end-all judgment of their entire lives quality / the whole of their character? etc etc

so thats bs. another one i think of is this one where its like, six ppl are put in a room but one of them doesnt know that the other five are In on the experiment. everyone is shown a piece of paper with line segments where their relative distinctions in length are obvious, and asked which one is the longest. the five conspirators all say the longest is one which is clearly not the longest, the sixth person who doesnt know whats going on usually agrees with them. thus proving that everyone reprehensibly gives in to peer pressure even if they know the rest of the group is wrong! sheeple

and like, uh? um? how about the sixth person hasnt been given a reason to believe the other five are lying, and in the face of their consensus, they make an entirely reasonable assumption that for whatever reason, their own perception of the lines is inaccurate, rather than stubbornly believing in their own superior infallibility, i.e. that its more likely that the perception of all the other five are inaccurate, rather than that sixth person being the one who's wrong. yeah sure "groupthink" exists but weirdly enough also, the Group isnt evil. but thats a cultural bias too, which is very scientific

and another "long term" """experiment""" (nothing abt this can be called a real experiment...) was back in the day where some guy was like "i'm going to bring together a few guys who have delusions of being the messiah and see if that logically proves to them that none of them are jesus" and so he did that, and expected them to like kill each other or whatever but actually the guys were all nice to each other and even went along with the idea of the others that the other was the Real second coming. and the guy running the experiment was like god damnit this isnt matching what i predicted, and so he did what youre supposed to do when your results dont align with your hypothesis: modified the conditions of the experiment partway through with such a controlled factor as "try to get some random lady to make one of the guys believe she was in love with him, and then try to leverage that fake relationship to convince him to admit he Knows he isnt reallly jesus." that didnt work either. there was probably more fucked up shit. but in the end? the guy who ran the experiment finally admitted that the expmt had "cured" someone of their delusion of being god, and that person was himself.

anyways i trust no psychologist (even worse: sociologists...) not that that isnt the only field where Experiments get fucked up by terrible bias. granted, these examples would likely be called "studies" anyhow, but that doesnt make them anything more than just anecdotal evidence, and this isnt the world of academic debate. like, were there controls, were there blinds, what were the parameters or potential variables in the test subjects, was data thrown out, was the experiment altered partway through, was it peer reviewed, is it replicable!! god. the only ones you can kinda rely on is mathematicians lbr

#im kinda joking like obviously not everyone with a psych major is the devil #but the whole field of treating mental disorders is still soooo subjective and culturally influenced & when u get ppl considered ''normal''#or ''avg'' according to the latest edition of the dsm saying that theyre into psych coz the brain is so Interesting and Fascinating what ppl #can be like; sorry but get tf out. or the concept of any psychologist/psychiatrist who talks abt their patients anonymously as a fun story #for a date or a cocktail party like......you can especially get the fuck out

7 notes · View notes