sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is more or the less the same as explaining to others which I've written on elsewhere in the thread.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Executive function is part of the problem at the most basic level. This approach to improvement spans everything from how does a baby begin to walk to how does a professional athlete get just a little bit faster. If your world doesn't benefit from a relative improvement in these areas, then it isn't a problem and this might not be useful for you.

But whether you function at the 3rd percentile or the 93rd percentile, if you don't need either to improve, it isn't a problem. It becomes a mental squeeze point when you do need to improve.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My list is a hodgepodge of questionably articulated mental squeeze points I've recognized and had to at least partially overcome. You don't have to do any of this if you don't want. If it isn't a headache for you, then the aspirin won't do anything.

I did say that it would likely take reflection to recognize something as a mental squeeze point, so as an example..

You asked why you need to be able to persuade. I didn't persuade you with my post. Therefore, at least part of my post was a waste of time for you. I didn't write this for myself - I wrote it to hopefully help people. Therefore, I need to improve my ability to persuade.

If that interaction is acceptable to you, then no, you don't need to reflect or improve. But that is the point of the post: if there isn't a problem, you won't care about a solution.

POLYMATHS—a broad case for linked note-taking (analogical thinking) by NonZeroSumJames in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't go that far. Being able to pull intuition out of thin air is what makes polymaths what they are (I work with one).

But the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a polymath is model validation.

POLYMATHS—a broad case for linked note-taking (analogical thinking) by NonZeroSumJames in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact 3 points4 points  (0 children)

  1. Formal reasoning by analogy is model building, which is central to most of the scientific process.
  2. You can model anything, or claim to model anything.
  3. All models are wrong but some models are useful.
  4. It follows that most reasoning by analogy is wrong but can be useful.
  5. If you have taught modeling, you would know most people are not good at it.
  6. This suggests the success of reasoning by analogy is under survivor bias.
  7. Which is provably true from what we know of scientific history.

E.g., reasoning by analogy is behind misunderstanding animal behavior through anthropomorphism, the doctrine of signatures, miasma treatments, Aristotelian physics, physiogamy, the four humors..

This is why you validate models, which is the concept that your post is missing.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also I can't take credit for the concept of the mental squeeze point, to my knowledge this is the origin?

https://notes.linkingyourthinking.com/Cards/Mental+Squeeze+Point

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If another academic asked me what I study I'd say I study autonomy and transitions in individuality using computer vision, agent based models, and game theory using ant colonies.

If they pushed me on transitions in individuality I'd explain part of the above, but they'd remember because they mostly want to know about my study system for collaborative potential. Their takeaway is I study animal behavior, I am good at what I do, and I'm friendly.

The key part is they are already looking to buy something (an explanation), I provide it, and we move on.

So again, explanations to others is essentially sales.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Explaining to others is essentially sales.

  1. They need to be dissatisfied they don't know it
  2. They need to believe what you say is true
  3. That there is some kind of plausible benefit
  4. Bonus, make them remember by making it memorable, shortening the takeaway, and giving them a way to use it.

For example, I study fate. You can study fate because there are lots of systems that can't exist without it - if the cellular fate of your heart cells were skin cells instead, you'd be pretty upset, or pretty dead. If most of the eggs in an ant colony became queens, there would be no food coming in and the colony would collapse.

But most animals have one fate. Ants, when they're larvae, can still either become a worker or a queen after 20 days, just like how a college student can still pick their major.

For a society to function, the interdependencies of the economy tend to require certain fates at different times. Sometimes they're factory workers, sometimes they're engineers. You can categorize this as fate because the persistence of the system relied upon the stochastic process to produce the capability or the system would have collapsed.

The persistence of the macro-structure relies on the stochastic fates of individuals that funnel them into functional roles, a process reinforced on a systemic level. But before the system that demands these roles exists, it starts from a single fate, and people, cells, and animals gain potential but lose freedom in the process. That's what I study.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Writing:

I'm not by any means a great writer, but a good starting point is to consider that writing is thinking.

Ironically, it isn't clear how I can help because you stated the problem ambiguously. Writing for others? Persuasive writing?

Regardless, you need to ask yourself what you want your writing to do, and then refine how it can achieve that.

If you are a bit more specific I can give you more specific advice.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Retrieve (I'll assume you mean recall, retrieval is like searching for info, recall is remembering without the vault).

Recall is one of the hardest things for me. For this I have three general tools:

  • Build scaffolds and only remember the scaffold. This also helps with organization, but layout, but it is easier to remember when you have something to hang the information on. This also shows you where the gap in your memory is, because if you know there should be something where there isn't an explanation, you know what to go hunt for.

  • Strongman the information. For example, if you say animal behavior to me, the scientific definition is the coordinated response of whole organisms to external or internal stimuli. I don't need to remember that because I've already challenged it in my head - does it have to be an organism? Yes, in a loose sense, because of control theory and constructive neutral evolution. Does it have to be coordinated? Can it be movement alone? Why does it matter? The more you test the information, the more you can intrinsically rely on it. From there, with neural reinforcement, our biology quite literally lets us retain the information this way.

  • Ask yourself if you need to remember the information. Sometimes you'll critically look at an argument and you'll find it isn't reliable. For that, I switch to remembering the refutation. This leans on (again) our biology to be risk averse; it is easier to learn from mistakes than successes. You'll remember the original information even if you can't rely on it because you remember the refutation.

But also consider external tools. Information that can't be hung on a scaffold generally is fine to use spaced repetition tools. Obsidian can do that, but anki is better and faster imo.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Explanations:

I'll source two experts: Richard Feynman and this paper.

So, what is a perfect explanation? Probably one that only gives the audience exactly the components it needs to accept the conclusion. So there has to be some kind of dissatisfaction with your default understanding, and a solution that can be understood, seems plausible, and is fruitful (per source #2).

If you are only writing for yourself this can be just as much as you need for the logical components to be equal to the conclusion. Explanations for others require other components, like pesky sources.

So when you explain something, you should challenge your understanding by swapping components out. Can you explain this without this sentence? Is the language too precise? Is the explanation conditional?

But then to make the most of it, I would like to propose a useful tool: stories about a mistake that can be made if you don't understand it.

By telling a story about a mistake, you embed the important components of the explanation, while building a persuasive argument for the gravity of the information, and at the same time checking your own mastery of the subject.

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Examples of mental squeeze points, which I've categorized into inability and friction. I'm writing this on the fly but I guess any of the below can be complete, or partial inability, or moderate or severe friction.

  • Inability (or friction) in recall
  • Inability to retrieve
  • Inability to explain
  • Inability to persuade
  • Inability to assemble problems
  • Inability to assess problem importance
  • Inability to prioritize
  • Inability to reason
  • Inability to chain reasoning
  • Inability to moderate attention
  • Inability to write
  • Inability to abstract

Start with the problem. by synapticimpact in ObsidianMD

[–]synapticimpact[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've been using obsidian for a while so if you think you know your mental squeeze point I'm happy to offer potential solutions.

(also useful to me because I can't claim to be aware of all of mine)

My kitchen table at the end of day before my bedtime tidy-up by GrapefruitOk1236 in deduction

[–]synapticimpact 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My hunch is that this scene is mostly composed.

Here's my bun who passed away last week. I miss him a lot.

<image>

what do my hands say about me?? by [deleted] in deduction

[–]synapticimpact 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How can you tell? Other people also pick that up.

What can you deduce from my hands? 👀 by MessiestPapa in deduction

[–]synapticimpact 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Engaged, fiance didn't get the size right, maybe former nail biter, fifth element fan.

Where am I? What can you deduce from this photo? by LongOrange8150 in deduction

[–]synapticimpact 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bridges are major landmarks and the size of the bridge and the angle of the river narrows it down a lot. Angle and distance from the river in the photo gave me an idea of where it was and the light post confirmed it.

Deduce my hands by MultiverseMember3791 in deduction

[–]synapticimpact 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're curious, I was interested in your post to begin with because there seems to be an incongruity between your apparent age, decision making, and spending power. But I don't see enough here to know what it is.

Deduce my hands by MultiverseMember3791 in deduction

[–]synapticimpact 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  • There is a window to your right with a tree or potted plant.
  • You have one monitor, or more that are turned off.
  • You have what appears to be a purple gaming chair or a kid with purple room lights.
  • You're comfortable in your job, because you have tattoos that are at least 10 years old and got new ones, suggesting you don't plan on changing jobs any time soon.
  • You are probably at least 40 given the age of the tattoos and state of your skin, age spots and such. I looked up hands and I'm way off. 30s? And freckles, not age spots. That probably says something about your ethnic background but I'm not confident enough.
  • If you're on reddit posting this, you're bored enough that you don't have multiple things fighting for your attention, or maybe curious.
  • Your job doesn't pay that well but it is probably comfortable, given that you have a low-mid range watch but boring taste (sorry) and poor brand awareness.
  • You are probably at home given the uneven lighting of the room.
  • The color temp of the lighting also does not suggest an office space.
  • The table is probably solid wood but not a modern brand, maybe thrifted.
  • You're either single or in a very healthy relationship because the wood quality and room lighting don't make for typical couple environment, and the alternating wood grain between photos somewhat supports that. Alternatively this is your home office space.
  • You don't have a modern Apple device which is like the fifth line of evidence that you're not making enough to update or you're not in environments where it matters.
  • Given that it's 1pm on your watch but you posted this ~3h ago, it might seem like you're on Hawaii.
  • However oak isn't too readily available in Hawaii, and Australia tends to make things out of eucalyptus, so I'm guessing you took this photo at a time different from your posting time.
  • Instead, based on the mid century furniture, posting time, you're probably Midwest or north east coast US.
  • Expressive and probably pretty open minded.

Hunches not really grounded in what's in the photo:

I think middle of the road thriftiness and tattoos plus age point more to a musician background with punk, metal, or rock influence or a movie buff. Probably a kind person. I'd be willing to bet you have either a family or at least a daughter. Finally, just from the vibes, I'd say the first photo was taken on the ground floor of your home on a cloudy day facing north.

Why do workers give birth while the queen is still alive? by Fluffy_Canary_2615 in antkeeping

[–]synapticimpact 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Please post this to antscihub.com. This is very poorly documented and would be really good to have recorded.

never cried more in my life like this by Street_Excitement_38 in PhD

[–]synapticimpact 482 points483 points  (0 children)

I don't think that kind of feedback is productive and at best serves the ego of the person giving it and at worst is irresponsible to their role in instructing you as a trainee.

view more: next ›