= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Perhaps, but why haven't I come across any homoromantic heterosexuals or heteroromantic homosexuals?
AFAIK people with mismatched romantic and sexual orientations, though very much existent, are quite rare and the -romantic terms are most often used by asexual spectrum people to describe their romantic preferences.
When my heterosexual male friends tell me companionship isn't about sex I ask them how many male companions they've had. Not many, I've gathered from the silence.
Ah, but it's quite likely that they're heteroromantic as well as heterosexual.
"she wanted to save the rainforest to stop global warming"
Katja Grace (of Meteuphoric) did some research for Giving What We Can looking into climate change charities. She wrote up her findings as a blog post.
Thank you, this is very useful!
What draws her to environmental charities? Concern for animals? Concern for humans? Fighting global warming with its likely negative effects on both?
Before GiveWell/whoever can make a recommendation they need to know what the person wants. The best environmental charity for preventing species extinction is going to be very different than the best one for preventing animal suffering.
Good point! When I asked her earlier she said she wanted to save the rainforest to stop global warming, but I don't think she's completely inflexible about this.
In response to
Open thread, 25-31 August 2014
I just started a tumblr (coffeespoonsposts) - which tumblrs should I follow?
In response to
Open thread, 25-31 August 2014
My sister is interested in environmental charities, a category which Givewell has no recommendations about. Does anyone know of any actually good ones?
In response to
Open Thread, May 26 - June 1, 2014
Dear hivemind: Any suggested interventions/experiments for a lack of appetite?
I haven't felt hungry in at least a month. I still eat, obviously, but I do it out of conscientiousness rather than desire, and have about one meal a day, with a couple of snacks that probably don't add up to a full meal throughout the day. I've had periods of no appetite before, but they usually resolved themselves within a week or so. I tried not eating when I wasn't hungry, assuming I'd wind up hungry, but this just resulted in my not eating at all for a day and a half.
Suggestions?
Try keeping food nearby? Have food in the house that's easy to prepare? Buy tastier food (even at the expense of healthiness)?
In response to
Open thread, January 25- February 1
I'm in art school and I have a big problem with precision and lack of "sloppiness" in my work. I'm sort of hesitant to try to improve in this area, however, because I suspect it reflects some sort of biological limit - maybe the size of some area in the cerebellum or something, I don't know. Am I right in thinking this?
Some guesses on my part-
Maybe your tendency towards precision is at the wrong times? If practicing, for example, it might be counterproductive since you probably want quantity instead of quality, or maybe you're trying to get everything down precisely too early on and it's making your work stiff.
Manfred's point is good- "metaphor that captures the scene without the need for detail."... If you render background details overmuch, they can distract the viewer from the focal point of the work. Maybe put some effort into looking at how the "metaphors" of different things work? For example, how more skilled artists draw/paint grass in the distance, or whatnot.
I think it's a common thing to sort of notice something wrong in an area, and to spend a lot of time on that area in hopes of fixing it, which would make it less sloppy... Maybe sketch that thing a lot for practice.
If you're drawing from life, it's possible that lack of sloppiness comes from not making sense of the gestalt, so to speak. I'd think that understanding the form of the subject and how the lighting on it works means you can simplify things away. I don't do much (read: any) figure drawings from life, but I'd imagine that understanding the figure and what's important and what isn't would be helpful. Maybe doing some master copies of skilled, more abstract drawings of the figure would help. Maybe look up a comic artist or cartoonist you like and look at what they do.
ETA:
To address your actual question, I'd say I don't know any particular evidence for why that should be so.
Rationality-technique-wise: It's good that you asked people, since that would bring you evidence of the idea being true or false. In the future it might be even more useful to suppress hypothesizing until some more investigating has gone on- "biological limit" is the sort of thing that feels true if you don't understand how to do something or how to understand how to do something. I think there's a post about this, or something; let me see if I can find it... ETA2: The exact anecdote I was thinking of doesn't apply as much as I thought it did, but maybe the post "Fake Explanations" or something applies?
It sounds like rule consequentialism to me - the ultimate arbiter of good and evil remains the consequences, but instead of determining rectitude by calculating the consequences of the action, you calculate the consequences of the decision method.
Basically, to use a blackjack metaphor, the rule consequentialist says someone who doubles-down when they have two tens showing is playing badly, even if they get an ace ... unless they've been counting cards and already know that the next card is an ace.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
The more is donated, the better, so figure out how much you expect to want for your own spending/saving and donate the rest. Don't give so much that it takes a toll on you; it must remain something achievable that you want to do.