Qualität / Quality:

Gibt es etwas in Deinem Leben, bei dem Du bestrebt bist, es in sehr hoher Qualität zu verrichten?

(In beruflicher Hinsicht ist ein hoher Qualitätsanspruch bestimmt wichtig. Oft überträgt sich der Anspruch, der im beruflichen Bereich aufrecht erhalten wird, auch auf andere Bereiche. Wer höhes Können in einem Bereich erworben hat, wird es nur ungern in manch anderem Bereich missen.)

-----

Is there something in your life that you strive to do with very high quality?

(In professional terms, high standards of quality are certainly important. Often, the standards set in the professional sphere carry over into other areas as well. Those who have acquired a high level of skill in one area will be reluctant to do without it in some other areas.)

Editor Fluency:

"Tip 27: Achive Editor Fluency

We've talked before about tools being an extension of your hand. Well, this applies to editors more than to any other software tool. You need to be able to manipulate text as effortlessly as possible, because text is the basic raw material of programming. ...

We are happy for you to use as many editors as you want. We'd just like you to be working toward fluency in each.

Why is this a big deal? Are we saying you'll save lots of time? Actually yes: over the course of a year, you might actually gain an additional week if you make your editing just 4% more efficient and you edit for 20 hours a week.

But that's not the real benefit. No, the major gain is that by becoming fluent, you no longer have to think about the mechanics of editing. The distance between thinking something and having it appear in an editor buffer drop way down. Your thoughts will flow, and your programming will benefit. (If you've ever taught someone to drive, then you'll understand the difference between someone who has to think about every action they take and a more experienced driver who controls the car instinctively.)"

The Pragmatic Programmer
David Thomas & Andrew Hunt

The Lion:

via Taoki / Twitter:

Age of parents and cognitive ability of their children – is there a negative, no or positive correlation?

Heiner Rindermann (2025)


Abstract

In recent decades, the average age of parents at the birth of their children has increased. Older parents have generally completed their education, are emotionally more mature and usually have work experience and their own income, which can be an advantage for their children’s development. On the other hand, the risk of mutations (in the father) increases as the parents get older, and there are also general health risks (especially in the mother). This means that both positive and negative factors for cognitive development are linked to the age of the parents. In our study with five diverse samples from different ethnic backgrounds, we covered an age range of 6 to 18 years (primary and secondary schools in Austria and Ecuador, N=920), used tests for both fluid and crystallized intelligence, and used target-specific measures for control variables. We calculated correlations and regressions between parental age and children’s intelligence (controlling for parental education, parental income, number of children, birth order and sex of children). Positive (linear) correlations were found in four out of five samples, on average r=+.10 to r=+.11 (N=920). Curvilinear (quadratic, inverted U-shaped) correlations are higher than linear ones (R=.20). The association with the age of the mother is somewhat stronger (father RF=.16 vs. mother RM=.19). The effect of parental age remained positive when other family variables were taken into account in a regression: beta=+.19. The parents’ level of education was more relevant (beta=+.28). Even if the possible effects are not large, there are predominantly positive (statistical) effects of the age of parents at the birth of their children on the development of their children. The slight inverted U-shaped curvilinearity indicates an optimal age for expectant parents of around 25/30 to 40 years.

Entropy:

My non-fiction blog has devolved into high-entropy hell. I’m trying to bring back some structure.

I don’t even understand exactly how this could have happened.

Substack versus Twitter:

You can almost use Substack like Twitter:

"Substack has leaned into social features lately, so it can feel a bit like Twitter/X. But there are some key differences:

• Core purpose:

  • Substack = publishing platform (mainly long-form newsletters, essays, and podcasts).

  • Twitter/X = microblogging platform (short, fast, viral posts).

• Format:

  • Substack posts are usually long-form or at least essay-style. You can comment, “like,” or “restack” (similar to retweeting).

  • Twitter is centered on short bursts (280/25,000 characters max), fast replies, threads.

• Audience relationship:

  • On Substack, people subscribe (email + app). It’s about building a direct reader–writer connection.

  • On Twitter, people follow, but you don’t own the connection (if the platform dies, so does your audience).

• Monetization:

  • Substack has built-in paid subscriptions. Writers earn directly from readers.

  • Twitter has tips, subscriptions, ad revenue share, but it’s less central.

• Community vibe:

  • Substack is slower, more thoughtful, often niche communities.

  • Twitter is real-time, chaotic, broader reach but noisier.

In short:
Substack mimics Twitter’s social layer (restacks, likes, discovery), but the backbone is still publishing + email lists, not short-form chatter. Twitter is about speed and virality; Substack is about depth and loyalty."

Probably the average quality of stacks is higher than the average quality of tweets. The community is smaller. It feels more niche.

Effort Matters:

"There has never yet been a man in our history who led a life of ease whose name is worth remembering."

Theodore Roosevelt

Useful Thoughts:

Forty Hard Truths:

via Kevin Kelly:

How People Make Their Own Environments

How People Make Their Own Environments: A Theory of Genotype --> Environment Effects
Sandra Scarr and Kathleen McCartney (1983)
Yale University

Abstract

We propose a theory of development in which experience is directed by genotypes. Genotypic differences are proposed to affect phenotypic differences, both directly and through experience, via 3 kinds of genotype --> environment effects: a passive kind, through environments provided by biologically related parents; an evocative kind, through responses elicited by individuals from others; and an active kind, through the selection of different environments by different people. The theory adapts the 3 kinds of genotype-environment correlations proposed by Plomin, DeFries, and Loehlin in a developmental model that is used to explain results from studies of deprivation, intervention, twins, and families.

-----

Short personal summary:

Genotypes not only influence traits directly but also determine which environments people encounter, how they respond to them, and which experiences they actively seek.

The theory distinguishes between three types of genotype–environment correlation:

• Passive: parents provide both genes and gene-correlated environments.

• Evocative: individuals evoke responses from others based on genetically influenced traits.

• Active: individuals select or build niches that match their dispositions (the strongest influence over time).

As children grow, passive effects decline, while active effects increase, making personal choice a stronger channel of genetic influence. This explains why identical twins—even reared apart—are so similar, while adopted siblings grow less alike.

In short: genes drive experience by guiding exposure to, selection of, and responses from environments.

-----

"In this paper we propose a theory of environmental effects on human development that emphasizes the role of the genotype in determining not only which environments are experienced by individuals but also which environments individuals seek for themselves."

-----

"Genetic variation must be associated with phenotypic variation, or there could be no evolution."

-----

"We argue that genetic differences prompt differences in which environments are experienced and what effects they may have. In this view, the genotype, in both its species specificity and its individual variability, largely determines environmental effects on development, because the genotype determines the organism's responsiveness to environmental opportunities."

-----

"Because there is no evidence that new adaptations can arise out of the environment without maturational changes in the organism, genotypes must be the source of new structures."

-----

"As Gottlieb (1976) said, there is evidence for a role of environment in (1) maintaining existing structures and in (2) elaborating existing structures; however, there is no evidence that the environment has a role in (3) inducing new structures. In development, new adaptations or structures cannot arise out of experience per se."

-----

"The dichotomy of nature and nurture has always been a bad one, not only for the oft-cited reasons that both are required for development, but because a false parallel arises between the two. We propose that development is indeed the result of nature and nurture but that genes drive experience."

-----

"A good theory of the environment can only be one in which experience is guided by genotypes that both push and restrain experiences."

-----

"Like Chomsky and Fodor (1980), we propose that the genotype is the driving force behind development, because, we argue, it is the discriminator of what environments are actually experienced. The genotype determines the responsiveness of the person to those environmental opportunities."

-----

"we stress the role of the genotype in determining which environments are actually experienced and what effects they have on the developing person."

-----

"We distinguish here between environments to which a person is exposed and environments that are actively experienced or "grasped" by the person. As we all know, the relevance of environments changes with development. The toddler who has "caught on" to the idea that things have names and who demands the names for everything is experiencing a fundamentally different verbal environment from what she experienced before, even though her parents talked to her extensively in infancy. The young adolescent who played baseball with the boy next door and now finds herself hopelessly in love with him is experiencing her friend's companionship in a new way."

-----

"Because the child's genotype influences both the phenotype and the rearing environment, their correlation is a function of the genotype."

-----

"developmental changes in the genetic program ... prompt new experiences"

-----

"the child becomes attentive to the language environment receptively months before real words are produced."

-----

"some genotypes are more likely to receive and select certain environments than others."

-----

"a passive kind, whereby the genetically related parents provide a rearing environment that is correlated with the genotype of the child"

"an evocative kind, whereby the child receives responses from others that are influenced by his genotype;"

"an active kind that represents the child's selective attention to and learning from aspects of his environment that are influenced by his genotype and indirectly correlated with those of his biological relatives."

"The relative importance of the three kinds of genotype --> environment effects changes with development. The influence of the passive kind declines from infancy to adolescence, and the importance of the active kind increases over the same period. "

"The degree to which experience is influenced by individual genotypes increases with development and with the shift from passive to active genotype -- environment effects, as individuals select their own experiences." 

-----

"Because parents provide both genes and environments for their biological offspring, the child's environment is necessarily correlated with her genes, because her genes are correlated with her parents' genes, and the parents' genes are correlated with the rearing environment they provide."

-----

"genotype -> environment effect is called evocative because it represents the different responses that different genotypes evoke from the social and physical environments"

-----

"The third kind of genotype --> environment effect is the active, niche-picking or niche-building sort. People seek out environments they find compatible and stimulating. We all select from the surrounding environment some aspects to which to respond, learn about, or ignore. Our selections are correlated with motivational, personality, and intellectual aspects of our genotypes. The active genotype - environment effect, we argue, is the most powerful connection between people and their environments and the most direct expression of the genotype in experience."

-----

"Examples of active genotype -> environment effects can be found in the selective efforts of individuals in sports, scholarship, relationships-in life. Once experiences occur, they naturally lead to further experiences. We agree that phenotypes are elaborated and maintained by environments, but the impetus for the experience comes, we argue, from the genotype."

-----

"Although infants are active in structuring their experiences by selectively attending to what is offered, they cannot do as much seeking out and nichebuilding as older children;"

"the effects of passive genotype -> environment effects wane when the child has many extrafamilial opportunities."

-----

"Genotype -> environment effects of the evocative sort persist throughout life, as we elicit responses from others based on many personal, genotype related characteristics from appearance to personality and intellect."

"Similarities in personal characteristics evoke similar responses from others, as shown in the case of identical twins reared apart"

-----

"We argue like McCall that nature has not left essential human development at the mercy of experiences that may or may not be encountered;"

-----

"Phenotypic variation among individuals relies on experiential differences that are determined by genetic differences rather than on differences among environmental effects that occur randomly. "

-----

"most often genotypes and environments are correlated in the real world"

-----

"monozygotic (MZ) twins come to be more similar than dizygotic (DZ) twins, and biological siblings more similar than adopted siblings on all measurable characteristics, at least by the end of adolescence"

"the declining similarities between DZ twins and adopted siblings from infancy to adolescence."

"unexpected similarities between identical twins reared in different homes"

"A theory of genotype-environment correlation can account for these findings by pointing to the degree of genetic resemblance and the degree of similarity in the environments that would be experienced by the co-twins and sibs."

-----

"One would certainly predict what is often observed: that the hobbies, food preferences, choices of friends, academic achievements, and so forth of the MZ twins are very similar (Scarr & Carter-Saltzman, 1980)."

"We propose that the home environments provided by the parents, the responses that the co-twins evoke from others, and the active choices they make in their environments lead to striking similarities through genotypically determined correlations in their learning histories. "

-----

"the selective placement estimates from studies by Scarr and Weinberg (1977) can account for most of the resemblance between adoptive parents and their children."

-----

"The theory put forward here predicts that the relative importance of passive versus active genotype-environment correlations changes with age."

-----

"The social psychology literature on attractiveness (Bersheid & Walster, 1974; Mursteid, 1972), for example, would seem to support our view that some personal characteristics evoke differential responses from others. Similarly, teachers' responses to children with high versus low intelligence, hyperactivity versus acceptable levels of energy, and so forth provide some evidence for our theory."

-----

"Our theory predicts that children select and build niches that are correlated with their talents, interests, and personality characteristics"

-----

"With a rich array of opportunities, however, most differences among people arise from genetically determined differences in the experiences to which they are attracted and which they evoke from their environments. "

Definition of Status Anxiety:

Alain De Botton:

– A worry, so pernicious as to be capable of ruining extended stretches of our lives, that we are in danger of failing to conform to the ideals of success laid down by our society and that we may as a result be stripped of dignity and respect; a worry that we are currently occupying too modest a rung or are about to fall to a lower one.

– The anxiety is provoked by, among other elements, recession, redundancy, promotions, retirement, conversations with colleagues in the same industry, newspaper profiles of the prominent and the greater success of friends. Like confessing to envy (to which the emotion is related), it can be socially imprudent to reveal the extent of any anxiety and, therefore, evidence of the inner drama is uncommon, limited usually to a preoccupied gaze, a brittle smile or an over-extended pause after news of another’s achievement.

– If our position on the ladder is a matter of such concern, it is because our self-conception is so dependent upon what others make of us. Rare individuals aside (Socrates, Jesus), we rely on signs of respect from the world to feel tolerable to ourselves.

– More regrettably still, status is hard to achieve and even harder to maintain over a lifetime. Except in societies where it is fixed at birth and our veins flow with noble blood, a high position hangs on what we can achieve; and we may fail due to stupidity or an absence of self-knowledge, macro-economics or malevolence.

– And from failure will flow humiliation: a corroding awareness that we have been unable to convince the world of our value and are henceforth condemned to consider the successful with bitterness and ourselves with shame.

Definition of Status:

Alain De Botton:

– One’s position in society; the word derived from the Latin statum or standing (past participle of the verb stare, to stand).

– In a narrow sense, the word refers to one’s legal or professional standing within a group (married, a lieutenant, etc.). But in the broader – and here more relevant – sense, to one’s value and importance in the eyes of the world.

– Different societies have awarded status to different groups: hunters, fighters, ancient families, priests, knights, fecund women. Increasingly, since 1776, status in the West (the vague but comprehensible territory under discussion) has been awarded in relation to financial achievement.

– The consequences of high status are pleasant. They include resources, freedom, space, comfort, time and, as importantly perhaps, a sense of being cared for and thought valuable – conveyed through invitations, flattery, laughter (even when the joke lacks bite), deference and attention.

– High status is thought by many (but freely admitted by few) to be one of the finest of earthly goods.

How Social Media Shortens Your Life

It's engineered to speed up your time

Gurwinder Aug 03, 2025

I truly like this essay from Gruwinder. Please read the whole essay: 
https://www.gurwinder.blog/p/how-social-media-shortens-your-life

For copyright reasons ;-) , I’ll only post the first few paragraphs here. Please make sure to read the entire essay.

The essay:

"The most common noun in the English language is “time”. We talk obsessively about time because it’s the most important thing in the universe. Without it, nothing can happen. And yet most of us treat time as if it’s the least important thing. We kick up a fuss when tech giants steal our data, but we’ve been strangely nonchalant as those same companies carry out the greatest heist of our time in history.

One reason for our indifference is that the true scale of the theft has been hidden from us. Social media platforms have been stealing our time using a sneaky trick: they’ve been speeding up our sense of time — effectively shortening our lives — so we think we had less than we did, and don’t notice some of it was pilfered.

Every social media user has experienced the theft of their time. You may log on to quickly check your notifications, and before you know it, half an hour has gone by and you’re still on the platform, unable to account for where the time went. This phenomenon even has a name: the “30-minute ick factor”. It also has empirical support. Experiments have found that people using apps like TikTok and Instagram start to underestimate the time they’re on such platforms after just a few minutes of use, even when they’re explicitly told to keep track of time.

To understand how social media warps time, we must understand time perception, or chronoception. Even outside of our heads, time doesn’t move at a constant pace. It is, for instance, slowed by gravity. This is why the Earth’s core is 2.5 years younger than its surface. Just as massive objects can slow objective time, so weighty experiences can slow subjective time. It’s why people tend to overestimate the duration of earthquakes and accidents (or in fact any scary situation).

Generally, an event feels longer in the moment if it heightens awareness. But we seldom think of time in the moment; the majority of our sense of time is retrospective. And our sense of retrospective time is determined by awareness of the past: in other words, by memory. The more we remember of a certain period, the longer that period feels, and the slower time seems to have passed.

Sometimes an experience can seem brief in the moment but long in memory, and vice versa. A classic example is the “holiday paradox”: while on vacation, time speeds by because you’re so overwhelmed by new experiences that you don’t keep track of time. But when you return from your vacation, it suddenly feels longer in retrospect, because you made many strong memories, and each adds depth to the past.

Conversely, when you’re waiting at a boring airport, you keep checking the clock, and this acute awareness of time causes it to pass slowly in the moment. But since the wait is uneventful, you don’t make strong memories of the experience, and so in retrospect it seems brief.

Now, a sinister thing about social media is that it speeds up your time both in the moment and in retrospect. It does this by simultaneously impairing your awareness of the present and your memory of the past.

Try to recall what you saw on social media the last time you scrolled. You’ll notice you can barely remember any posts, even if you scrolled for hours. This phenomenon has been confirmed by studies, which have found that social media impairs both short-term and long-term memory. A social media feed is like the Lethe, the mythical river in whose waters lost souls sought absolution, and received it in the form of oblivion.

But what explains this “Lethe effect”? Theoretically, a social media feed should heighten awareness and memory, and dilate time, because it selects for content that’s exciting, outrageous, and scary. And yet we seldom remember such content. The reason for this discrepancy is simple: when every post is alarming, your brain quickly becomes desensitised, and starts to interpret alarming content as routine. And routine, being passive and therefore immemorable, speeds up time.

This is one way social media impairs awareness and memory. Unfortunately, there are many others, and, unlike this one, they’re not a result of mere circumstance, but of ruthless planning. Sean Parker, Facebook’s founding president, said: “The thought process that went into building these applications … was all about: ‘How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?’”

Parker and other tech executives employ “attention engineers” to design interfaces and algorithms that warp your sense of time. To understand how they do this, we must look to the history of casino floor design.
..."

Please read the whole essay: 
https://www.gurwinder.blog/p/how-social-media-shortens-your-life

-----

"The opposite of a maze is a route, and a route through time is a story. This is because stories are linear and syntagmatic — each moment of the tale semantically follows from the previous — and this collective meaningfulness anchors the whole thing in memory. This is why studies have consistently found that people are much better at memorising information when it’s presented in narrative form.

The memorable and sequential nature of stories makes them good timekeepers. As such, the way we make sense of time is through emplotment: by turning time into stories. It’s why research finds that people who are similarly engaged in a story will tend to converge in their estimates of how much time has elapsed. If we can’t turn a duration into a story, we struggle to keep track of it.

Now here’s the issue: your social media feed resists emplotment because it’s the opposite of a story. It’s a chronological maze. It has no beginning, middle, or end, and each post is unrelated to the next, so that scrolling is like trying to read a book in a windstorm, the pages constantly flapping, abruptly switching the current scene with an unrelated one, so you can never connect the dots into a coherent and memorable narrative.

Thus, not only do you forget time while scrolling through posts, but you also forget the posts themselves. We have no problem recounting the plot of a good book we read or movie we saw last year, yet we can barely remember what we saw on social media yesterday.

Despite not having much memory of your social media feed, you may have a vague sense that you at least enjoy scrolling. This, too, is likely a trick. Research suggests that people judge an experience as being more enjoyable if they believe they underestimated its duration. In other words, not only does time fly when we’re having fun, but we also believe we had fun if time flies. So, by speeding up time on social media, attention engineers don’t just make you waste more time, they might also reduce your likelihood of regretting it.

But even if you do regret it, social media excels at making you return. A physical casino can only warp your time while you’re within its walls. Social media is always within arm’s reach. And it has ways of making you reach for it.

Friedman’s cubicles were designed to spark FOMO by letting you hear the cheers and roars of excited players but without letting you see the cause — unless you entered. Similarly, the push notifications of social media platforms periodically tease you with what you’re missing out on, and the only way for you to find out more is to re-enter the maze. The result of having your day punctuated by these notifications is that your attention is constantly intercutting between the real world and the virtual one, so that your life becomes a book in a windstorm just like your feed.

This creates problems of its own. Continually dividing your attention between two worlds means you can never fully settle in either, creating constant anxiety and stress. And when attention is constantly switching between concurrent tasks, it imposes a “switch-cost effect” that can make people lose track of time. Thus, by constantly interrupting you, social media platforms can impair your awareness and shorten your days even while you’re not on them, so that you end up scrolling through the real world as shallowly as the virtual one.

It would be bad enough if this disorientation were only costing us time. But it can also cost us our health too. Social media appears to disrupt young people’s sleep cycles and lead to mental health problems. Further, when people have their sleep continually disrupted, it can have cascading effects on their body’s ability to keep time, causing, for instance, puberty to begin sooner. This may help explain why children, particularly girls, are experiencing puberty earlier than they used to.

As well as potentially speeding up puberty, screentime also seems to speed up ageing. A recent study of 7212 adults tracked various biomarkers of body age, such as muscle mass and telomere length, and found that those who spent more time staring at screens had aged faster, even when controlling for physical inactivity. This effect might partly be due to confounding (people with high screentime are likely to have other unhealthy habits) but it’s also a predictable result of the stress, disorientation, and hyposomnia inflicted by living out of sync with reality.

Ultimately, social media doesn’t just threaten the quantity of your time, but also the quality. And it doesn’t just accelerate your experienced life, but potentially also your actual, biological life.

Now that we understand this, we can try to do something about it. Fortunately, there are ways to not only prevent further theft of our lives, but to take time back."

-----

And finally:

"just as Friedman’s casinos were made like mazes to maximise wandering and getting lost, so social media platforms have increasingly become labyrinthine to trap people in them."

Relevant Decisions:

Ed Stack / Shane Parrish:

"The person who talks the least is usually the decision maker."

Feedly:

This blog is currently the 7th most popular hbd blog on Feedly. Thanks for following!

https://feedly.com/i/top/hbd-blogs

Remnant:

Dictionary:

"a part or quantity that is left after the greater part has been used, [explained,] removed, or destroyed."

My Second Blog (Poems and Aphorisms):

Please visit my second blog ("Poems and Aphorisms"), where every post appears in both English and German:

https://gedichteundaphorismen.blogspot.com/

Unterschiedliche Wertigkeiten von Information / Different Values of Information:

https://meinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com/2020/09/unterschiedliche-wertigkeiten-von.html

Überspitzt ausgedrückt:

Das Gehirn des Mitmenschen beherbergt Information. Und manche dieser Informationen sind für uns tausendfach wertvoller als manch andere dieser Informationen.

In manchen Gesprächen teilt der Mensch sein kostbarstes Wissen, seine kostbarsten Gedanken, Erinnerungen, Erlebnisse, etc.

-----

Put somewhat pointedly:

The brain of another person contains information. And some of this information is a thousand times more valuable to us than certain other pieces of information.

In some conversations, a person shares their most precious knowledge, their most precious thoughts, memories, experiences, etc.

Intelligenz / Intelligence:

https://meinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com/2020/10/intelligenz_3.html

Wie wichtig ist Intelligenz bzw. Denkbegabung letztlich? Und was gibt es neben der Intelligenz bzw.  der Denkbegabung alles noch?

Als Erstes würde mir da die "emotionale Ansprechbarkeit" oder "Schwingungsfähigkeit" einfallen.

Der Ausprägungsgrad der Intelligenz, in dem Sinn, legt fest, wie wirksam eine Person Phänomene der Um- und Innenwelt unter Kategorien bringen kann.

Die "emotionale Ansprechbarkeit" als die Fähigkeit, Äußeres oder Inneres als Wert zu erleben. Angesprochen zu werden und anzusprechen. Zu lieben, zu hassen. Freude und Schmerz zu erleben. Mit dem Herzen an Menschen, Dingen und Ideen zu hängen.

-----

How important is intelligence, or mental ability, ultimately? And what else exists besides intelligence or mental ability?

The first thing that comes to mind for me is "emotional responsiveness" or "capacity for resonance."

The degree of intelligence, in this sense, determines how effectively a person can classify phenomena of the external and internal world.

"Emotional responsiveness," on the other hand, is the ability to experience what is external or internal as value. To be addressed and to address. To love, to hate. To experience joy and pain. To be attached with one’s heart to people, things, and ideas.

Belief versus Action:

https://meinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com/2025/03/belief-systems-versus-actions-efficacy.html

Alexander:

"Some people seem to live in a mental world, where the way they define themselves their identity is largely based upon what they think, feel, and believe. For example, “I am an anarcho-communist,” “I am a Trump supporter,” or “I am red pilled.” Others define themselves more by what they do or have done: “I am a landscaper,” “I am a husband” or “I am a sailor.” Really easy to get into Group 1, because it doesn’t actually require anything. You basically just get in-group membership by claiming it. “I believe the right thing.” Almost like putting on a costume. A lot of these people need to work on shifting themselves into Group 2 - an identity based on real-world accomplishments and behaviors."

Frequently Viewed Posts:

https://www.google.com/search?q=meinnaturwissenschaftsblog+site%3Ameinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com&sca_esv=d43255849d412494&biw=1112&bih=806&sxsrf=AE3TifMWjrPirQDb1H6aGsis9vQd79v8kQ%3A1758664087439&ei=lxXTaNDQGvHAwPAP5dvnkA4&ved=0ahUKEwiQ-Neh7u-PAxVxIBAIHeXtGeIQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=meinnaturwissenschaftsblog+site%3Ameinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com

Being Tense:

https://meinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com/2024/08/being-tense.html

I know some tense people. Their tension often makes them unusually vigilant. In certain situations, that heightened vigilance can even be attractive.

"A person who is always tense and almost never relaxed can be described using several labels or adjectives. Some of the most common ones include:

1. High-strung: This term describes someone who is very nervous or easily agitated.
2. Tense: Refers to a person who is often anxious or unable to relax.
3. Uptight: Used for someone who is excessively concerned with following rules or conventions, and who is often nervous or worried.
4. Anxious: Describes a person who frequently feels worried or uneasy.
5. Nervous: Someone who is often apprehensive or uneasy.
6. Stressed: Refers to a person who is frequently overwhelmed by stress or pressure.
7. Edgy: Describes someone who is tense or irritable, often anticipating something bad happening.
8. On edge: Similar to edgy, this phrase is used for someone who is very tense or nervous.

These terms capture the various aspects of being perpetually tense and can be used depending on the context and specific characteristics of the person's behavior."

Quantitative Connections / Quantitative Zusammenhänge:

The size of one thing (or quantity) depends on the size of another thing (or quantity).

-----

Die Größe eines Gegenstands (oder einer quantitativen Größe) hängt von der Größe eines anderen Gegenstands (oder einer anderen quantitativen Größe) ab.

Erkennen // Spotting Patterns / Deliberate Thinking:

https://meinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com/2020/09/erkennen.html

Wir sind umgeben von Gegenständen, die nach gewissen Regeln entstehen, vergehen, sich verändern. Aufgabe der 'Ratio' ist es, diese Regeln aufzufinden, zu detektieren, und zu verwerten.

-----

We are surrounded by objects that come into being, pass away, and change according to certain rules. The task of reason is to uncover, detect, and make use of these rules.

The Good Engineer:

A good engineer is good or effective at constructing useful things.

[Also see: The Good Scientist]

The Good Scientist:

A good scientist is good or effective at extracting true statements from nature.

[Also see: Science]

Nations as Natural Families: From Kin Selection to Multilevel Selection

Filipe Nobre Faria and Sandra Dzenis (2025)
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/nana.70023


Abstract

In nationalism studies, nations are often viewed as artificial constructs. By contrast, many sociobiologists see nations as natural families or kin groups. They explain altruism and shared ancestry among co-nationals through kin selection theory, which accounts for altruism towards close genetic relatives. In this article, we refine and deepen this sociobiological view through multilevel selection theory, an evolutionary framework that extends selection beyond genes and individuals to include groups. We contend that nations function as extended kin groups whose cohesion arises from genetic relatedness, culturally evolved institutions, and intergroup competition. This biocultural perspective advances the insights of sociobiologists and bridges constructivist and evolutionary explanations of nationhood.

Context & Memory:

Currently I am reading the book "Why we remember" from Charan Ranganath. A short review will follow.

Context:

"That sense of being in a particular time and place is called context. ... A great deal of everyday forgetting happens not because our memories have disappeared but because we can't find our way back to them. In the right context, however, memories that have seemed long gone can suddenly resurface back to the forefront of our recall. Why is it that, in the right context, I can access dormant memories - including words and phrases in an otherwise foreign language - that seem unreachable to me back at home?"

-----

~ in the right context we can just remember things.

The Entertainment Industry:

To what extent does the entertainment industry target the tastes of the average person?

"The entertainment industry largely does target the “average person”, because mass appeal drives revenue. Movies, music, TV, and even streaming platforms depend on large audiences, so they’re built around broad tastes, familiar story structures, recognizable genres, and easy-to-follow formats."

Wissen / Knowledge:

Wissen wird nicht weniger, wenn wir es teilen.

Das Teilen von Wissen verbraucht das Wissen nicht.

Manche Dinge haben deshalb großen Reiz,
da sie sich in ihrem Reiz nicht erschöpfen.

So der Blick auf manch einen Gegenstand.

Der Gegenstand bleibt interessant oder schön.

So das Studium von manch einem Text oder Buch.

Der Text / das Buch oder das Thema des Texts
/ des Buchs bleibt interessant.

Vielleicht geht es eben darum, das zu suchen,
was an Wert gewinnt, wenn wir es teilen.

-----

Knowledge does not diminish when we share it.

The act of sharing knowledge does not use it up.

Some things are so appealing precisely
because their appeal does not run out.

Like certain objects.

They remain interesting or beautiful.

Like the study of certain texts or books.

The texts, the books, or the subject of these
texts or books remains interesting.

Perhaps it is precisely about seeking
what gains in value when we share it.

This Blog / Dieser Blog:

My blog should be a place where some valuable bits of information are shared.

-----

Mein Blog sollte eine Art Sammlung oder Quelle von wertvollen und kostbaren Informationen sein, aus der der Leser schöpfen kann, wann immer ihn das Bedürfnis überkommt.

Selbstbezug / Self-reference:

Die Kunst, das Beste an sich selber zu kennen.

-----

The art of knowing the best in yourself.

Vertieftes Lesen / Deep Reading:

Ein paar Stunden am Tag tief eindringen, in ein Buch, in einen Artikel.

-----

Spending a few hours a day immersing yourself deeply in a book, in an article.

Der Evolutionäre "Imperativ" / The Evolutionary “Imperative”:

Tritt die Evolution manchmal schon fast mit einem Imperativ an uns heran?

"so kann man es durchaus sehen.

• Evolution „redet“ nicht direkt mit uns, aber manche Anpassungen wirken wie ein Befehl: Hunger treibt zur Nahrung, Angst zwingt zur Flucht, Lust zur Fortpflanzung.

• Diese Imperative sind tief in unserer Biologie verankert – sie überstimmen oft Überlegung oder Moral.

• Auch im Sozialen spüren wir das: Zugehörigkeit und Status waren überlebenswichtig, deshalb fühlen wir heute noch den Druck, dazuzugehören.

• Gleichzeitig können wir diese „Befehle“ reflektieren und unterlaufen – Kultur, Vernunft und Technik machen uns nicht völlig ausgeliefert.

• Aber selbst wenn wir widerstehen, bleibt der evolutionäre Imperativ wie ein Grundrauschen, das unser Verhalten formt.

Kurz gesagt: Evolution spricht nicht mit Worten, aber sie zwingt uns durch Gefühle und Triebe – fast wie ein stummer Imperativ."

-----

Does evolution sometimes approach us almost with an imperative?

"You could certainly see it that way.

Evolution doesn’t “speak” to us directly, but some adaptations act like commands: hunger drives us to food, fear forces us to flee, desire to reproduce.

These imperatives are deeply rooted in our biology – they often override reflection or morality.

We also feel it socially: belonging and status were vital for survival, which is why we still feel the pressure to fit in today.

At the same time, we can reflect on and subvert these “commands” – culture, reason, and technology mean we are not entirely at their mercy.

But even when we resist, the evolutionary imperative remains like a background hum, shaping our behavior.

In short: evolution does not speak in words, but it compels us through feelings and drives – almost like a silent imperative."

Science:

Science aims at extracting true statements from nature.

Inhaltliche Verschiebung / Substantive Shift:

Wie konnte sich hier,
von 2019 an,
eine erstaunliche
Änderung
des inhaltlichen
Schwerpunkts
vollziehen?

-----

How was it possible that,
starting in 2019,
an astonishing change
in the substantive focus
took place here?

Plappern / Babbling:

>„Plappern“ hat tatsächlich den Beigeschmack von Geräusch statt Gehalt. Es ist Reden, das nicht unbedingt Information oder Bedeutung transportiert, sondern eher als Lautkulisse wirkt.

• Oft verbindet man damit kindliches Sprechen („Kinder plappern“), also ungefiltertes, spontanes Gerede.

• Bei Erwachsenen klingt es eher abwertend: jemand redet zu viel, zu schnell, ohne wirklich nachzudenken.

• Der Kern ist tatsächlich, dass die Quantität im Vordergrund steht, nicht die Qualität oder Substanz der Worte.

• Gleichzeitig kann Plappern auch eine soziale Funktion haben: es füllt Stille, schafft Nähe oder nimmt Nervosität.<
  
  
  

-----

>“Babbling” indeed carries the connotation of noise rather than substance. It is speech that does not necessarily convey information or meaning, but rather serves as a kind of sound backdrop.

It is often associated with childish speech (“children babble”), meaning unfiltered, spontaneous talk.

With adults, it tends to sound more derogatory: someone talks too much, too fast, without really thinking.

The essence is that quantity is in the foreground, not the quality or substance of the words.

At the same time, babbling can also serve a social function: it fills silence, creates closeness, or eases nervousness.<

Think Clearly:

I bought the book "Think Clearly - Eight Simple Rules to Succeed in the Data Age". It's a light read.

A review will follow soon.

-----

1. Accept How Complex the World Is

"The world isn’t simple. Things interact; many variables; unintended consequences. Don’t expect neat causality or one-size-fits-all explanations.

We tend to oversimplify because it’s easier. That risks misinterpretation or being misled.

2. Think in Numbers

Use quantitative thinking: look at rates, proportions; compare reasonably. Rough back-of-envelope estimates are useful.

Relying solely on stories or intuition can hide scale issues or exaggerate rare events.

3. Protect your Samples from Biases

Be aware of how data is collected; sample bias, selection effects, survivorship bias etc.

Many conclusions fail because the sample isn’t representative.

4. Accept that Causation is Challenging

Correlation ≠ causation. Need to think about confounders, experiments vs observational studies, natural experiments, etc.

It’s easy to see patterns and assume causation (politics, media, health, etc.)

5. Don’t Underestimate the Power of Randomness

Random variation is everywhere. What looks like pattern may be just noise. Also rare events do happen.

Overfitting, seeing meaning when none is there; neglecting probabilistic thinking.

6. Predict Without Ignoring Uncertainty

Make predictions or decisions acknowledging what you don’t know; use confidence intervals or ranges; expect surprises.

Overconfidence and ignoring what might go wrong tends to cause big mistakes.

7. Accept the Trade-offs

Every choice has costs and benefits; you can’t optimize everything. You often need to balance competing values (speed vs accuracy; fairness vs efficiency etc.).

People or organizations try to maximize one dimension and ignore others, which causes unintended consequences.

8. Don’t Trust Your Intuition

Intuitions are useful in some domains, but they are also often biased. It’s better to test them, use data, and be aware of when intuition misleads.

False confidence; heuristics that are useful sometimes but misleading in others."

Marriage:

~ Men are competing for sex & Women are competing for commitment:

-----

Gia Macool:

Ever wonder why women flood social media with wedding photos? Because for a woman, marriage means being “chosen.” Society frames it as “love,” but it’s always been about status. Marriage works like a badge. A married woman is seen as “chosen,” a married man as “capable.” In her mind, she is now valuable, worthy of protection, provision, and legitimacy. That badge shields her from being labeled “undesirable,” “unwanted,” or “just a mistress.” It’s also why many married women look down on those who aren’t. Men use it too. For them, the badge says, “I can provide. I’m respectable. I’m not drifting with no direction.” To society, it signals maturity, stability, and leadership. But let’s be real none of this equals truth. Historically, marriage was a tool. Religion and culture used it to control people, organize families, and keep property, wealth, and reputations in order. That’s why people still ask, “When are you getting married?” If you don’t have an answer, they look down on you. Reality: marriage today is more about public perception than love. Real love doesn’t need a badge and it definitely doesn’t care about anyone else’s approval. Those who live by their own choices win."

-----

"Social signaling: Right – marriage has always carried symbolic weight. For women, historically, it meant security and legitimacy; for men, capability and respectability. That hasn’t fully disappeared.

Cultural inertia: The constant “When are you getting married?” reflects how deep marriage is woven into tradition, religion, and family structures. People project their own expectations onto others.

Status vs. substance: The “badge” idea captures how marriage can be used to project an image, regardless of the underlying relationship. Social media amplifies this signaling.

Shifting norms: In many places, marriage is losing its monopoly. Cohabitation, chosen singleness, and non-traditional partnerships are gaining legitimacy, though stigma still lingers.

Love ≠ marriage: Love can thrive without a certificate; marriage can exist without love. The two only overlap when people intentionally align them."

------



"Economic capacity: In most historical societies, men married only when they could support a household. That meant land, a trade, or wealth. Poor men often stayed unmarried or married much later.

Social rank: For elites, marriage was less about love and more about alliances. A man’s family had to be “capable” of offering status, property, or influence.

Reputation: A man had to be seen as stable, responsible, not a drifter. In many towns or villages, community approval mattered as much as personal readiness.

Demographics: In some times and places (e.g., medieval Europe), there were more men than women, meaning not every man could realistically expect to marry.

So historically, marriage was often a marker of capability — but defined narrowly: the ability to provide, maintain property, and uphold social expectations."

Das Finden der Eigenen Idendität / Finding One’s Own Identity:

"Spiegelung: Wir erkennen uns selbst oft erst, wenn wir sehen, wie andere auf uns reagieren. Manchmal überraschend, manchmal schmerzhaft.

Platz finden: „Wo gehöre ich hin?“ ist eine Frage von Zugehörigkeit. Familie, Freunde, Partner, Arbeit, Gemeinschaften – all das gibt Orientierung.

Spannung: Es gibt fast immer einen Konflikt zwischen dem, was man selbst sein will, und dem, was andere erwarten.

Eigenständigkeit vs. Beziehung: Der eigene Platz ist nie völlig unabhängig, aber auch nicht völlig bestimmt von anderen. Man muss aushalten, dass man nie ganz „passt“ – und genau da entsteht die eigene Freiheit.

Sinn: Der Platz in der Welt ist nicht nur ein „Ort“, sondern eine Art Haltung: Wo kann ich so sein, dass ich einen Beitrag leiste, der mir selbst und anderen Sinn gibt?"

-----

Reflection: We often only recognize ourselves when we see how others respond to us. Sometimes surprising, sometimes painful.

Finding a Place: “Where do I belong?” is a question of belonging. Family, friends, partners, work, communities – all of these provide orientation.

Tension: There is almost always a conflict between what one wants to be and what others expect.

Independence vs. Relationship: One’s own place is never completely independent, but also never fully determined by others. You have to endure the fact that you never entirely “fit” – and it is precisely there that your own freedom emerges.

Meaning: One’s place in the world is not just a “location,” but a kind of attitude: Where can I be in such a way that I contribute something that gives meaning both to myself and to others?"

Persönlichkeit / Personality:

 1. Wie viele Dimensionen benötigen wir zur Beschreibung eines Menschen?

 2. Wie heißen sie?

Peter R. Hofstätter

-----

1. How many dimensions do we need to describe a person?

2. What are they called?

Aimlessness and Idleness / Ziellosigkeit und Müßiggang:

“[One is tempted] to look behind the symptom of idleness for a conflict that prevents a person from forming goals.”

“I have often wondered whether very many of the people who push their way through our shopping streets—quite aimlessly, without for the most part having any serious intention or even the means to make a purchase—are not idlers, burdened with inner contradictions, driven by the fear of being alone, and by horror vacui. You can already tell by their walk that they do not really know where they want to go; what they seem to expect is a stimulus capable of masking their indecision. They crave stimulation and, in the end, are thankful to the neon lights in the shop windows for sparing them a tormenting inner monologue. We know this from adolescents, who are full of inner tensions and who sometimes cannot bring themselves to engage in any particular activity because of them. They then waste their time. To waste time, to drift over a stretch of life—that is the essence of idleness. To waste a time that one will later miss—it is already fairly clear in advance that one will miss it—that is the trick by which the idler rids himself of a paralyzing conflict. Later, he will somehow have to make up for the lost time through special activity; …”

“People are peculiar: they claim to wish for free time, and yet there is nothing with which they know less what to do than precisely that free time. When it is granted to them—say, on the weekend or on vacation—they often fare like the man in the fairy tale, for whom the fulfillment of his wishes only brought embarrassment. We know that every well-ordered society abounds in institutions whose main task is the filling of leisure time. They are said to serve ‘distraction’—perhaps it would be better to say: liberation from the inner monologue.”

—Peter R. Hofstätter

-----

"[Man ist versucht], hinter dem Symptom des Müßigganges nach einem Konflikt zu suchen, der den Menschen nicht zur Bildung von Zielen kommen lässt."

"Ich habe mich oftmals gefragt, ob nicht sehr viele der Menschen, die sich durch unsere Geschäftsstraßen drängen - recht ziellos, ohne dass sie meist ernsthafte Absicht oder auch nur die Mittel für einen Kauf hätten - Müßiggänger sind, beladen mit inneren Widersprüchen, getrieben von der Angst, allein zu sein, und vom "horror vacui". Man merkt es schon ihrem Gang an, dass sie eigentlich nicht wissen, wohin sie wollen; was sie zu erwarten scheinen, ist ein Reiz, der ihre Unentschlossenheit zu überblenden vermöchte. Sie sind reizhungrig und schließlich den Neon-Röhren der Auslage dafür dankbar, dass sie ihnen ein qualvolles Selbstgespräch ersparen. Man weiß es von den Heranwachsenden, die voller innerer Spannungen stecken und die aus ihnen heraus manchmal nicht zu einer bestimmten Tätigkeit finden. Sie vertun dann ihre Zeit. Eine Zeit vertun, über einen Lebensabschnitt hinweggleiten, das ist das Anliegen des Müßigganges. Eine Zeit vertun, die einem später doch fehlen wird - man weiß es im voraus ziemlich deutlich, dass sie einem fehlen wird - das ist der Kunstgriff, mittels dessen sich der Müßiggänger des lähmenden Konflikts erledigt. Er wird die verlorene Zeit später irgendwie durch besondere Aktivität wieder einzubringen haben; ..."

"Die Menschen sind eigenartig: Sie geben vor, sich eine freie Zeit zu wünschen, und sie wissen mit nichts so wenig anzufangen, wie eben mit jener freien Zeit. Wird sie ihnen - etwa im Wochenende oder im Urlaub - zuteil, dann ergeht es ihnen nicht selten wie dem Mann im Märchen, dem die Erfüllung seiner Wünsche nur Verlegenheit bereitete. Man weiß, dass jede wohlgeordnete Gesellschaft überreich ist an Institutionen, deren hauptsächliche Aufgabe die Ausfüllung der Freizeit ist. Sie dienen der "Zerstreuung", heißt es - vielleicht sollte man besser sagen, der Befreiung vom Selbstgespräch."

Peter R. Hofstätter

Autonomie in Firmen / Autonomy in large companies:

"Autonomie wird nicht gleichmäßig verteilt. In Firmen zeigt sich ein Muster:

• Erfahrene Fachkräfte: Wer Kompetenz und Expertise bewiesen hat, bekommt eher Spielraum.

• Vertrauenspersonen: Mitarbeiter, die zuverlässig liefern, auch ohne ständige Kontrolle.

• Kreative / Wissensarbeiter: Bereiche wie Forschung, Entwicklung, IT, Design – da macht Micromanagement keinen Sinn.

• Führungskräfte / Projektleiter: Sie müssen selbst entscheiden können, sonst lähmt das die Organisation.

• Selbststarter: Leute, die Initiative zeigen und Probleme eigenständig lösen, statt auf Anweisungen zu warten.

Weniger Autonomie kriegen typischerweise neue Mitarbeiter, Routinetätigkeiten, oder Rollen mit stark regulierten Abläufen."

"Autonomie wird tendenziell nicht gewährt, wenn:

• Unerfahrenheit: neue Mitarbeiter, die Abläufe noch lernen müssen.

• Routine- und Fließbandtätigkeiten: dort sind Prozesse eng getaktet, Abweichungen kaum möglich.

• Stark regulierte Bereiche: z. B. Medizin, Luftfahrt, Banken-Compliance – da sind feste Regeln vorgeschrieben.

• Geringes Vertrauen: wer Fehler macht, Deadlines verpasst oder unzuverlässig wirkt, wird enger kontrolliert.

• Hierarchisch geprägte Kulturen: in Firmen oder Abteilungen, wo Führungskräfte Kontrolle mit Autorität gleichsetzen.

Kurz: Weniger Autonomie haben meistens die, die neu, austauschbar, risikobehaftet oder nicht vertrauenswürdig erscheinen."

-----

"Autonomy is not distributed evenly. In companies, a pattern emerges:

Experienced professionals: Those who have proven competence and expertise are more likely to receive leeway.

Trusted individuals: Employees who deliver reliably, even without constant supervision.

Creative / knowledge workers: Areas such as research, development, IT, or design—micromanagement simply makes no sense here.

Managers / project leaders: They must be able to make decisions on their own, otherwise the organization becomes paralyzed.

Self-starters: People who show initiative and solve problems independently, instead of waiting for instructions.

Typically, less autonomy is given to new employees, routine tasks, or roles with heavily regulated processes."

"Autonomy tends not to be granted when:

Inexperience: new employees who still need to learn the processes.

Routine and assembly line work: processes are tightly scheduled, leaving little room for deviation.

Highly regulated areas: e.g., medicine, aviation, banking compliance—strict rules are prescribed.

Low trust: those who make mistakes, miss deadlines, or appear unreliable are monitored more closely.

Strongly hierarchical cultures: in companies or departments where leaders equate control with authority.

In short: those who are new, interchangeable, risky, or perceived as untrustworthy usually receive less autonomy."

Why is it that some women treat sex as a chore?

"From an evolutionary point of view, it makes sense that sex can sometimes be experienced as a means to an end rather than inherently rewarding:

1. Different reproductive costs: Women historically bore higher biological costs from sex (pregnancy, childbirth, nursing). This made them more selective and cautious—sex wasn’t “just fun,” it had heavy consequences. That predisposition lingers.

2. Parental investment theory (Trivers): Because women invest more in offspring, their evolved psychology emphasizes long-term mate quality and stability over frequent copulation for its own sake. When those conditions aren’t met, sex may feel like a duty rather than a drive.

3. Adaptive shifts in desire: Female sexual desire fluctuates with the menstrual cycle, relationship security, and resource availability. In contexts where reproduction isn’t beneficial (stress, poor partner support, no desire for more children), desire can downshift.

4. Pair-bond maintenance: Over time, long-term relationships involve “maintenance sex” to secure male commitment and resources. Evolutionarily, sometimes sex was less about pleasure and more about ensuring continued support.

5. Mismatch with modern conditions: Modern contraception, chronic stress, work, and social expectations can suppress natural desire signals. The body’s evolved system isn’t optimized for today’s environment, so sex can feel detached from instinctual reward.

In short: evolution shaped female sexuality to be highly conditional and strategic. If the context doesn’t align with those evolved conditions, sex can easily feel like a task or chore, rather than a spontaneous pleasure."

Situations of Excessive Demand / Extrem Fordernde Situationen:

The demands of a situation exceed an organism’s capacity to handle them.

(I’d like to take it from here and work further.)

-----

Die Anforderungen einer Situation übersteigen die Fähigkeit eines Organismus, diesen Anforderungen zu entsprechen.

(Hier würde ich gerne einhaken und weiterarbeiten.)

Twitter as the Easy Solution / Twitter als die Kurzfristige Lösung:

A glance at Twitter is, in many situations, the easy ‘solution’—a quick release from boredom or tension. Yet there are actions that demand more effort, more force, and more skills.

-----

Ein Blick auf Twitter ist in vielen Situationen die einfache "Lösung" (in Form einer Auflösung von Langeweile oder Spannung). Aber es gibt da Handlungen, die mehr Einsatz, mehr Kräfte und Fähigkeiten fordern ...

Careful Analysis versus Vibing:

Robin Hanson:

"Abstract beliefs have two big causes: vibes and analysis. We vibe beliefs mostly via intuitively feeling out their associations with people, other beliefs, and our personal status. (Music, art, eloquence, and status often influence this a lot.) We analyze such beliefs by more consciously and explicitly comparing our beliefs logically to concrete analysis of relevant data and established theory.

Most people form and change most of their abstract beliefs via vibing. (In far mode.) But there are experts in the world who have learned about specific relevant data and theory, and have learned how to apply those to estimate nearby abstract beliefs. Those calculated abstract beliefs are often at odds with the most popular vibed versions.

Most public talk on abstract beliefs is vibes. You can tell this by comparing how fast, fluid, and vague is such talk, relative to how slowly, carefully, and precisely experts must proceed to figure out the logical implications or data and theory, and to communicate that to other experts.

Most experts allow their expert knowledge to change some of what would otherwise be their vibed beliefs. However, they usually try to minimize the impact of their expert knowledge, which usually only applies to narrow areas, on their network of vibed beliefs, which covers a much wider range of topics. Often they emphasize the limits of their expert tools, and invoke piecemeal “common sense judgments” to protect their vibed beliefs from being changed by expert knowledge.

Most experts only have a few related areas of expertise. But some “polymaths” (like me) work to acquire expertise across a much wider range of topics. They then have more chances for expert knowledge to overturn vibed beliefs. For them there is a conflict not only between their network of vibed beliefs and expert knowledge, but also between expert knowledge in different areas."

Neuroticism & Divorce:

Emil Kirkegaard:

Science:

Science is about extracting true statements from nature.

Trust / Slow Science and Social Media:

Cory J. Clark & Bo M. Winegard:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cory-Clark-2/publication/395385848_The_Siren_Song_of_Influence/

I love quite many statements from this paper. A great read.

------

"Science has something helpful to offer. And helpfulness leads to status and influence."

-----

"Of course, discovering genuinely new and useful information is hard. It can take years of uncertain and tedious work. And in some disciplines, the well of discovery may be running dry."

------

"it may be that “honesty is the best policy” for maintaining long-term public trust in, and thus deference to, science."

------

"in the age of social media, a growing number of scientists appear less interested in the patient work of discovery ...."

-----

"Trust doesn’t come from demands for deference. It comes from repeated demonstrations of competence. It’s earned by delivering results."

-----

"Science earned its authority ... by ... offering high-quality information that helps people solve problems[.]"

"the hard-won and always-precarious reputation of science as a dispassionate arbiter of truth."

"Evolutionary scholars have documented status conferral across cultures, showing that generating benefits for others is the primary path to earning prestige and influence (e.g., Cheng, 2020; Durkee et al., 2020). Status gained through dominance or coercion can work in the short term, but it breeds resentment and unstable hierarchies, not durable trust."

------

"Likes, retweets, and follows reward attention-grabbing content rather than careful analysis."

"A viral tweet can return more validation in twelve hours than a peer-reviewed paper offers in two years."

"And the more you post, the greater your chances of going viral. Quantity trumps quality, since each tweet, however meagre, is one more shot to win Twitter for the day."

-----

"Ideally, science rewards rigorous, methodical work, a system that is constraining and at times, painfully slow."

-----

"Earlier generations of scholars earned prestige over decades through meaningful contributions to their fields. A rare few reached broader public fame. Today, a scholar with little expertise but 4 strong opinions and a fiery temperament can swiftly reach “public intellectual” status. It doesn’t take much experience with social media to learn that the currency of influence is provocation, not precision, and that fanning the flames of controversy drives engagement."

-----

"The scientific method, though imperfect, is specifically designed to minimize biases, flawed analyses, and imprecise claims."

"science is the best system for arriving at truths (at least for now)."

"So long as scholars stick to their core mission, i.e., identifying and describing empirical reality, they can offer something genuinely useful to the world."

"Science has something helpful to offer. And helpfulness leads to status and influence."

-----

"Firing off a polarizing tweet, by contrast, might take just a few minutes and still deliver thousands of likes, hundreds of new followers, and a fleeting but real sense of importance."

"The job of an academic used to be much quieter. Scholars were known to their students, immediate colleagues, and perhaps their broader subdiscipline, but few scholars reached public awareness. Now, with podcasts, blogs, and especially social media, scholars frequently speak directly to the public, amassing followers, attention, and influence."

-----

"scientific communicators who embraced accountability—by inviting discussion of dissenting views, acknowledging uncertainty, and taking responsibility for previous errors—elicited more trust and engagement than those who adopted authoritarian messaging, dismissed dissent, or labeled critics as “anti-science.” "

-----

"Academia often responds to problems with strategic plans, committees, and more bureaucracy. ... In this case though, the solution lies in a collective recommitment to the core values of science and a scaling back of everything else. Instead of overstating certainty, scientists should model epistemic humility, acknowledging uncertainty where it exists and being transparent about the limitations of our knowledge."

"Neither does issuing sweeping “consensus statements” on unresolved social issues. Where true consensuses exist, there is no need for such statements. ... And scholars should resist the urge to demand, “Trust the science!” The moment such a command is felt necessary is usually the moment there is no single, settled science to trust."

"Science is not a body of dogmas to be trusted or deferred to. Rather, it is a process ... whose primary virtue is precisely that it disdains all authority save that of the rational mind."

"the very thing we claim to offer: impartial, high-quality information."

-----

"If, however, we want science to continue to have that authority, we must return to the slow, unglamorous, often tedious process that made the findings of science worthy of credibility in the first place."

------

"The disciplines perceived as least politicized (including math, physics, chemistry, English, nursing, and computer science) are also the most trusted and provoke the least skepticism. In contrast, disciplines viewed as highly politicized (including religious studies, gender studies, ethnic studies, and political science [perhaps an unfortunate name choice]) tend to be the least trusted and elicit the most skepticism."


Mean Disciplinary Scepticism & Mean Disciplinary Politization

Blog Drift:

Since 2019—or perhaps even earlier—this blog has drifted in an odd direction.

General Intelligence:

Arthur Jensen:

"Whenever the task at hand, whatever it may be, involves complexity, novelty, uncertainty calling for choice, mental manipulation of the elements of the problem, or the recall of specific relevant items of information from memory needed to get on with solving the problem, then g comes into the picture."

"Making jellyrolls is much more g-loaded than making scrambled eggs. On the Armed Forces Qualification Test a greater percentage of high-scoring army cooks could make jellyrolls without prompting than could low-scoring cooks. But both high- and low-scoring cooks can prepare scrambled eggs equally well."

Tiny Thoughts - Shane Parrish:

Shane Parrish:

"Surround yourself with people who are thoughtful in ways you are not, because they see what you can't.

**

All the time you spend worrying about the opportunities you don't have comes at the expense of maximizing the opportunities you do have.

***

Anyone can move fast. That's the trap. Speed is cheap, but the ability to be fast without being reckless is expensive.

The chess master's lightning moves come from decades of slow study. The CEO who is in the weeds knows where the problems lurk.

Details don't slow you down; they speed you up.

Insights

*

Author Paul Smith, on seeing what we want to see:

“What we see in people is determined, in large part, by what we expect to find.”

**

Pico Iyer on different resolutions:

“It’s easy to feel as if we’re standing two inches away from a huge canvas that’s noisy and crowded and changing with every microsecond. It’s only by stepping farther back and standing still that we can begin to see what that canvas (which is our life) really means, and to take in the larger picture.”

***

Nobel Prize-winning author Doris Lessing on reading:

“There is only one way to read, which is to browse in libraries and bookshops, picking up books that attract you, reading only those, dropping them when they bore you, skipping the parts that drag – and never, never reading anything because you feel you ought, or because it is part of a trend or a movement. Remember that the book which bores you when you are twenty or thirty will open doors for you when you are forty or fifty-and vice versa. Don’t read a book out of its right time for you.”

The Knowledge Project

What if AI is just another platform shift like the iPhone rather than the civilization-transforming revolution everyone's claiming?

Benedict Evans, technology analyst and former partner at a16z, challenges the AI hype machine, arguing that while AI represents the biggest technological shift since the iPhone, it's only the biggest thing since the iPhone, not the new electricity or industrial revolution.

This episode will challenge what you think you know about AI."