171–180 of 209 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably mean "c'est fait par du monde" or maybe that's some way of mocking french language that I am not aware of !?
it's the way it's spoken where I reside.
So refreshing, and timely. Diving into the moat of low status is a huge multiplier. Courting rejection is a super power because when success is explosive and non-linear, it favours the players who make the most attempts, and not the hardest ones. Timely because it's not just winter, I hit a really hard personal low over the last few months. This article reminded me that I do hard, scary, and difficult things, and my…
Cate believe success is all about luck. She said it herself. https://sashachapin.substack.com/p/things-you-learn-dating-c...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always assumed everyone assumed everything was learnable. Realizing this (i.e., that being everyone's default belief) might not be the case is kind of blowing my mind a little right now.
Ask ten people if they can draw, and half will say "No, I'm not artistic" or "I'm not creative", as though it were an innate quality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Based on the environmental and community based work I’ve done, and also my experience at school. I pick up most things on my own, and always suffered in a classroom environment. But most people I know and have worked with are the opposite. They have real trouble picking up new subjects without a teacher guiding them through it and formal courses. Anecdotal I know, but the true autodidacts I’ve encountered are rare in…
Thanks for elaborating. I think I realize now that we are talking about different things. I wasn't distinguishing between learning styles (e.g., guided or self taught), but more thinking of the ability to step into a new field and learn about it using whatever method works best for each individual. I think I understand now!
I'd say most people think learning is a passive activity -- happens when someone is teaching you, or forcing you to learn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always assumed everyone assumed everything was learnable. Realizing this (i.e., that being everyone's default belief) might not be the case is kind of blowing my mind a little right now.
Ask ten people if they can draw, and half will say "No, I'm not artistic" or "I'm not creative", as though it were an innate quality.
I think this post does a great job of arguing against its own thesis. This woman was apparently the rank one poker player in the world. She obviously has great natural ability and works hard at what she does. So why doesn't she stick with anything for longer than a few years? Why has she had an impressive start to four or five different careers without following through on any of them to real greatness? She believes,…
To even get close to that you need to be the sort of person who changes fields every 5 years or so. I think this temperament is relatively fixed, perhaps because it's a feature of some kinds of neurodivergence. If ND and innate ability are both fixed, what you need to reach greatness is a bag of tricks like the author has so you optimise the many parts of personality and behaviour that are not fixed.
What I think is sad about modern times is, it's increasingly difficult and impractical to make a career change into a regulated profession. You can switch to CS, painting, or poker any old time. But if you're not a doctor by the time you're 40, forget about it. I bump into many people who are interested in medicine and would be great at it, but the switching cost is insurmountable. A shame because there's so much greatness to unlock at the intersection of CS, medical research, and clinical practice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ask ten people if they can draw, and half will say "No, I'm not artistic" or "I'm not creative", as though it were an innate quality.
When I've heard that before I always just thought they meant they had no particular talent for it and weren't interested enough to learn. More a case of choosing to focus on things you feel more naturally inclined to, as opposed to thinking something is unlearnable for you.
Feeling like it's useless also hinders the desire to try, declining the interest in it anyway.. a little bit chicken&egg.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sustained motivation is just a matter of degree of want. If you want something enough you will do it. At least that's my premise.
This is a wild oversimplification. And very dangerous if you try to apply to people in more complex situations.
[1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble...
No. The word poker face exists for a reason. Everyone knew about the importance of physical reads.