= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
I'm not sure if going to the bathroom is a "smart" adjustment between conscious and subconscious, or if it's closer to firing neurons in the region associated with it (that is to say, instead of a communication networks, it may be closer to just flipping on a switch). What would agree with the latter, is that studies show that the region of the brain associated with it is overly active when under the influence of alcohol. I think resting all day (and as a result, not wishing to do serious work) could probably be better explained by less blood flow to the brain (and as a result, less oxygen) due to lack of movement. On top of this, our bodies tend to operate in 12-hour cycles. If you are active for a while, your telling your brain it's in that 12-hour cycle. If your inactive, your telling it your in your inactive cycle.
Against Amazement
Time start: 20:48:35
I
The feelings of wonder, awe, amazement. It's a very human experience, and it is processed in the brain as a type of pleasure. If fact, if we look at the number of "5 photos you wouldn't believe" and similar clickbait on the Internet, it functions as a mildly addictive drug.
If I proposed that there is something wrong with those feelings, I would soon be drowned in voices of critique, pointing out that I'm suggesting we all become straw Vulcans, and that there is nothing wrong with subjective pleasure obtained cheaply and at no harm to anyone else.
I do not disagree with that. However, caution is required here, if one cares about epistemic purity of belief. Let's look at why.
II
Stories are supposed to be more memorable. Do you like stories? I'm sure you do. So consider a character, let's call him Jim.
Jim is very interested in technology and computers, and he is checking news sites every day when he comes to work in the morning. Also, Jim has read a number of articles on LessWrong, including the one about noticing confusion.
He cares about improving his thinking, so when he first read about the idea of noticing confusion on a 5 second level, he thought he wants to apply it in his life. He had a few successes, and while it's not perfect, he feels he is on the right track to notice having wrong models of the world more often.
A few days later, he opens his favorite news feed at work, and there he sees the following headline:
"AlphaGo wins 4-1 against Lee Sedol"
He goes on to read the article, and finds himself quite elated after he learns the details. 'It's amazing that this happened so soon! And most experts apparently thought it would happen in more than a decade, hah! Marvelous!'
Jim feels pride and wonder at the achievement of Google DeepMind engineers... and it is his human right to feel it, I guess.
But is Jim forgetting something?
III
Yes, I know that you know. Jim is feeling amazed, but... has he forgotten the lesson about noticing confusion?
There is a significant obstacle to Jim applying his "noticing confusion" in the situation described above: his internal experience has very little to do with feelings of confusion.
His world in this moment is dominated with awe, admiration etc., and those feelings are pleasant. It is not at all obvious that this inner experience corresponds to a innacurate model of the world he had before.
Even worse - improving his model's predictive power would result in less pleasant experiences of wonder and amazement in the future! (Or would it?) So if Jim decides to update, he is basically robbing himself of the pleasures of life, that are rightfully his. (Or is he?)
Time end: 21:09:50
(Speedwriting stats: 23 wpm, 128 cpm, previous: 30/167, 33/183)
Neutralizing Physical Annoyances
Once in a while, I learn something about a seemingly unrelated topic - such as freediving - and I take away some trick that is well known and "obvious" in that topic, but is generally useful and NOT known by many people outside. Case in point, you can use equalization techniques from diving to remove pressure in your ears when you descend in a plane or a fast lift. I also give some other examples.
Ears
Reading about a few equalization techniques took me maybe 5 minutes, and after reading this passage once I was able to successfully use the "Frenzel Maneuver":
The technique is to close off the vocal cords, as though you are about to lift a heavy weight. The nostrils are pinched closed and an effort is made to make a 'k' or a 'guh' sound. By doing this you raise the back of the tongue and the 'Adam's Apple' will elevate. This turns the tongue into a piston, pushing air up.
(source: http://freedivingexplained.blogspot.com.mt/2008/03/basics-of-freediving-equalization.html)
Hiccups
A few years ago, I started regularly doing deep relaxations after yoga. At some point, I learned how to relax my throat in such a way that the air can freely escape from the stomach. Since then, whenever I start hiccuping, I relax my throat and the hiccups stop immediately in all cases. I am now 100% hiccup-free.
Stiff Shoulders
I've spent a few hours with a friend who is doing massage, and they taught me some basics. After that, it became natural for me to self-massage my shoulders after I do a lot of sitting work etc. I can't imagine living without this anymore.
Other?
If you know more, please share!
Prometheus, thank you for your intelligent comment. What you are saying is testable, and I plan to get more data on this. My experience seems to not be limited to 12-hour periods, but I'll specifically control for that for now on.
What I know from reading the posts by the author of FPV suggests that the core of FPV is the algorithm of processing the list (with dots and so on). Just writing a disorganised list of all your tasks and crossing them out hardly seems to come from any specific "system", so I don't know which elements you mean when you say "[...] recognise elements from [FPV]".
I tend to do the same thing as the notches, only I write lttle tick marks.
Today has been a day full of suck and I don't know why but at least I wrote this out.
Haha, feels.
Have you considered posting these things to your blog instead?
I find your comment somewhat surprising - could you unpack it?
(E.g. what exactly was your reaction, what part or property of the post triggered it, how do you consider blogs different from LW discussion, do you have some general policies that govern what you do in such matters etc.?)
Willpower Schedule
TL;DR: your level of willpower depends on how much willpower you expect to need (hypothesis)
Time start: 21:44:55 (this is my third exercise in speed writing a LW post)
I.
There is a lot of controversy about how our level of willpower is affected by various factors, including doing "exhausting" tasks before, as well as being told that willpower is a resource that depletes easily, or doesn't etc.
(sorry, I can't go look for references - that would break the speedwriting exercise!)
I am not going to repeat the discussions that already cover those topics; however, I have a new tentative model which (I think) fits the existing data very well, is easy to test, and supersedes all previous models that I have seen.
II.
The idea is very simple, but before I explain it, let me give a similar example from a different aspect of our lives. The example is going to be concerned with, uh, poo.
Have you ever noticed that (if you have a sufficiently regular lifestyle), conveniently you always feel that you need to go to the toilet at times when it's possible to do so? Like for example, how often do you need to go when you are on a bus, versus at home or work?
The function of your bowels is regulated by reading subconscious signals about your situation - e.g. if you are stressed, you might become constipated. But it is not only that - there is a way in which it responds to your routines, and what you are planning to do, not just the things that are already affecting you.
Have you ever had the experience of a background thought popping up in your mind that you might need to go within the next few hours, but the time was not convenient, so you told that thought to hold it a little bit more? And then it did just that?
III.
The example from the previous section, though possibly quite POOrly choosen (sorry, I couldn't resist), shows something important.
Our subconscious reactions and "settings" of our bodies can interact with our conscious plans in a "smart" way. That is, they do not have to wait to see the effects of what you are doing, to adjust to it - they can pull information from your conscious plans and adjust *before*.
And this is, more or less, the insight that I have added to my current working theory of willpower. It is not very complicated, but perhaps non-obvious. Sufficiently non-obvious that I don't think anyone has suggested it before, even after seeing experimental results that match this excellently.
IV.
To be more accurate, I claim that how much willpower you will have depends on several important factors, such as your energy and mood, but it also depends on how much willpower you expect to need.
For example, if you plan to have a "rest day" and not do any serious work, you might find that you are much less *able* to do work on that day than usual.
It's easy enough to test - so instead of arguing this theoretically, please do just that - give it a test. And make sure to record your levels of willpower several times a day for some time - you'll get some useful data!
Time end: 20:00:53. Statistics: 534 words, 2924 characters, 15.97 minutes, 33.4 wpm, 183.1 cpm
To me that seems like a misapplication. The politician who makes sure that his friends get forward can be at stage 3 without being idealistic.
A politician who is in a party because they want to advance capitalism or because they want to advance liberalism would likely be in stage 4 because their loyality is to the institution and not to people.
I have an impression of some politician who operate at the city level in Berlin that doesn't come through the media. I would categories those people mostly as stage 3 or stage 4.
How would you characterize yourself in Kagan's framework?
I'm not going to argue about this - as I said, I think the Kegan's model by itself is underspecified, and you can apply it in various ways to the same situation. Quite possible your application to politics makes more sense.
How would you characterize yourself in Kagan's framework?
If you are asking this question, you don't understand some critical things. Never ask this question.
I like that you analysed this topic, however after thinking about it I came to conclusions that are not compatible with your approach.
I do not believe you are suggesting any policy in practice that is substantially different from what I'd suggest.
However I want to oppose the "filter" approach, and suggest it is more growth-y to look at this differently.
The idea of using a "filter" on your communication sounds to me like it suggests "dressing up" or softening your statements, which blocks people from transferring their thoughts to other people. Which makes all the people involved lose.
Instead, I suggest to keep conversations healthy to such a degree, that you can say whatever it is you wanted to express. And also to preempt any misunderstanding by saying what you DON'T mean if the topic is sensitive.
But basically I strongly oppose the approach that assumes filtering communication.
It makes more sense to work on preparing ground to enable communication to happen more efficiently and without undue emotion/offense.
In politicians who in their lifetimes change from being idealistic to being self-serving and calculated, we will observe a period of backing off from politics in the middle of the change.
Why do you think that Kegan's model makes that prediction?
Why do you think that Kegan's model makes that prediction?
I don't think it's fair to say that "Kegan's model makes that prediction" - the model itself (in the form I know it) is a little bit too vague for this. I'd rather say that I'm making that prediction USING Kegan's model, and I apply it to politics in this way:
- idealistic politicians who are in it to help people = stage 3
- gap = politicians who think politics doesn't make sense so they are not politicians anymore = stage 4
- calculating politicians who are in it to play the system = stage 5
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
I don't see why this would "supersede" other models. I don't have to test it in my own case, because I already know that I am less willing to work if I did not expect to have to work. That doesn't mean that willpower is not a consumable resource. For example, you can compare it with money. If I go out and expect to spend $20, I might tell people, "I can't afford that," if the thing is going to cost $100. But if I had expected it to cost $100, I might have spent that amount. None of that shows that money is not a consumable resource.
Using your money analogy, what I'm saying above is that if you expect the item to cost $20, you will go to the shop with only $20 or $25 in your wallet. So you won't buy the item if it costs $100.
This theory is compatible with willpower being expendable - obviously, you can't carry more cash in your wallet than the total amount you own.
So it is a more detailed model, in which you can be short of money in two ways: you can't afford this at all, or you didn't think to have that much cash on you when you left the house.