|
fatelvis posted:Are there any articles on the evidence for this? Most people would generally disagree that they do this. I don't have it handy, but there seems to be a lot of experimental evidence. You can go from behavioral econ or organizational theory (with authors mentioned above) to psychologists (Kahnemann maybe?) up to full on neuroscience research, where there's stuff on whether we actually make conscious decisions at all or ex-post rationalize everything. In any case it's a good bet that we are far less rational and far more ex-post rationalizing than we think we are. And, interestingly, the implication of this would also be that we may not actually want to be too rational. Not only in terms of "not being depressed lol", but also in terms of living together in a society and in particular in hierarchies of any sort. In that sense, the 1950's ideal of a rational person, rational firm, rational decision-maker and rational society may have little value - not only as a positivist description, but even as a normative goal. Here's another interpretation from an entirely different literature: Fame is something unexpected (to some degree). Such things require interpretation, e.g. sense-making. Here, it has been shown that people pick interpretations that are "plausible" over those that are accurate (ref. rational). Plausibility, however, also refers to self-value and self-image. People usually have some (maybe hidden) self-image and value that gives a tendency to pick favorable interpretations. So, the way people make sense of fame is by finding an interpretation that gives some credence to their existing conception of self, and then also remains plausible under repeated iterations of new data. For most people, such an interpretation comes in the form of agency. Fame means that they did something, and they got some result. This supposed causality is actually not necessarily accurate. Hell, many celebrities didn't really merit fame. However, it IS plausible, both individually and in society. Important point then: In our society, liberal interpretations are not only consistent with self-image, but also plausible (think of some sort of micro-evolutionary stable explanation). Thus, successful people are often "moved" toward such ideologies as they make sense of what is happening. Now before you scoff at celebrities, you should be aware that we all do this. Even in this very thread. Haramstufe Rot fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Feb 9, 2021 |
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
fatelvis posted:Are there any articles on the evidence for this? Most people would generally disagree that they do this. Well that's kind of the point - you can't tell when you're doing it. Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow has a bunch of good stuff in how judgements are irrational and inconsistent, although I can't remember how strongly it leads into post-hoc justification.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:34
|
|
|
Strom Cuzewon posted:Well that's kind of the point - you can't tell when you're doing it. I can tell. Just because you can tell you're doing it doesn't mean you stop doing it. It's kinda the reason I post the way I do. Being able to see it is... not recommended.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:43
|
|
|
A few years ago I read somewhere that schizophrenic people don't actually hallucinate, they just very strongly remember having hallucinated because the pipeline between sensory input and short term memory gets rewritten along the way. (Not to disparage the severity of schizophrenic hallucinations, since the end result is functionally the same). Maybe something similar to that but with the emotional resonance associated with the information, i.e. whether on not information 'feels' right or wrong to you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
Borrovan posted:Citation needed, most marking is done by fairly large teams (often including a bunch of postgrads who get roped in) so a student doesn't have any idea who's marking it. Depends on where and when and if you're talking about exams or day to day teaching. The way it worked when I read history at Oxford was you wrote your essay and read it out to the tutor, just you and him one and one in the tutorial, and then he ripped it to pieces in front of you. So, uh, yes, you know exactly who's marking it, he's telling you all the ways your argument is crap right there in front of your face.  When it comes to exams, well, if he's the 17th century French history expert and your essay is on 17th century French history it is at least quite likely he is marking your paper, and if he was your tutor he's likely to know your writing style well enough to know it's you even if the paper is anonymised, so welp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:46
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:https://twitter.com/JP_Biz/status/1359109633139425286?s=19 A good sign for down south if this keeps up, might mean more food for us up north cause what is coming across the water from UK is limited and i'm not sure it will get any better for quite a while.  Downloaded a lot of Mock The Week compilations off YT (sometimes play them as i go to sleep), Andy Parsons has never been on my playlist. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:I can tell. Sometimes I think I can, but then sometimes I only think I think I can and I get stuck in a pit of rumination and introspection. To do it long term sounds rough 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:https://twitter.com/JP_Biz/status/1359109633139425286?s=19 Ireland prepared. https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/7347b-preparing-ireland-for-the-economy-of-the-future/ https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/cc269-16496-new-jobs-created-by-enterprise-ireland-supported-companies-in-2020/ https://www.enterprise-ireland.com/en/funding-supports/Brexit/Ready-for-Customs/
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:16
|
|
|
fatelvis posted:Are there any articles on the evidence for this? Most people would generally disagree that they do this. Well, yes, after the fact 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:A few years ago I read somewhere that schizophrenic people don't actually hallucinate, they just very strongly remember having hallucinated because the pipeline between sensory input and short term memory gets rewritten along the way. (Not to disparage the severity of schizophrenic hallucinations, since the end result is functionally the same). I've always wondered about that, because our perception of the world around us is massively filtered and we edit our memories more or less on the fly to make up for the deficiences of our senses. The best example is the clock ticking illusion - you look at a clock and it seems to take considerably more than a second for the second hand to move. This is because it can take up to 200ms for your brain to assemble the image of the clock when you shift your gaze to it, and if the second hand moves in that time, your brain basically edits it out (including even editing out the sound of the tick) so your consciousness perceives the second hand taking well over a second to move. There's all sorts of other phenomena like this (it's why eye-witness testimony, especially of stressful situations, is so unreliable) and I've always wondered if hallucinations are these filters breaking down in some way. Like our brains have to fill in a *lot* of blanks left by our pretty useless sensory organs, and there's a definite evolutionary advantage to have the brain that interprets three bits of grass moving funny as "Leopard about to eat me" compared to the brain that waits for a lot more info to come in; is it possible that it's this system that drives hallucinations?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Ireland prepared. Well yeah I know they wanked themselves into a smug frenzy about preparedness, but it's good to know they actually did do something. Shame about every other aspect of Irish society tho
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:30
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:I can tell. There's a difference between akrasia and being entirely aware of all your cognitive biases. The Kahneman point of view is that the latter is impossible. Working out the 1950s ideal rational person choice in every situation is cognitively overwhelming, so we all resort to shortcuts and these are where the biases hide.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:32
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:A few years ago I read somewhere that schizophrenic people don't actually hallucinate, they just very strongly remember having hallucinated because the pipeline between sensory input and short term memory gets rewritten along the way. Does intense deja vu exist as part of the prodromal schizophrenic symptomology? If so it would certainly support that way of thinking about schizophrenia
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:33
|
|
|
Some of us like our cognitive biases and think they are cool and good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:35
|
|
|
If I wanted to be completely free of cognitive biases, I would simply join the BBC!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:If I wanted to be completely free of cognitive biases, I would simply join the BBC! How ridiculous! Yet at the same time, how quite sensible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Strom Cuzewon posted:Sometimes I think I can, but then sometimes I only think I think I can and I get stuck in a pit of rumination and introspection. Yeah I had a big injury with severe neurological symptoms. The ability to see myself making decisions and only then reasoning is a side-effect from containing the symptoms. My sensory and cognitive information was just all hosed up every which way and it took a very long time to learn to filter them out properly, and I can still get noise in the signal out of nowhere, which results in the synthesized understanding of my immediate surroundings being... badly wrong? Once I learned to filter out the bad information, take a second and analyze what I was doing, I started looking at my motivations and emotional states with the same lens. As well as looking back on my life with the insight I then had, about my disease and decision making process alike. What the gently caress was I doing? Wait, I'm doing it right now and it's no more sensible! I am witnessing myself making stupid choices without thinking about them in real time with little to no chance to influence them. Wait, what the gently caress are the people around me doing. Nobody makes any sense at any time, it's all just post hoc justifications that don't have to be consistent they only need to feel consistent. If you try to point out the inconsistencies to anyone, they will get angry because people will get seriously distressed by realizing their own behavior is irrational and I've got several different conflicting thought processes in my head at all times and by the time I'm analyzing what I'm going to do I will already have done it. In order for me to say I'm in charge I have to define myself and... I can't. There's nothing there. You are the illusion that you're making consistent decisions towards your own goals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:54
|
|
|
Sounds rough, but also a very unique perspective on the whole living thing. What blows my mind is autonomic responses. Your blood pressure starts rising a moment before you "decide" to stand up, otherwise you might get really dizzy. Determinism is a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 20:57
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Some of us like our cognitive biases and think they are cool and good. Don’t doxx me
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:00
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:If I wanted to be completely free of cognitive biases, I would simply join the BBC! Endjinneer posted:Working out the 1950s ideal rational person choice Haramstufe Rot posted:Now before you scoff at celebrities, you should be aware that we all do this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:01
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Like our brains have to fill in a *lot* of blanks left by our pretty useless sensory organs, and there's a definite evolutionary advantage to have the brain that interprets three bits of grass moving funny as "Leopard about to eat me" compared to the brain that waits for a lot more info to come in; is it possible that it's this system that drives hallucinations? Failed Imagineer posted:Does intense deja vu exist as part of the prodromal schizophrenic symptomology? If so it would certainly support that way of thinking about schizophrenia I did also read something that claimed Deja Vu was a misfire of the part of the brain involved in your sense time, so the incoming stimulus also sets off the part of the brain that 'recognises' memories and the resulting mess is the sensation that you've heard / seen / experienced this before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
Having a terrible memory in general is also instructive in making you feel/aware that you are a sort of idea complex riding on the top deck of a bus made of a seemingly largely automatic collection of reactions to stimuli while making brum brum noises and waving your hands around like there's a wheel in front of you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
Endjinneer posted:There's a difference between akrasia and being entirely aware of all your cognitive biases. The Kahneman point of view is that the latter is impossible. Working out the 1950s ideal rational person choice in every situation is cognitively overwhelming, so we all resort to shortcuts and these are where the biases hide. I am aware I'm unable to perceive all my biases, I can only mitigate them. But I can witness myself creating a narrative where I explain to myself how I made a rational decision while remaining fully aware that I did not actually think about that decision. I'm lying to myself as an automatic process that happens even when there's no need to lie at all, and if I let myself accept it I just believe it even when I know it's false. It's distressing the exact way a hard drive click is distressing when you're not sure how recent your backups are. I have no idea how you could ever be rational. Well, I know you can't ever be rational, a rational being would immediately collapse on its own paradox and presumably then create the universe. To rationally make decisions you have to prioritize subjective values, which means Hume's guillotine ends your rational person there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:a bus made of a seemingly largely automatic collection of reactions to stimuli while making brum brum noises and waving your hands around like there's a wheel in front of you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Having a terrible memory in general is also instructive in making you feel/aware that you are a sort of idea complex riding on the top deck of a bus made of a seemingly largely automatic collection of reactions to stimuli while making brum brum noises and waving your hands around like there's a wheel in front of you. Yeah my memory is a pile of poo poo and I relate to this. Ultimately though it comes down to you'll remember what you enjoy (notwithstanding brain injuries or what have you). Like I barely remember doing my PhD, or the girl I went out with for 8 years around the same time. But I can quote at least 8 seasons of The Simpsons verbatim lmao
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:11
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I think about that too, traits that were useful for one evolutionary purpose or another, but are either stigmatised or flat out regarded as mental illness because they're counterproductive to modern life - people who naturally sleep in / stay up late being a good example of someone who would be able to wake the group when everyone else is sleeping, but are now regarded as being lazy or wrong. This is what I've read as well. It is the idea that makes most intuitive sense to me - but also requires that you completely accept the unreliability of your own memories. I know a lot of people seem to think they've dreamed a thing when they have deja vu - and they get really annoyed if you try and explain what might be happening. Guess you shouldn't ruin peoples dreams.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I think about that too, traits that were useful for one evolutionary purpose or another, but are either stigmatised or flat out regarded as mental illness because they're counterproductive to modern life - people who naturally sleep in / stay up late being a good example of someone who would be able to wake the group when everyone else is sleeping, but are now regarded as being lazy or wrong. Oh, for sure: the brains and bodies of human beings are optimised for living a hunter-gather lifestyle on the African savannah, in a small band of extended families. The consequences of creatures with these bodies and brains ending up living in modern, urban environments are... messy but endlessly interesting, I guess!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
fatelvis posted:Guess you shouldn't ruin peoples dreams.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:18
|
|
|
See, I just drink gin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:23
|
|
|
Mebh posted:See, I just drink gin. eh, pricey and i don't just mean in pounds stirling. be careful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
Ireland spent all its DPC money* on customs and now they’re having to be sued into doing their job. Good going Ireland. *€1.50 and a post it note
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:29
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:If you try to point out the inconsistencies to anyone, they will get angry because people will get seriously distressed by realizing their own behavior is irrational and I've got several different conflicting thought processes in my head at all times and by the time I'm analyzing what I'm going to do I will already have done it. All of which explains why when someone tries to give older people info that contradicts their understanding of the world, they get angry. And the more certain of their worldview they are, the angrier they get. And this is to a certain extent true with the left as well - if a sensible centrist just asked mid argument why it's important to feed the poor, you might be lucky enough to have memorised the line about how spending grows an economy; but more than likely something that fundamentally oppositional to the concept of empathy can send you reeling for a second. It's another reason it's so hard to argue with gammon, because if you point out that immigrants don't come over here and get given a free house and a grand a week, they'll start going nuts about fake news, because to them there's no possibility of it being true. Pistol_Pete posted:Oh, for sure: the brains and bodies of human beings are optimised for living a hunter-gather lifestyle on the African savannah, in a small band of extended families. The consequences of creatures with these bodies and brains ending up living in modern, urban environments are... messy but endlessly interesting, I guess! In humans that number is supposedly about 50. The smallest village in the UK (Fordbridge) has 350 people in it. We are all just complicated monkeys. Some people seem to get really, really mad when you point this out though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I'm pretty sure I've said it before but the more familiar a thought pattern is, not only is it easier and quicker for the brain to slip down that channel, the inverse is also true - new thought channels are slower and tougher to form (especially with age) and cause a stress hormone release that impairs the formation of new memories. I guess there is no way of stopping this and we're all destined to become old and set in our ways 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Once a community gets past that number, it starts to splinter as people get deprioritised, make enemies and ultimately start to 'other' anyone not in their sphere. I'd say that number is more like 3. Where any 3 are gathered together (in flatshares or friendship groups), there will be two ganged up against the third (albeit it is sometimes quite subtle and takes a while to click.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:01
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I'm pretty sure I've said it before but the more familiar a thought pattern is, not only is it easier and quicker for the brain to slip down that channel, the inverse is also true - new thought channels are slower and tougher to form (especially with age) and cause a stress hormone release that impairs the formation of new memories. When I try to quiz my reasoning process about the obvious lie it just tried to encode in my memory as a fact, the response is incredibly enlightening. It's the exact response petulant children and angry gammons have to being caught in a lie. Most of the behavior patterns that were in my head were not very useful unless you're expecting everyone around you to be hostile and you need to be ready to get on the offensive to gain the upper hand. So, once I witnessed that one enough times, I realized a way to work around it, which is to always choose an option that doesn't feel right, because it's new. And because I haven't tried it before, I might learn something new. It works great for posting badly and making sure nobody ever understands what you're saying unless they're willing to put in the work, and nobody ever does. It's a SEP field that gets people to accept completely unhinged ideas as normal. Then you can use the group cohesion mechanics to make it the group consensus since nobody's bothering to oppose it. I know absolutely nothing about these "little libraries" which are basically houses for archivist gnomes, why do you ask?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
Haramstufe Rot posted:Don't know if you are genuinely asking or whether this is insightful, but the reason is most likely that us humans create our "rationality" ex-post - making our supposed preferences and explanations fit a certain interpretation of events. So, it's not necessarily just people being good or bad, it is also related to what consistent explanations are available. Herb Simon the sociologist? American, must be about 85 now? I know him. My wife did some work in sociology and became friends with him, I think he was working here for a while. He's very cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:21
|
|
|
I definitely read a peer reviewed article when I was at uni about how they're pretty sure that for at least some decisions, the electrical signals that make the decision (for some simple things like raising your hand) happen before the corresponding electrical bullshit happens in your brain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:24
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Sounds rough, but also a very unique perspective on the whole living thing. Have you heard the one about the mind-controlling gut microbiota? Had a lecture once from a researcher who was very much into gut microbiomes and they were theorizing that there was a degree of interaction between all the bacteria in the gut and the human they lived in. To the point where you could get personality changes when the microbiome was altered by antibiotics or faecal transplants. It sounded a bit far-fetched but I guess mind-controlling gut bacteria is about as reasonable as 420 post-hoc rationalization. Z the IVth fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Feb 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:24
|
|
|
Sounds like he might have just been a perv looking for excuses to shove his poo up other people's bums.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Sounds like he might have just been a perv looking for excuses to shove his poo up other people's bums. It's Gillian McKeith in a bad wig and fake moustache now she's not allowed to examine poo on telly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:30
|
|
