331–340 of 340 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing to "believe". If it is useful in expanding your comfort zone, it's useful, full stop. If it's useful in helping to get along with people who are different from you, it's useful, full stop. If it's not useful to you, that does not mean it is not useful to anybody else.
You can say that about punching people in the face, too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I took this stuff in an introductory college course. I kind of knew it was bs but it was also easy to understand and score an easy mark. Sometimes it just doesn't pay to tell the emperor they have no clothes.
> Sometimes it just doesn't pay to tell the emperor they have no clothes. Indeed. I worked a job in which I worked more hours than my coworkers and was (measurably) more productive on a per hour basis than my coworkers. I loved my job, the people in other departments loved it when I worked because things got done that they needed, and I always had a smile on my face. But I had a "bad attitude" because I objected to s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>General Semantics isn't bullshit like NLP is Uh.. did you read Science and Sanity ?![2] It's absolutely BS. Korzybski thought "is" should be eliminated. When you say "The car is red", there are many things the car 'is' besides red, so this is a lie. (No, really!) Thus a language without 'is' would be better.[1] He saw and wrote of himself as an Aristotle-scale genius. Science and Sanity has a couple of ideas: "map i…
You sound like you need to take a "cortico-thalamic pause"... https://www.quora.com/How-does-one-perform-a-cortico-thalami...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unfortunately the books are still sold. I've considered printing stickers that warns about the nonsense and sneak it on to copies in book stores. Great idea! We should do that for Why We Sleep, too: https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep/
The article starts by stating fairly that the book's author is a professor of psychology and neuroscience and UC Berkeley. The article author's homepage says: > I'm an independent researcher with background in Economics, Mathematics, and Cognitive Science. Since I don't have any prior knowledge of the area, I'm sure either of them could convince me of their argument. So I'm inclined to believe the published Berkeley…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You sound like you need to take a "cortico-thalamic pause"... https://www.quora.com/How-does-one-perform-a-cortico-thalami...
I can't tell if that's meant to be a joke or not.
My dad reputedly made references to the "cortico-thalamic pause", and it was probably a joke. I think maybe it was more of a reference to A E Van Vogt's science fiction than General Semantics as such. And possibly there was a (humorous) association with "we now pause for station identification" on the radio.
Looking at Wikipedia, it seems like Van Vogt was significantly involved in Dianetics which later became Scientology, which seems vaguely disturbing (I also learned of Theodore Sturgeon's connections to it relatively recently).
But, I mean, the concept of pausing and reconciling your feelings and analytical mind seems to make sense, kind of.
The line between stuff that appeals to smart people who think laterally and total bullshit gets hazy sometimes. Or between obvious truisms and deep insights. My father was a physicist with an interest in various things including philosophy, and I recall books belonging to him by Chomsky and many others that don't necessarily appeal to me but I can't ask him now exactly what he thought of them and how seriously he took something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Colours WTF! The Belbin team Roles does have some value I feel as that's derived from real results - but you should not use it prescriptivly
Belbin is same bs mostly. Yes, some people tend to be more comfortable in leadership roles and yes, some people are more creative. But the belbin model is yet again one failed attempt to quantify these ephemeral observations - and failing at that. I deal with several roles. My belbin questionnaire mapped pretty well the type of communication that was required in each role between the other person, but did not tell ab…
Though wen I did it the course leader said so you work at the labs which was flattering (the Uk equivalent of bell labs that is)
And not everyone is comfortable with leadership roles I know developer who is better than me who totally went to pieces presenting in front of a small group of his peers.
I applied to Volvo when looking for graduate schemes in my final year of university and recall having to complete a personality test there. I'm not sure whether or not that particular test corresponded to the referenced 'method', however it was a series of very arbitrary statements that one had to either agree or disagree with. None of them seemed particularly useful for determining my aptitude as a software engineer…
I'm guessing this was in Göteborg. I also worked on a team in Göteborg and was presented with this nonsense. I ended up telling the HR manager that this "method" is obviously pseudoscience and a waste of my time, and I ended up leaving the team.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sometimes it just doesn't pay to tell the emperor they have no clothes. Indeed. I worked a job in which I worked more hours than my coworkers and was (measurably) more productive on a per hour basis than my coworkers. I loved my job, the people in other departments loved it when I worked because things got done that they needed, and I always had a smile on my face. But I had a "bad attitude" because I objected to s…
For some reason in corporate environments, the ideal employee "gets along with others" but also "doesn't waste time." I mean quite literally they want an oxymoron. Also I find that these things can easily be gamed because they can try to figure out "what" contains the variables that allow for them to make themselves appear to be the ideal candidate; moldable to whatever position they desire. I think there is an over…
For instance, the model (we take quiz to evaluate how well we use it and how to rate each other) relies on things like "is late to meetings" or "does not fully consider everyone's ideas" to judge a student as being an underperformer. The most problematic was that it made us choose whether we are "details" or "overview" in terms of what kind of work we complete, with no room for being able to handle both (you are either the person who types individual sentences at the whim of your 'leader', or you are planning the entirety of the project and doing none of the grunt work). Speaking of 'leader', it also asks us to rate ourselves as leaders (good, mediocre, bad), and to state what kind of person we want to be led by.
I'm expecting our responses to be used to assign us to groups and given roles in each group, but we will see.
I just get annoyed when I'm stuck taking a survey that - by the nature of the questions on it - is almost certainly dubious.
> · Red: dominant, driven, solution focussed. > · Blue: analytic, careful, meticulous > · Green: patient, considerate, nice > · Yellow: extroverted, creative, verbal Damn. I spent so much of my time and energy pushing back exactly on this bullshit when I was young. That's part of the curriculum of mandatory courses I had to take during an apprenticeship in Switzerland. Expensive and mandatory courses paid by students…
> Based on my experience, that kind of pseudo-science is super popular in corporate environment, and is really difficult to fight against. Because it has some merit. It's not the complete picture of a human, but it's a shortcut that gets you in the ballpark. Kind of like a fuzzy picture coming into focus. People can be evaluated on any spectrum: morality, intelligence, friendliness, creativity, etc. They're all usefu…
See the Barner / Forer Effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect