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

Mental Liquidity

collabfund.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 123 posts

Re: Mental Liquidity

#61

Post by javajosh »

saiya-jin wrote: post #53
javajosh wrote: post #24

The prerequisite for "mental liquidity" is articulated by Aristotle: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." If you entertain the thought, this gives you the chance to try out a new belief network. If you find your belief network would be strengthened by its inclusion, then you adopt it. Otherwise, you reject it. In this way, ones interconnected set of beliefs grow…

> And this is right and good. I disagree (without down-voting). This is basically 1-man echo chamber, you take what you like (it doesn't matter how many eloquent words you use to describe this, result is same), reject what would challenge your beliefs and would make them weaker. That's the opposite of critical thinking so needed in real world, and prime source why the current world, particularly west, is so torn to p…

It seems like you misread what I was saying. I am not advocating a "1-man echo chamber" - that would be a person who never changes their beliefs. When I say "weaker" and "stronger" I am referring to the whole of the belief network, not individual beliefs. This means, generally, that every change reduces inconsistency and increases cohesion of the entire network. The ignorant people in the world pay no attention to consistency, only to feeling, which makes their network intrinsically weak, and they become emotional and ultimately resort to violence rather than resolve to improve their beliefs. (The internet makes this kind of interaction more common, even encouraged, since it drives "engagement" - one of the great tragedies of our time.)

Stuff in life is complex, people are assholes, but even assholes have good ideas sometimes. I recommend listening to everyone who speaks for themselves in good faith. Anyone can cook!

Re: Mental Liquidity

#62

Post by cassepipe »

david_allison wrote: post #41
krm01 wrote: post #9

One of the biggest beliefs I keep struggling with is the need to be perfect. I've been jamming away for many many weekends on a side project that literally was done. I just kept adding tiny tweaks left and right, until I literally just now launched it ( https://amee.la ). Nothing ground breaking, and in the end nothing that needed to have so much perfectionism around. The belief of having to need something perfect is…

Unsolicited feedback: * Your input box doesn't look like a text box * The 'enter' key doesn't work in the text box * 'Refresh' neither looks like a refresh icon, nor has a label * The fade on the right of the gallery implies you can scroll, but this isn't possible * The generated logo + icon pair wasn't immediately noticeable (the first image is the icon without text, and the first icon isn't guaranteed to be noticea…

Haha, that's a bit of a cruel response to someone who just wrote he had a "perfection" problem. You probably had OP to waste the entire week now. WebDesign is a total time sink

On desktop, you can actually scroll right now

Re: Mental Liquidity

#64

Post by cubefox »

noduerme wrote: post #55
cubefox wrote: post #35

The best way to test your "mental liquidity" is to think about some hypotheses that are outside the "Overton window" or even outright taboo. "What if ***** were true? Surely it can't be true. If it were, that would be terrible." That's motivated reasoning. Remember that the truth of any hypothesis is not influenced by how much you want it to be true, or false. Some hypotheses are deeply uncomfortable, but you should…

Actually, most people shouldn't do that in most cases, because they aren't qualified to understand the evidence presented to them. Nor are the hypotheses they're testing their own. Valuable hypotheses arise from evidence - not vice versa. This is why juries in complex cases need so much time to be walked through subject matter by expert witnesses, and why standards of evidence are applied to what they are and aren't…

The above was only a case against wishful thinking and rationalization. Of course expert testimony is still some form of evidence. The point is not to willfully ignore or reinterpret the evidence because you don't like the direction it is pointing at.

It is worth citing the Litany of Gendlin:

What is true is already so.

Owning up to it doesn't make it worse.

Not being open about it doesn't make it go away.

And because it's true, it is what is there to be interacted with.

Anything untrue isn't there to be lived.

People can stand what is true,

for they are already enduring it.

Re: Mental Liquidity

#65

Post by testacct22 »

saiya-jin wrote: post #53
javajosh wrote: post #24

The prerequisite for "mental liquidity" is articulated by Aristotle: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." If you entertain the thought, this gives you the chance to try out a new belief network. If you find your belief network would be strengthened by its inclusion, then you adopt it. Otherwise, you reject it. In this way, ones interconnected set of beliefs grow…

> And this is right and good. I disagree (without down-voting). This is basically 1-man echo chamber, you take what you like (it doesn't matter how many eloquent words you use to describe this, result is same), reject what would challenge your beliefs and would make them weaker. That's the opposite of critical thinking so needed in real world, and prime source why the current world, particularly west, is so torn to p…

> reject what would challenge your beliefs and would make them weaker.

Most unresolved disagreements I know of are because the groups disagree on some unprovable underlying assumption. Switching positions on it doesn't make the beliefs stronger or weaker

Being able to believe something and stick to it, regardless of challenges from competing interests or forms of coercion: that's more valuable in practice than being more reconciliatory

Re: Mental Liquidity

#66

Post by ianbutler »

krm01 wrote: post #9

One of the biggest beliefs I keep struggling with is the need to be perfect. I've been jamming away for many many weekends on a side project that literally was done. I just kept adding tiny tweaks left and right, until I literally just now launched it ( https://amee.la ). Nothing ground breaking, and in the end nothing that needed to have so much perfectionism around. The belief of having to need something perfect is…

I like this, quick suggestion, I'd add an ability to take one of the generated logos and refine from that same logo.

Re: Mental Liquidity

#68

Post by Gaessaki »

cassepipe wrote: post #62
david_allison wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unsolicited feedback: * Your input box doesn't look like a text box * The 'enter' key doesn't work in the text box * 'Refresh' neither looks like a refresh icon, nor has a label * The fade on the right of the gallery implies you can scroll, but this isn't possible * The generated logo + icon pair wasn't immediately noticeable (the first image is the icon without text, and the first icon isn't guaranteed to be noticea…

Haha, that's a bit of a cruel response to someone who just wrote he had a "perfection" problem. You probably had OP to waste the entire week now. WebDesign is a total time sink On desktop, you can actually scroll right now

This is good feedback though, as I had the same issues. It shows the value of launching and iterating quickly with user feedback, rather than building in the dark in the guise of perfection.

Re: Mental Liquidity

#69

Post by TeMPOraL »

testacct22 wrote: post #65
saiya-jin wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And this is right and good. I disagree (without down-voting). This is basically 1-man echo chamber, you take what you like (it doesn't matter how many eloquent words you use to describe this, result is same), reject what would challenge your beliefs and would make them weaker. That's the opposite of critical thinking so needed in real world, and prime source why the current world, particularly west, is so torn to p…

> reject what would challenge your beliefs and would make them weaker. Most unresolved disagreements I know of are because the groups disagree on some unprovable underlying assumption. Switching positions on it doesn't make the beliefs stronger or weaker Being able to believe something and stick to it, regardless of challenges from competing interests or forms of coercion: that's more valuable in practice than being…

> Most unresolved disagreements I know of are because the groups disagree on some unprovable underlying assumption. Switching positions on it doesn't make the beliefs stronger or weaker, just different

In my experience, that assumption isn't in principle "unprovable" - the parties to the disagreement usually don't realize they're making such assumption in the first place! Switching positions can make the existence of that assumption apparent to all, and if people involved are intellectually honest and discussing in good faith, it's pretty much impossible for their disagreement to remain as strong as it was before.

> Personally, I prefer having convictions and sticking to them.

Good point about competing interests and "reducing to something manageable". I prefer "strong opinions weakly held", but in practice, I embrace the natural inertia of beliefs. I.e. I don't consider me already believing something to be strong evidence the belief is true (i.e. "having convictions") - but the stronger a belief is, or more high-impact changing it would be (e.g. suddenly feeling a moral compulsion to upend my entire life), the more evidence and time I need to change my mind.

This may be also a dumber and less admirable strategy, but it's effectively a low-pass filter on evidence: it saves me from changing my mind every other day, and suffering the costs (including cognitive dissonance if I plain override my beliefs for sake of quality of life).

Re: Mental Liquidity

#70

Post by jrflowers »

> Be careful what beliefs you let become part of your identity.

“I have a tight enough knowledge and grasp of my beliefs to intentionally control my sense of identity” is a fascinating belief to turn into an identity.

Post reply on HN