Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Spoon Theory (2003)

butyoudontlooksick.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 133 posts

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#41

Post by J-dawg »

taneq wrote: post #12

When I was first learning to ride motorcycles I came across "A Twist of the Wrist" by Keith Code, which uses a similar analogy for attention. In this analogy, you have $10 worth of attention to spend. Maybe as a novice rider you spend $5 just coordinating steering, clutch, gears and brakes to keep the bike upright. You then spend $3 on navigating, which leaves you with only $2 left to pay attention to the traffic aro…

I remember a similar anecdote about a legendary F1 driver (possibly Michael Schumacher, but I can't remember).

During practice the drivers talk to their team over the radio about the car's setup. Most drivers would stop talking in the corners and come on the radio during the straights.

This driver would apparently just keep talking all the way around corners. Driving the car was basically automatic, leaving him free to focus on optimising the car.

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#42

Post by padolsey »

dmos62 wrote: post #13
bearerofgarbage wrote: post #2

> I explained that the difference in being sick and being healthy is having to make choices or to consciously think about things when the rest of the world doesn’t have to. The healthy have the luxury of a life without choices, a gift most people take for granted.

What choices do you mean? I'd say that healthy people have more freedom so they have more choices to make. When you come down to it health is about freedom. Freedom from preoccupying pain, constricting impairment, freedom to do whatever. Choices are a symptom of freedom. We must have a different definition somewhere in here. Haven't read the article yet. Edit: Having read the story, the spoons are a metaphor for unit…

I think I agree with part of what you've said. I often think that disability is something imposed by the external world; it is society's expectations of functionality that are encoded into how we've designed our infrastructure and lifestyles. Spoons are in such deficit, largely, because the world is often unadaptable to our capabilities. We change. It remains fixed, expecting that same amount of capability in order to participate. Participation in the world is optional, but to sit alone in spoon-deficit for life is so so awful a concept, especially because it doesn't have to be that way if we only designed more parts of life to accommodate the entire spectrum of capabilities.

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#43

Post by padolsey »

Puts wrote: post #27

"Most people start the day with unlimited amount of possibilities" I think the comments to this post testifies that no one has unlimited spoons. Most people struggle. Some more, some less.

TBQH I have a real dislike for the relativistic thinking that people apply to this. Everyone does struggle, yes. But the degree of struggle, for some, is exponentially more. To just participate in the smallest parts of life... eating, cleaning, emptying one's bowels, is a daily challange. What if you could only afford energy for one outing to the shop? What if taking a shower felt like running a marathon? What if making a meal was prohibiltely exhausting? The everyday small parts of life that most people enjoy are inaccessible to many. The degrees of separation between between an able-bodied person and a disabled person can be so massive.

So, yes, all people struggle, but the struggle of some denies them reaching the threshold of energy required to do even the minimum expected daily activites. That threshold is the crucial separator between isolation and participation. .. not even to mention the socioeconomic effects.

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#44

Post by fidrelity »

J-dawg wrote: post #41
taneq wrote: post #12

When I was first learning to ride motorcycles I came across "A Twist of the Wrist" by Keith Code, which uses a similar analogy for attention. In this analogy, you have $10 worth of attention to spend. Maybe as a novice rider you spend $5 just coordinating steering, clutch, gears and brakes to keep the bike upright. You then spend $3 on navigating, which leaves you with only $2 left to pay attention to the traffic aro…

I remember a similar anecdote about a legendary F1 driver (possibly Michael Schumacher, but I can't remember). During practice the drivers talk to their team over the radio about the car's setup. Most drivers would stop talking in the corners and come on the radio during the straights. This driver would apparently just keep talking all the way around corners. Driving the car was basically automatic, leaving him free…

I can't find the video but I'm pretty confident this was in fact Ayrton Senna.

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#45

Post by [deleted] »

padolsey wrote: post #43
Puts wrote: post #27

"Most people start the day with unlimited amount of possibilities" I think the comments to this post testifies that no one has unlimited spoons. Most people struggle. Some more, some less.

TBQH I have a real dislike for the relativistic thinking that people apply to this. Everyone does struggle, yes. But the degree of struggle, for some, is exponentially more. To just participate in the smallest parts of life... eating, cleaning, emptying one's bowels, is a daily challange. What if you could only afford energy for one outing to the shop? What if taking a shower felt like running a marathon? What if mak…

[deleted]

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#46

Post by Moru »

coldtea wrote: post #23
dmos62 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What choices do you mean? I'd say that healthy people have more freedom so they have more choices to make. When you come down to it health is about freedom. Freedom from preoccupying pain, constricting impairment, freedom to do whatever. Choices are a symptom of freedom. We must have a different definition somewhere in here. Haven't read the article yet. Edit: Having read the story, the spoons are a metaphor for unit…

> What choices do you mean? Hard choices. The "Should I do X, or it will hurt me?", "Is it worth feeling bad for doing Y?" related to the disease and its impact. It's not about choice as in a healthy person having a selection of 10 fun sports to decice which to play in a sunny day. It's about difficult choices, like "I want to do this sport activity today, but should I do it and feel depleted for the rest of my day?…

Or even simpler things that we take for granted, eg brush teeth, get dressed in the morning, or even get out of bed. And no, I don't mean the usual Monday morning tiredness most of us have.

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#47

Post by cfontes »

fidrelity wrote: post #44
J-dawg wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember a similar anecdote about a legendary F1 driver (possibly Michael Schumacher, but I can't remember). During practice the drivers talk to their team over the radio about the car's setup. Most drivers would stop talking in the corners and come on the radio during the straights. This driver would apparently just keep talking all the way around corners. Driving the car was basically automatic, leaving him free…

I can't find the video but I'm pretty confident this was in fact Ayrton Senna.

It’s Ayrton, he also knew as much about mechanics as his mechanics

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#48

Post by k__ »

jackpirate wrote: post #26
reedf1 wrote: post #16

One of the effects of society is to reduce the number of 'spoons' any person needs to 'spend' a day. This is probably a good argument against those who are anti-automation. As a more efficient automated society slowly lowers the 'minimum spoon bar' that is required for net contribution.

I don't think this is true. I once spent some time at an Amish community, and I saw their elderly and sick all living relatively productive lives. They were cooking, cleaning, watching children, and performing other small tasks that made everyone's life a bit nicer. The only reason these "menial" jobs were available to them was the deliberate inefficiency of the Amish lifestyle.

I think the Amish optimize not for minimum spoon use but for maximum spoon availability.

Re: The Spoon Theory (2003)

#50

Post by notatrumper »

t-writescode wrote: post #31
reedf1 wrote: post #16

One of the effects of society is to reduce the number of 'spoons' any person needs to 'spend' a day. This is probably a good argument against those who are anti-automation. As a more efficient automated society slowly lowers the 'minimum spoon bar' that is required for net contribution.

I don't believe this especially. We've replaced a large amount of our work with a huge amount of bureaucracy. There's so much of it that it feels like I'm being overwhelmed by just it some days.

What exactly do you mean? You mean if you want to do something extraordinary, bureaucracy keeps you in check? I think "normal days" are pretty automatic in terms of bureaucracy?
Post reply on HN