Umbrella Academy (s4)

meh, sloppy. 

Had its good moments but plot holes as large as a black hole

Shogun

Amazing series, following what I remember from James Claville's book quite well

Alien:Romulus

Enjoyable, back to the old "creepy alien on space ship" approach, albeit not that intensily catchiy.

Asteroid City

Enjoyable if you approach it from a meta-story/film concept.

Gary Shteyngart - "Super Sad True Love Story"

Robert Greene - "The Laws of Human Nature"

 

If you come across any special trait of meanness or stupidity... you must be careful not to let it annoy or distress you, but to look upon it merely as an addition to your knowledge-a new fact to be considered in studying the character of humanity. Your attitude towards it will be that of the mineralogist who stumbles upon a very characteristic specimen of a mineral.

                        Arthur Schopenhauer

We are subject to forces from deep within us that drive our behaviour and that operate below the level of our awareness. We see the results — our thoughts, moods, and actions — but have little conscious access to what actually moves our emotions and compels us to behave in certain ways.

To this day, we humans remain highly susceptible to the moods and emotions of those around us, compelling all kinds of behavior on our part — unconsciously imitating others, wanting what they have, getting swept up in viral feelings of anger or outrage. We imagine we're acting of our own free will, unaware of how deeply our susceptibility to the emotions of others in the group is affecting what we do and how we respond.

Athena was literally born from the head of Zeus, her name itself reflecting this — a combination of "god" (theos) and "mind" (nous). But Athena came to represent a very particular form of nous — eminently practical, feminine, and earthy. She is the voice that comes to heroes in times of need, instilling in them a calm spirit, orienting their minds toward the perfect idea for victory and success, then  giving them the energy to achieve this. To be visited by Athene was the highest blessing of them all, and it was her spirit that guided great generals and the best artists, inventors, and tradesmen. Under her influence, a man or woman could see the world with perfect clarity and hit upon the action that was just right for the moment. For Athens, her spirit was invoked to unify the city, make it prosperous and productive. In essence, Athena stood for rationality, the greatest gift of the gods to mortals, for it alone could make a human act with divine wisdom.

Learn to question yourself: Why this anger or resentment? Where does this incessant need for attention come from?

The first step toward becoming rational is to understand our fundamental irrationality. There are two factors that should render this more palatable to our egos: nobody is excempt from the irresistible effect of emotions on the mind, not even the wisest among us, and to some extent irrationality is a function of the structure of our brains and is wired into our very nature by the way we process emotions.

[...]

The oldest is the reptilian part of the brain, which controls all automatic responses that regulate the body. This is the instinctive part. Above that is the old mammalian or limbic brain, governing feeling and emotion. And on top of that has evolved the neocortex, the part that. controls cognition and, for humans, language.

low-grade irrationality. This is a function of the continual moods and feelings that we experience in life, below the level of consciousness. When we plan or make decisions, we are not aware of how deeply these moods and feelings skew the thinking process.

high-grade irrationality. This occurs when our emotions become inflamed, generally because of certain pressures. As we think about our anger, excitement, resentment, or suspicion, it intensifies into a reactive state – everything we see or hear is interpreted through the lens of this emotion. We become more sensitive and more prone to other emotional reactions. Impatience and resentment can bleed into anger and deep distrust. These reactive states are what lead people to violence, to manic obsessions, to uncontrollable greed, or to desires to control another person.

recognise the biases
- confirmation bias
- conviction bias
- appearance bias
- group bias
- blame bias
- superiority bias

Blame bias: Our natural response is to blame others, circumstances, or a momentary lapse of judgement. The reason for this bias is that it is often too painful to look at our mistakes. It calls into question our feelings of superiority. It pokes at our ego. We go through the motions, pretending to reflect on what we did. But with the passage of time, the pleasure principle rises and we forget what small part in the mistake we ascribed to ourselves.

Superiority bias: it's the equivalent of an optical illusion – we cannot seem to see our faults and irrationalities, only those of others.

We feel a tremendous pull to imagine ourselves as rational, decent, and ethical. These are qualities highly promoted in the culture. To show signs otherwise is to risk great disapproval. If all of this were true – if people were rational and morally superior – the world would be suffused with goodness and peace. We know, however, the reality, and so some people, perhaps all of us, are merely deceiveing ourselves. Rationality and ethical qualities must be achieved through awareness and effort.

In early childhood we were at our most sensitive and vulnerable. Our relationship to our parents had a much greater impact on us the further back in time we go. [...] The way to recognise this in yourself and in others is by noticing behaviour that is suddenly childish in its intensity and seemingly out of character.

Be aware of demagogues who exploit the group effect and stimulate outbreaks of irrationality. They inevitably resort to certain devices. In a group setting, they begin by warming up the crowd, talking about ideas and. values that everyone shares, creating a pleasant feeling of agreement. They rely on vague but loaded words full of emotive quality such as justice or truth or patriotism. They talk of abstract, noble goals rather than the solving of specific problems with concrete actions.

Technology now inspires religious fervor. People have a desperate need to believe in something and they will find it anywhere. Polls have revealed that increasing numbers of people believe in ghosts, spirits, and angels, in the twenty-first century.

Know yourself thoroughly. The Emotional Self thrives on ignorance. The moment you are aware of how it operates and dominates you is the moment it loses its hold on you and can be tamed. Therefore, your first step toward the rational is always inward. You want to catch that Emotional Self in action. For this purpose, you must reflect on how you operate under stress. What particular weaknesses come out in such moments – the desire to please, to bully or control, deep levels of mistrust? Look at your decisions, especially those that have been ineffective – can you see a pattern, an underlying insecurity that impels them?

Examine your emotions to their roots. You are angry. Let the feeling settle from within, and think about it. Was it triggered by something seemingly trivial or petty? That is a sure sign that something or someone else is behind it. Perhaps a more uncomfortable emotion is at the source – such as envy or paranoia. You need to look at this square in the eye. Dig below any trigger points to see where they started. For these purposes, it might be wise to use a journal in which you record your Self-assessments with ruthless objectivity. [...] Find a neutral position from which you can observe your actions, with a bit of detachment and even humor.

Increase your reaction time. This power comes through practise and repetition. When some event or interaction requires a response, you must train yourself to step back. This could mean physically removing yourself to a place where you can be alone and not feel any pressure to respond. Or it could mean writing that angry email but not sending it.

Accept people as facts. Interactions with people are the major source of emotional turmoil, but it doesn't have to be that way. The problem is that we are continually judging people, wishing they were something that they are not. We want to change them. We want them to think and act a certain way, most often the way we think and act. And because this is not possible, because everyone is different, we are continuously frustrate and upset. Instead, see other people as phenomena, as neutral as comets or planets. They simply exist. They come in all varieties, making life rich and interesting.

In his stories and plays, [Chekov] found it immensely therapeutic to get inside his characters and make sense of even the worst types. In his way, he could forgive anybody, even his father. His approach in these cases was to imagine that each person, no matter how twisted, has a reason for what they've become, a logic that makes sense to them. In their own way, they are striving for fulfillment, but irrationally. By stepping back and imagining their story from the inside, Chekhov demythologized the brutes and aggressors; he cut them down to human size.

Find the optimal balance of thinking and emotion. We cannot divorce emotions from thinking. The two are completely intertwined. But there is inevitably a dominant factor, some people more clearly governed by emotions than others. What we are looking for  is the proper ratio and balance, the one that leads to the most effective action. The ancient Greeks had an appropriate metaphor for this; the rider and the horse.
    The horse is our emotional nature continually impelling us to move. This horse has tremendous energy and power, but without a rider it cannot be guided, it is wilde, subject to predators, and continually heading into trouble. The rider is our thinking self. Through training and practise, it holds the reins and guides the horse, tranforming this powerful animal energy into something productive.

[...]

Try to maintain a perfect balance between skepticism (rider) and curiosity (horse). In this mode you are skeptical about your own enthousiasms and those of others. 

"Trust your feelings" − But feelings are nothing final or original; behind feelings there stand judgments and evaluations which we inherit in the form of… inclinations, aversions, … The inspiration born of a feeling is the grandchild of a judgment - and often of a false judgment! − and in any event not a child of your own! To trust one's feelings − means to give more obedience to one's grandfather and grandmother and their grandparents than to the gods which are in us; our reason and our experience"
    − Friedrich Nietzsche

In constructing a self that we can hold on to and love, the key moment in its development occurs between the ages of two and five years old. As we slowly separate from our mother, we face a world in which we cannot get instant gratification. We also become aware that we are alone and yet dependent on our parents for survival. Our answer is to identify with the best qualities of our parents − their strength, their ability to soothe us − and incorporate these qualities into ourselves. If our parents encourage us in our first efforts at independence, if they validate our need to feel strong and recognise our unique qualities, then our Self-image takes root, and we can slowly build upon it. Deep narcissists have a sharp break in this early development, and so they never quite construct a consistent and realistic feelings of a self.

In the backgrounds of almost all deep narcissists we find either abandonment or enmeshment. The result is that they have no self to  retreat to, no foundation for Self-esteem, and are completely dependent on the attention they can get from others to make them feel alive and worthy.

Recognize deep narcissists: if they are ever insulted or challenged, they have no defense, nothing internal to soothe them or validate their worth. They generally react with great rage, thirsting for vengeance, full of a sense of righteousness. This is the only way they know how to assuage their insecurities. In such battles, they will position themselves as the wounded victim, confusing others and even drawing sympathy. They are prickly and oversensitive. Almost everything is taken personally. They can become quite paranoid and have enemies in all directions to point to. You can see an impatient or distant look on their face whenever you talk about something that does not directly involve them in some way. They immediately turn the conversation back to themselves, with some story or anecdote to distract from the insecurities behind it. They can be prone to vicious bouts of envy if they see others getting the attention they feel they deserve. They frequently display extreme Self-confidence. This always helps to gain attention, and it neatly covers up their gaping inner emptiness and their fragmented sense of self. But beware if this confidence is ever truly put to the test.
    When it comes to other people in their lives, deep narcissists have an unusual relationship that is hard for us to understand. They tend to see others as extensions of themselves,  what is known as self-objects.

more dangerous and toxic; the narcissistic leader. Almost all dictator types and tyrannical CEOs fall into this category. They generally have more ambition than the average deep narcissist and for a while can funnel this energy into work. Full of narcissistic Self-confidence, they attract attention and followers. They say and do things that other people don't dare say or do, which seems admirable and authentic. They might have a vision for some innovative product, and because they radiate such confidence, they can find others to help them realize their vision. They are experts at using people.

It is ironic that the word narcissism has come to mean Self-love, when it is in fact the case that the worst narcissists have no cohesive self to love, which is the source of their problem.

We are all narcissists. In a conversation we are all champing at the bit to talk, to tell our story, to give our opinion. We like people who share our ideas − they reflect back to us our good taste. If we happen to be assertive, we assertiveness as a positive quality because it is ours, whereas others, more timid, will rate it as obnoxious and value introspective qualities. We are all prone to flattery because of our Self-love. Moralizers who try to separate themselves and denounce the narcissists in the world today are often they biggest narcissists of them all − they love the sound of their voice as they point fingers and preach. We are all on the spectrum of Self-absorption. Creating a self that we can love is a healthy development, and there should be no stigma attached to it. Without Self-esteem from within, we would fall into deep narcissism.

Our brains were built for continual social  interactions. [...] At a certain point, involving ourselves less with others has a net negative effect on the brain itself and atrophies our social muscle. To make matters worse, our culture tends to emphasize the supreme value of the individual and individual rights, encouraging greater Self-involvement. We find more and more people who cannot imagine that others have a different perspective, that we are all not exactly the same in what we desire or think.

empathic attitude: you must begin with the assumption that you are ignorant and that you have natural biases that will make you judge people incorrectly. The people around you present a mask that suits their purposes. You mistake the mask for reality. Let go of your tendency to make snap judgements.

Try reversing your normal impulse to talk and give your opinion, desiring instead to hear the other person's point of view. You have tremendous curiosity in this direction. Cut off your incessant interior monologue as best you can. Give full attention to the other. What matters here is the quality of your listening, so that in the course of the conversation you can mirror back to the other person things they said, or things that were left unsaid but that you sensed. This will have a tremendous seductive effect.

visceral empathy: it is hard for us to read or figure out the thoughts of another person, but feelings and moods are much easier for us to pick up. [...]  A key element you are trying to figure out is people's intentions. There is almost always an emotion behind any intention, and beyond their words, you are attuning yourself to what they want, their goals, which will also register physically in you if you pay attention.

mirror neurons − those neurons that fire in our brain when we watch someone do something, such as picking up an object, just as if we were doing it ourselves. This allows us to put ourselves in the shoes of others and to feel what it must be like.

People who are connecting physically and emotionally in a conversation will tend to mimic each other's gestures and posture, both crossing their legs, for instance. To a degree, you can do this consciously to induce a connection by deliberately mimicking someone. Similarly, nodding your head as they talk and smiling will deepen the connection. Even better, you can enter the spirit of the other person. You absorb their mood deeply and reflect it back to them. You create a feeling of rapport.

analythic empathy. As Abraham Lincoln said, "I don't like that man. I must get to know him better." [...] You want to get a read on people's values. [...] If people seem reluctant to talk, try asking  open-ended questions, or begin with a sincere admission of your own to establish trust.

direct form [of empathic skill] you ask people about their thoughts and feelings to get a sense of whether you have guessed correctly.

Try to see people as they interact with others besides you − people are often very different depending on the person they are involved with. Try to focus not on categories but on the feeling tone and mood that people evoke in you, which is continually shifting.

In building tihs Self-image, we tend to accentuate our positive qualities and explain away our flaws. We cannot go too far in this, for if our Self-image is too divorced from reality, other people will make us aware of the discrepancy, and we will doubt ourselves.

You must recognize your state of Self-absorption and how little you actually observe.

Shakespeare: "All the world's a stage, / And all the men and women merely players; / They have their exits and their entrances, / And one man in his time plays many parts."

Pick up their moods and mirror these moods back to them, getting them to unconsciously relax in your presence.

Children are the bane of inveterate liars, con artists, magicians and people who pretend to be something they are not. [...] You must realize that it is not a matter of acquiring skills you do not possess but rather of rediscoering those you once had in your earliest years.

[...]

Give yourself the goal of observing one or two facial expressions that seem to go against what the person is saying or indicate some additional information. Be attentive to microexpressions, quick flashes on the face of tension, or forced smiles. [...] Once you find it easier to notice cues from the face, attempt to make a similar observation about an individual's voice, noting any changes in pitch or the pace of talking. The voice says a lot about people's level of confidence and their contentment. Later on graduate to elements of body language – such as posture, hand gestures, positioning of legs.

[...]

Be engaged in the conversation while talking less and trying to get them to talk more. Try to mirror them, making comments that play off something they have said and reveal you are listening to them. This will have the effect of making them relax and want to talk more, which will make them leak out more nonverbal cues. But your observing of people must never be obvious.

[...]

establish their baseline expression and mood.

[...]

observe people who are about to do something exciting

[...]

Sit in a cafe or some public space, and without the burden of having to be involved in a conversation, observe the people around you.

Othello's error: Othello, assumes that his wife, Desdemona, is guilty of adultery based on her nervous response when questioned about some evidence. In truth Desdemona is innocent, but the aggressive, paranoid nature of Othello and his intimidating questions make her nervous, which he interprets as a sign of guilt.

Keep in mind that people from different cultures will consider different forms of behavior acceptable. These are known as display rules.

Most important cues to observe and identify are dislike, like, dominance/submission, and deception.

[...]

People give out clear indications in their body language of actrive dislike or hostility. These include the sudden squinting of the eyes at something you have said, the glare, the pursing of the lips until they nearly disappear, the stiff neck, the torso or feet that turn away from you while you are still engaged in a conversation, the folding of the arms as you try to make a point, and an overall tenseness in the body. The problem is that you will not usually see such signs unless a person's displeasure has become too strong to conceal at all. Instead, you must train yourself to look for the microexpressions and the other more subtle signs that people give out.

[...]

[microexpressions] The first comes when people are aware of a negative feeling and try to suppress it, but it leaks out in a fraction of a second. The other comes when we are unaware of their hostility and yet it shows itself in quick flashes on the face or in the body. These expressions will ber a momentary glare, tensing of the facial muscles, pursing of the lips, the beginnings of a frown or sneer or look of contempt.

[...]

People will often give themselves away with the mixed signal – a positive comment to distract you but some clearly negative body language. This offers them relief from the tension of always having to be pleasant. They are betting on the fact that you will tend to focus on the words and gloss over the grimance or lopsided smile. Pay attention as well to the opposite configuration – someone says something sarcastic and pointed, directed at you, but they do this with a smile and a jokey tone of voice, as if to signal it is all in good humor.

An excellent gauge for decoding antagonism is to compare people's body language toward you and toward others. You might detect that they are noticeable friendlier and warmer toward other people and then put on a polite mask with you. In a conversation they cannot help showing brief flashes of impatience and irritation in their eyes, but only when you talk. Also keep in mind that people will tend to leak out more of their true feelings, and certainly hostile ones, when they are drunk, sleepy, frustrated, angry, or under stress. They will later tend to excuse this, as if they weren't themselves for the moment, but in fact they were actually being more themselves than ever.

Enough signs of discomfort indicated secret hostility. If you suspect someone of feeling envy, talk about the latest good news for you without appearing to brag. Look for microexpressions of disappointment on their face. Use similar tests to probe for hidden anger and resentments, eliciting the responses that people cannot suppress so quickly.

The genuine smile will affect the muscles around the eyes and widen them, often revealing crow's-feet on the sides of the eyes. It will also tend to pull the cheeks upward. There is no genuine smile without a definite change in the eyes and cheeks.

Those who are powerfull will feel allowed to look around more at other,s choosing to make eye contact with whomever they please. Their eyelids are more closed, a sign of seriousness and competence. If they feel bored or annoyed, they show it more freely and openly. They often smile less, frequent smiling being a sign of overall insecurity. They feel more entitled to touch people, such as with friendly pats on the back or on the arm. In a meeting, they will tend to take up more space and create more distance around themselves. They stand taller, and their gestures are relaxed and comfortable. Most important, others feel compelled to imitate their style and mannerisms. 

[...] 

They speak faster than others and feel entitled to interrupt and control the flow of the conversation.

[...]

For women in leadership positions, what often works best is a calm, confident expression, warm yet businesslike. Perhaps the best example of this would be current German chancellor Angela Merkel. Her smiles are even less frequent than the average male politician, but when they occur they are especially meaningful. They never seem fake. She listens to others of complete absorption, her face remarkably still. She has a way of getting others to do most of the talking while always seeming to be in control of the course of the conversation. She does not need to interrupt to assert herself. When she wants to attack someone, it is with looks of boredom, iciness, or contempt, never with blustery words. When Russian president Vladimir Putin tried to intimidate her by bringing his pet dog into a meeting, knowing Merkel had once been bitten and had a fear of dogs, she visibly tensed, then quickly composed herself and looked him calmly in the eye. She put herself in the one-up position in relation to Putin by not making anything of his ploy.

[...]

Leaders who display tension and hesitation in thier nonverbal cues are generally insecure in their power and feel it threatened. Signs of such anxiety and sinsecurity are generally easy to spot. They will talk in a more halting manner, with long pauses. Their voice will rise in pitch and stay there. They will tent to avert their gaze and control their eye movements, although they will often blink more. They will put on more forced smiles and emit nervous laughs. As opposed to feeling entitled to touch others, they will tend to touch themselves in what is known as pacifying behavior. They will touch their hair, their neck, their forehead, all in an attempt to soothe their nerves. People trying to hide their insecurities will assert themselves a little too loudly in a conversation, their voices rising. As they do this, they look around nervously, eyes wide open. Or as they talk in an animated way, their hands and bodies are unusually still, always a sign of anxiety. They will inevitably give off mixed signals, and you must pay greater attention to those that signal underlying insecurity.

[...]

People will often show up late in indicate their superiority, real or imagined. They are not obliged to be on time.

[...]

One final but very subtle nonverbal means of asserting dominance in a relationship comes through the symptom. One partner suddenly develops headaches or some other illness, or starts drinking, or generally falls into a negative pattern of behavior. This forces the other side to play by their rules, to tend to their weaknesses. It is the willful use of sympathy to gain power and it is extremely effective.

If people are trying to cover something up, they tend to become extra vehement, righteous, and chatty. They are playing on the conviction bias – if I deny or say something with so much gusto, with an air of being a victim, it is hard to doubt me. We tend to take extra conviction for truth. In fact, when people try to explain their ideas with so much exaggerated energy, or defend themselves with an intense level of denial, that is precisely when you should raise your antennaee.

Learn how to consciously put yourself in the right emotional mood by imagining how and why you should feel the emotion suitable to the occasion or performance you are about to give. 

You must know how to selectively absent yourself, to regulate how often and when you appear before others, making them want to see more of you, not less. Cloak yourself in some mystery, displaying some subtly contradictory qualities. People don't need to know everything about you.  Learn to withhold information. In general, make your appearances and your behavior less predictable.

Learn how to occasionally lower your head and appear humble.

The word personality comes from the Latin persona, which means "mask". In the public we all wear masks, and this has a positive function. If we displayed exactly who we are and spoke our minds truthfully, we would offend almost everyone and reveal qualities that are best concealed. Having a persona, playing a role well, actually protects us from people looking too closely at us, with all of the unsecurities that would churn up. In fact, the better you play your role, the more power you will accrue, and with power you will have the fredom to express more of your peculiarities. If you take this far enough, the persona you present will match any of your unique characteristics, but always heightened for effect.

People's character is formed in their earliest years and by their daily habits. It is what compels them to repeat certain actions in their lives and fall into negative patterns. Look closely at such patterns and remember that people never do something just once. They will inevitably repeat their behavior. Gauge the relative strength of their character by how well they handle adversity, their ability to adapt, and work with other people, their patience and ability to learn.

The blind spot in human nature: we are poorly equipped to gauge the character of the people we deal with.

We see these patterns [in others] and they don't, because nobody likes to believe that they are operating under some kind of compulsion beyond their control. It is too disturbing a thought.

[...]

There is a different way of looking at this concept [of fate]: it is not spirits or gods that control us but rather our character. The etymology of the word character, from the ancient Greek, refers to an engraving or stamping instrument. Character, then, is something that is so deeply ingrained or stamped within us that it compels us to act in certain ways, beyond our awareness and control. We can conceive of this character as having three essential components, each layered on top of the other, giving this character depth.
    The earliest and deepest layer comes from genetics, from the particular way our brains are wired, which predisposes us toward certain moods and preferences. This genetic component can make some people prone to depression, for instance. It makes some people introverts and others extroverts. It might even incline some towards becoming especially greedy – for attention or privilege or possessions.

[...]

The second layer, which forms above this, comes from our earliest years and from the particular type of attachments we formed with our mother and caregivers.

[...]

four basic schemas: free/autonomous, dismissing, enmeshed-ambivalent, and disorganized.

[...]

Above this a third layer will form from our habits and experiences as we get older. Based on the first two layers, we will tend to rely on certain strategies for dealing with stress, looking for pleasure, or handling people. These strategies now become habits that are set in our youth.

Without conscious effort, these strenghts will tend to wear down or turn into weakenesses. What this means is that the weakest parts of our character are the ones that create habits and compulsive behavior.

Successful people have just as many character flaws as anyone else. Also, we tend to believe that someone who adheres to a particular religion or political belief systme or moral code must have the character to go with this. But people bring the character they have to the position they occupy or to the religion they practice. A person can be a progressive liberal or a loving Christian and still be an intolerant tyrant at heart.

 

You pay close attention to what they do in the present. You see their actions not as isolated incidents but as part of a compulsive pattern. If you ignore the pattern, it is your own fault.

You must always keep in mind the primary corollary of this law. People never do something just once. They might try to excuse themselves to say they lost their heads in a moment, but you can be sure they will repeat whatever foolishness they did on another occasion compelled by their character and habits. In fact, they will often repeat actions when it is completely against their self-interest, revealing the compulsive nature of their weaknesses. 

 

You can see eloquent signs of people's character and how they handle everyday affairs. If they are late in finishing simple assignments, they will be late with larger projects. If they become irritated by little inconveniences, they will tend to crumble on the large ones. If they are forgetful on small matters and inattentive to details, they will be so or more important ones. Look at how they treat employees in everyday settings and notice if there are discrepancies between the persona they present and their attitude towards underlings.

 

So often we think that power has changed people when in fact it simply reveals more of who they are.

 

Introverts are more sensitive and easily exhausted by too much outward activity. They like to conserve their energy, to spend time alone or with one or two close friends. As opposed to extroverts who are fascinated by facts and statistics for their own sake, introverts are interested in their own opinions and feelings. They love to theorize and come up with their own ideas. If they produce something, they do not like to promote it. They find the effort distasteful. What they make should sell itself. They like to keep a part of their life separate from others, to have secrets. 

[...] 

Once you understand you are dealing with someone of the other variety than yourself, you must reassess their character and not foist your own preferences on them. 

 

Toxic types: 

The hyperperfectionist: They have patterns of initial success followed by burnout and spectacular failures. It is best to recognize the type before getting enmeshed on any level. They cannot be satisfied by anything you do.

The relentless rebel: It is something that they cannot control, a compulsion to feel superior, not some higher moral quality. 

The Personalizer: What you come to realize later on is that their sensitivity really goes in one direction, inward. They are prone to take everything that people say or do as personal.

The Drama Magnet: They learned that the only way to get love and attention that lasted was to enmesh their parents in their troubles and problems, which had to be large enough to engage the parents emotionally over time.

The Big Talker: On the one hand, they are secretly afraid of the effort and responsibility that go with translating their ideas into action. On the other hand, they crave attention and power.

The Sexualizer: If they occupy positions of leadership, they will use their power to get what they want, all under the guise of being natural and unrepressed.

The Pampered Prince / Princess: They are not equipped to handle the harsh aspects of adult life and either manipulate a person into the pampering role or resort to drinking and drugs to soothe themselves.

The Pleaser: You must be on your guard with people who actively exert so much charm and politeness past the point of what is natural They can turn out to be quite passive passive, particularly hitting you when your guard is down

The Saviour: You can detect the compulsive aspect of this behavior by their needs to control you. If they are willing to let you stand on your own two feet after some initial help, then they are truly noble. If not, it is really about the power they can exercise.

The Easy Moralizer: They develop some self-loading and are quick to project negative qualities onto others or look envisously at people who are not so repressed They don't like other people enjoying themselves. Instead of expressing their envy, they choose to judge and condemn

 

The concept of a set character can seem like a prison and many people secretly want to be taken outside themselves through drugs, alcohol or video games. The result of such denial is simple. The compulsive behavior and the patterns become even more set into place. You cannot move against the grain of your character or wish it away. It is too powerful. 

 

In anything, it is a mistake to think one can perform an action or behave in a certain way once and no more. (The mistake of those who say, "Let us slave away and save every penny till we are 30, then we will enjoy ourselves." At 30 they will have a bent for avarice and hard work and will never enjoy themselves anymore...) What one does, one will do again. Indeed has probably already done in the distant past. The agonizing thing in life is that it is our own decisions that throw us into this rut under the wheels that crush us. (The truth is that, even before making those decisions, we were going in that direction.) A decision and action are infallible omens of what we shall do another time, not for any vague, mystic, astrological reason, but because they result from an automatic reaction that will repeat itself. 
- Cesare Pavese 

 

You need to reverse your perspective. Instead of focusing on what you want and covered in the world, you must train yourself to focus on others, on their repressed desires and unmet fantasies. You must train yourself to see how they perceive you and the objects you make as if you were looking at yourself and you'll work from the outside.

 

Because our youth is an object that grows more distant as we age we are able to idolize it and see it as greener than green.
Such a syndrome can be explained by three qualities of the human brain; the first is known as induction how something positive generates a contrasting negative image in our mind. This is most obvious in our visual system. When we see some color, red or black for instance, it tends to intensify our perception of the opposite color around us, in this case green or white.

 

Second, complacency will be a dangerous evolutionary trait for a conscious animal such as humans. If our early ancestors had been prone to feeling content with present circumstances, they would not have been sensitive enough to possible dangers that lurked in a most apparently safe environment. We survived and thrived through our continual conscious alertness, which predisposed us to thinking and imagining the possible negative in any circumstance. We no longer live in savannas or forests, teeming with life-threatening predators and natural dangers, but our brains are wired as if we were. We are inclined therefore towards a continual negative bias, which often consciously is expressed through complaining and griping. 

Finally, what is real and what is imagined are both experienced similarly in the brain. 

 

Know how and when to withdraw. Your presence must have a touch of coldness to it, as if you feel like you could do without others. This signals to people that you consider yourself worthy of respect, which unconsciously hightens your value in their eyes. It makes people want to chase after you. This touch of coldness is the first form of withdrawal that you must practice. Add to this a bit of blankness and ambiguity as to who you are. Your opinions, values and tastes are never too obvious to people. This gives them room to read into you what they want. 

 

 

Broomgate

Fun little podcast about a scandal (...!) in the world of curling, regarding ... brooms.

Sophie Hardach - "Languages Are Good For Us"

Nice book about languages etc

The Sumerians flavoured their meals with a sipce called gamun in Sumerian. In Akkadian, it was called kamunum, which we know from bilingual lists. We still use this spice, and still know it by an almost identical name, cumin. The Akkadians enjoyed the tasty, nourishing seeds and oil of the sesame plant, called šamaššammu. The name is thought to mean sun-oil, or sun-plant, and is the ancestor of our word, sesame. 

[...]

From around 1000 CE, cumin is mentioned in Old English plant lists as cimen. Later, it would be known in England as comyn, or as cumin, the name still used for it today. In the Middle Ages, between the twelfth and the fifteenth centuries, English tenants even paid their rent in pepper and cumin. 

[...]

It's a myth that spices were used to mask the taste of rotten meat. Spices were much more expensive than meat, and it wouldn't have made sense to waste them that way, especially when meat usually came from freshly slaughtered animals.

Slip

Quite amazing series of a woman who jumps through parallel universes every time she has an orgasm.

"I think my pussy is a worm hole"

Dave Addey - "Typeset in the future (typography and design in science fiction movies)"

Amazing book discussing fonts (and more) of all the classics, including interviews with designers.

Made me want to rewatch all of them.

website: https://typesetinthefuture.com/ 

The Murder City Devils - "Press Gang"

in their "EMO" list.  Quite catchy!!!

David Robson - "Words as feelings"

https://aeon.co/essays/in-the-beginning-was-the-word-and-the-word-was-embodied

amazing article.  This seems to indirectly confirm my suspicion about names like "Mordor" and "Nazgul" sounding angry and dangerous!

Try to guess their meaning from the two available options:

1. nurunuru (a) dry or (b) slimy?

2. pikapika (a) bright or (b) dark?

3. wakuwaku (a) excited or (b) bored?

4. iraira (a) happy or (b) angry?

5. guzuguzu (a) moving quickly or (b) moving slowly?

6. kurukuru (a) spinning around or (b) moving up and down?

7. kosokoso (a) walking quietly or (b) walking loudly?

8. gochagocha (a) tidy or (b) messy?

9. garagara (a) crowded or (b) empty?

10. tsurutsuru (a) smooth or (b) rough?

The answers are: 1(b); 2(a); 3(a); 4(b); 5(b); 6(a); 7(a); 8(b); 9(b) 10(a).

If you think this exercise is futile, you’re in tune with traditional linguistic thinking. One of the founding axioms of linguistic theory, articulated by Ferdinand de Saussure in the early 19th century, is that any particular linguistic sign – a sound, a mark on the page, a gesture – is arbitrary, and dictated solely by social convention. Save those rare exceptions such as onomatopoeias, where a word mimics a noise – eg, ‘cuckoo’, ‘achoo’ or ‘cock-a-doodle-doo’ – there should be no inherent link between the way a word sounds and the concept it represents; unless we have been socialised to think so, nurunuru shouldn’t feel more ‘slimy’ any more than it feels ‘dry’.

Yet many world languages contain a separate set of words that defies this principle. Known as ideophones, they are considered to be especially vivid and evocative of sensual experiences. Crucially, you do not need to know the language to grasp a hint of their meaning. Studies show that participants lacking any prior knowledge of Japanese, for example, often guess the meanings of the above words better than chance alone would allow. For many people, nurunuru really does feel ‘slimy’; wakuwaku evokes excitement, and kurukuru conjures visions of circular rather than vertical motion. That should simply not be possible, if the sound-meaning relationship was indeed arbitrary. (The experiment is best performed using real audio clips of native speakers.)

Yet Westermann’s later research found that there was also something special in ideophones’ phonological features. Comparing the ideophones of half a dozen West African languages, he noted that certain ‘front’ or ‘closed’ vowels – such as the [i] sound in the English word ‘cheese’ – tended to be used to represent concepts that were light, fine or bright, for instance; while ‘back’ or ‘open’ vowels – such as the [ɔ] sound in ‘talk’ or the [ɑ] in past – tended to be associated with a sense of slowness, heaviness and darkness. Meanwhile, voiced consonants such as ‘b’ or ‘g’ – so-called because they require the vocal cords to resonate – were associated with greater weight and softness, while voiceless consonants, such as ‘p’ or ‘k’, tended to be used to represent lighter weights and harsher surfaces. So, for example, in Ewe, someone kputukpluu is thinner than someone who is gbudugbluu.

He found similar relationships with linguistic tones. In many languages, the pitch at which a syllable is spoken can change a word’s meaning. Westermann found that words representing slowness, darkness and heaviness tended to have lower tones than those depicting speed, agility and brightness, which were formed of higher tones. Many also include the repetition of syllables, which can be used to signify number and a continuous action or state. So, for instance, in Ewe, kpata is used to denote one drop falling, but kpata kpata depicts many drops falling.

These patterns have now been observed in the ideophones of many other languages. To take a couple of examples from Basque – a language isolate that also has more than 4,000 ideophones – tiki taka, with its closed, frontal [i] sound, means taking quick, light steps, while taka taka, with a more open [a] sound, denotes taking heavier steps; tilin tilin means ‘small toll’, and tulun tulun ‘big toll’.

Meanwhile, in Japanese you have gorogoro, which, with its voiced ‘g’ sounds, represents a heavy object rolling continuously, while korokoro, with a voiceless ‘k’, represents a lighter rolling object. Similarly, bota means a ‘thick/much liquid hitting a solid surface’, while pota means a ‘thin/little liquid hitting a solid surface’. If you are a Pokémon fan, you might even notice these sound-meaning relationships in your favourite characters. Pikachu, for instance, is named after the Japanese ideophone pikapika, which means sparkle. As Westermann had noted, the voiceless consonants and front [i] vowels are often associated with brightness in a number of languages.

An early version of this experiment can be found in the writing of the German psychologist Wolfgang Köhler in the late 1920s, who tested participants in Tenerife. But the result has now been repeated many times, in many different cultures. In almost all cases, bouba is chosen to represent the shape on the right by the vast majority of participants, while kiki naturally seems to fit a spiky, pointed object.

The evocative power of ideophones might therefore reflect on an inherent sound symbolism understood by all humans. Although we don’t know the exact origin of these universal connections between sounds and meanings, one attractively parsimonious answer comes from human biology and the bodily experience of speech. According to this theory, subtle feedback from our mouth and throat primes us to associate certain phonemes with certain concepts. The mouth tends to form a rounder shape when we form an [o] sound, compared with an [i] sound – which might help to explain the kiki/bouba phenomenon. Voiced consonants such as ‘b’ also last for a marginally longer time than voiceless consonants such as ‘t’ – which might explain why they are associated with slower speed.

As part of the same study, Dingemanse also asked Dutch participants to memorise various lists of word pairs. In one, the ideophones were paired with the correct translation that matched their sound symbolism (kibikibi was paired with its true meaning, ‘energetic’, for instance). In another, the Japanese ideophones were paired with words of the opposite meaning (kibikibi was paired with the Dutch word for ‘tired’).

Over all the experiments, the participants found it far easier to learn the ideophones paired with their correct meaning, remembering about 86 per cent of the ‘congruent’ word pairs, compared with 71 per cent of the word pairs in which they had been given the wrong translation of the ideophone. Once again, this was not true in another experiment that measured how well they learnt Japanese adjectives – supporting the idea that there is something special about ideophones, and the way they are formed, that makes them particularly vivid.

Lewis Gordon - "The Glitch Art of ‘Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom’"

https://artreview.com/the-glitch-art-of-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom/

In this context of speed and avatar movement, it’s fitting that the word glitch should derive from German or Yiddish words meaning ‘to slide’ or ‘to slip’. It was subsequently popularised in the 1950s and 60s by employees at NASA, coming to mean ‘a spike or change in voltage in an electrical circuit’. And now in video games and other digital media, glitches tend to produce moments of horror, disruption and incongruence, by virtue of interrupting whatever reality principle has been established. This is partly why the similarly hyped but bug-ridden Cyberpunk 2077 was panned by some critics and players at the time of its 2020 release. Nathan Wainstein, writing in the LA Review of Books, described Cyberpunk’s glitches as ‘bald’ in two distinct ways: ‘in their transparently unintended nature’ and also their ‘surreal puncturing of reality itself’. They broke immersion in a game that was intended to represent the apex of modern graphical prowess. By leaning into stylised, decidedly cartoonish graphics and animations, Nintendo’s game operates according to a different reality principle, one that is ultimately more forgiving.

Where Breath of the Wild was rooted in the pastoral, Romantic tradition of a lone warrior wandering a mythic landscape, Tears of the Kingdom asks you to mine its natural resources in order to construct machines. The game is partly about mastering such a place, of bringing it under your dominion, thus pulling Zelda into the age of reason.

Marcia Bjornerud - "Geopedia"

 

To geoscientists, rocks are not nouns but verbs - far more than inert curios, they are evidence of Earth's ebullient creativity, its capacity for ceaseless reincarnation of primordial matter into new forms. Rocks are transcripts of eons of conversation between the solid earth and water, air and life.

Acasta Gneiss Complex, are celebrities: the oldest yet found on Earth, clocking in at the astonishing age of 4.03 billion years.

amethyst: the name given to it by the ancient Greeks, amethustos or "not drunken," which was based on their belief that it allowed the wearer to drink wine without becoming intoxicated.

A useful cultural unit of time is the saeculum–broadly, the time between a major event like a war of an epidemic and the death of the last person who had firsthand memories of it.

Areology is the rather ungainly term for the study of the "geology" of Mars, a modern homage to the ancient Greek warrior god Ares (counterpart to the Romans' Mars.) Since geology literally means "the science of Earth," the term isn't technically correct when applied to other planets or moons. The study of Earth's moon is sometimes called "selenology" for the Greek moon goddess Selene, a term that peaked in popularity in the late 1960s in the lead-up to the Apollo moon landing.

The diggers and grubbers that first appeared in the Cambrian also brought an end to the long reign of Earth's first complex ecosystems - the stromatolites, teeming mats of microbes that had thrived for eons in shallow coastal waters since early Archean time.

Chondrites – or materials with chondritic composition – were thus the universal ancestors of all rocks on Earth, and other rocky planets and moons. They preserve a memory of the starting composition of these worlds, something that all other rocks have forgotten, particularly on Earth, where the process of differentiation has continued for 4.5 billiion years and generated a prodigious diversity of rocks that fall far from the chondritic tree in their chemistry.

B. Catling - "Hollow"

Amazing story, again taking place in the Lowlands, with Dutch names and references, in a sort of fantastic medieval time.

An Oracle in a monastery.  A band of thieves delivering a new one...

Lastly, there had been Scriven, who proved to be a grievous mistake. He had come highly recommended for his skill as a tracker and a bowman. Follett had taken him without suspecting that he was an avid practitioner of the worst form of blasphemy that the old warrior could image, and one that he would never tolerate in his company. But nobody saw Scriven's demise coming, especially the man himself. Better that such errors are exposed early before they run inward and slyly contaminate the pack. Scriven had been found spying on the other men and making written copies of their confessional Steepings. He had been caught listening and scribing Follett's own gnarled words. Pearlbinder grabbed him and held him against a tree by his long hair. He pushed his sharp knife against the man's jugular vein, allowing just enough space for his larynx to work and for him to attempt to talk his way out of his fate. He was midway through when Follett unsheathed his lance and pushed three feet of it through Scriven's abdomen. Written words had condemned Follett before. Words written by others that he could not read. Ink keys that had locked him in a Spanish cell for three years. He had always distrusted written words, and now he despised them.

So Follett explained. "Writing is the shame of man. It dilutes the guts of meaning. If thou be not man enough to hold great learning and the saying of events in your memory, then thou should not attempt to keep them imprisoned. The world weas turned by scrolls and books. The making of those brikcs of paper even contaminated the tower of language itself, making it less than a woodpile or an old maid's collection of rags. Words are power, and writing is only a pissed shadow."

Sam Woodward - "The terror of reality was the true horror for H P Lovecraft"

https://aeon.co/essays/the-terror-of-reality-was-the-true-horror-for-h-p-lovecraft

 

[opening paragraph of 'The Call of Chtulhu']

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.

As an absolute determinist, Lovecraft's metaphysics describes an infinite universe in eternal predetermined motion: 'each human act,' he wrote, 'can be no less than the inevitable result of every antecedent and circumambient condition in an eternal cosmos.' This left no room for teleology, the notion that the universe is moving towards some pre-ordained goal, or that humans and other species are evolving for some purpose. His determinism was accompanied by a strict materialism that, in line with the views of many of his contemporaries, made the immaterial - the soul and spirit - inconceivable. These views shaped the nightmarish figures in his tales, which are not apparitions or spectres, the 'supernatural beings of conventional horror writing, but materially real horrors that only appear supernatural because of humanity's inability to comprehend their true nature.

Through a belief in the impossible, Lovecraft thought we might 'acquire a certain flush of triumphant emancipation comparable in its comforting power to the opiate dreams of religion'. But that would happen only if we had, he believed, 'the illusory sensation that some law of the ruthless cosmos has been - or could be - invalidated or defeated'. In that sense, the illusory depictions of nature contravened in weird fiction tales provide some respite, even if only aesthetic, from the rigid and unerring clockwork of the mechanistic and predetermined universe.

Gwern Branwen - "Feynman's Maze-Running Story"

 https://gwern.net/maze 

But in 1937 a man named Young did a very interesting one. He had a long corridor with doors all along one side where the rats came in, and doors along the other side where the food was. He wanted to see if he could train the rats to go in at the third door down from wherever he started them off. No. The rats went immediately to the door where the food had been the time before.

The question was, how did the rats know, because the corridor was so beautifully built and so uniform, that this was the same door as before? Obviously there was something about the door that was different from the other doors. So he painted the doors very carefully, arranging the textures on the faces of the doors exactly the same. Still the rats could tell. Then he thought maybe the rats were smelling the food, so he used chemicals to change the smell after each run. Still the rats could tell. Then he realized the rats might be able to tell by seeing the lights and the arrangement in the laboratory like any commonsense person. So he covered the corridor, and, still the rats could tell.

He finally found that they could tell by the way the floor sounded when they ran over it. And he could only fix that by putting his corridor in sand. So he covered one after another of all possible clues and finally was able to fool the rats so that they had to learn to go in the third door. If he relaxed any of his conditions, the rats could tell.

Now, from a scientific standpoint, that is an A-Number-1 experiment. That is the experiment that makes rat-running experiments sensible, because it uncovers the clues that the rat is really using—not what you think it’s using. And that is the experiment that tells exactly what conditions you have to use in order to be careful and control everything in an experiment with rat-running.

I looked into the subsequent history of this research. The subsequent experiment, and the one after that, never referred to Mr. Young. They never used any of his criteria of putting the corridor on sand, or being very careful. They just went right on running rats in the same old way, and paid no attention to the great discoveries of Mr. Young, and his papers are not referred to, because he didn’t discover anything about the rats. In fact, he discovered all the things you have to do to discover something about rats. But not paying attention to experiments like that is a characteristic of Cargo Cult Science.

Jim Baggott - "Quantum dialectics (How Soviet communist philosophy shaped postwar quantum theory)"

https://aeon.co/essays/how-soviet-communist-philosophy-shaped-postwar-quantum-theory

As the founders of the theory argued about what it meant, the views of the Danish physicist Niels Bohr began to dominate. He concluded that we have no choice but to describe our experiments and their results using seemingly contradictory, but nevertheless complementary, concepts of waves and particles borrowed from classical (pre-quantum) physics. This is Bohr's principle of "complementarity". He argued that there is no contradiction because, in the context of the quantum world, our use of these concepts is purely symbolic. We reach for whicever descsription - waves or particles - best serves the situation at hand, and we should not take the theory too literally. It has no meaning beyond its ability to connect our experiences of the quantum world as they are projected to us by the classical instruments we use to study it.

Bohr emphasised that complementarity did not deny the existence of an objective quantum reality lying beneath the phenomena. But it did deny that we can discover anything meaningful about this. Alas, despite his strenuous efforts to exercise care in his use of language, Bohr could be notoriously vague and more than occassionally incomprehensible. Pronouncements were delivered in tortured "Borish". It is said of his last recorded lecture that it took a team of linguists a week to discover the language he was speaking.

Complementatiry also fell foul of the principal political ideologies that, in different ways, dominated human affairs from the early 1930s, through the Second World War, to the Cold War that followed. Both Bohr and Einstein were of Jewish descent and, to Nazi ideologues, complementarity and relativity theory were poisonous Jewish abstractions, at odds with the nationalistic programme of Deutsche Physik, or 'Aryan physics'. But the proponents of Deutsche Physik failed to secure the backing of the Nazi leadership, and any threat to complementarity from Nazi ideology disappeared with the war's ending. Much more enduring were the objections of Soviet communist philosophers who argued that complementarity was at odds with the official Marxist doctrine of 'dialectical materialism'.

Complementarity looked just like the kind of positivist gibberish that Lenin had sought to annihilate. A reality accessible only in the form of quantum probabilities did not suit the needs of the official philosophy of Soviet communists. It appeared to undermine orthodox materialism. Nevertheless, an influential group of Soviet physicists, including Vladimir Fock, Lev Landau, Igor Tamm and Matvei Bronstein, promoted Bohr's views and for a time represented the 'Russian branch' of Bohr's school. This was not without some risk. Communist Party philosophers sought their dismissal, to no avail, largely because they could not agree on the issues amongst themselves.

Inside Out 2

Enjoyable, but can't compare to the first

The Silent Sea

Korean scifi series about "lunar water"

so many plotholes and weird stuff, would not recommend.