Psychocybernetics is one of the most interesting self-help books I've ever read. Thread of interesting bits:
The book is structured pedagogically rather than anecdotally. There are sections to write notes and quizzes to remember things. In the postwar period a bunch of researchers started doing big experiments and learning about how humans really learn and to date no one really uses the research for much, certainly not for curriculum design.
Identity consistency effects are so strong because people don't have write access to their self image. Identity can be thought of as a big set of confirmation bias gradients in salience and decision space.
Identity is more fluid than generally believed, but it takes several weeks of doing things that feel awkward to change it. This involves visualization exercises and taking actions consistent with the new identity.
The hidden variable in growth mindset is whether it is being applied to inputs or outputs i.e. a well calibrated locus of control. People for whome growth mindset 'didn't work' were consistently found to be applying it to overly specific outcomes.
People have positive affect towards harmful features of the self-image without being aware of it. Likely because it is part of habits or coping strategies. It is hard to alter these features until the positive components have new routes towards success.
Low level feedback structures in the brain and nervous system have goal states that they attempt to correct towards when they deviate. Coherent goal states are mutually compatible, incoherent goal states result in fights between feedback mechanisms.
Productivity systems fail when they are used to try to boost a side in the fight between feedback mechanisms, but this results in escalation and paralysis. Only way out is new self images that can contain both goals.
Known goals rely mostly on negative feedback (course correction) while unknown goals rely mostly on positive feedback (seeking behavior/play).
Ambiguity in goal directed tasks arise when no clear picture of what goal state is. A clear internal picture generates lots of intermediate states to compare to. The more fine grained the task, the more fine grained the intermediate states need to be.
For complex behaviors it is not possible to systematize improvement, too many minor details (think socializing or complex movements in sports) but change in image changes what is being compared to moment by moment in low level systems and brings small details in line.
Limiting beliefs get repeated internally more than you remember through some combination of words, images, feelings, essentially you have hypnotized yourself. They are tacitly present in much language, spottable from outside.
Belief formation/refactoring only happens in the relaxed state, so much therapy is about reaching the point that the charge has dissipated enough to work with it while relaxed.
Imagination is more powerful than the will. Use of willpower but image is demotivating? Thing doesn't happen. Image is motivating but willpower tries to prevent it? Thing will happen anyway.
Maintaining vivid picture of the thing is more efficient than effort. Physical relaxation also backprops to mental relaxation. Any tensing->worth pausing to investigate.
Worry is predicated on excessively detailed bad outcome visualizations, along with insufficient positive alternatives. Useful to dig for deeper symbolic limiting belief and see if you can stay with it past initial activation into relaxation.
We tend to exaggerate the importance and difficulty of tasks. If we think of them as easy they often are. If we think 'I'm too tired' and that excuse works, we will mysteriously find ourselves thinking it more often, eventually gaining self image as low energy person.
Most problem solving is non-conscious so make extremely thorough preparations to solve the problem as intensely as you know how to, and then don't worry about it. The answer will come or it won't.
The best antidote to worry is to identify which decisions or belief updates we are avoiding. Once we are in motion the rest of our system knows what to do. Setting intentions before sleep is a good way to wake up with the answer ready to go.
Some common but wrong frames:
Happiness is a reward for virtuous behavior
Happiness is selfish
Happiness is in the future
Happiness is mostly the natural state when we stop diligently maintaining habits of unhappiness. Eg comparison mind, reactivity, resentment of our real problems as low status.
The actual obstacles in anything are only things that disrupt the sense of progress, the actual obstacles are fine. Exercise and writing are both good outlets for frustrated energy. Remember relaxation. The solutions will come.
Uncertainty is based on the illusion that passivity insulates against harm. Inactivity is a choice just like the others. When a real opportunity comes along, do you think you will regret having made lots of mistakes leading up to it? No, they were good preparation.
Resentment carries with it the vice of a sense of righteousness in having been wronged. We will cling to this frame even when it conflicts with the facts as a sort of IOU from the universe.
If you feel slighted by a small transgression, remember a time you observed a thin skinned people. It is more obvious from the outside that they were doubting their own self worth. Find that part within yourself and give it some space.
If you want to get over bad habits you have to stop moralizing at yourself about them.
Many people's internal witness is not their true self but some nebulous combo of parents, teachers, friends, bosses, etc. These error signals are not dynamic enough to actually run your adult life.
@JoeDotAverage Second, depends on the person. I definitely had some aha moments for my own patterns.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If someone tells you that thinking is the problem, that's wrong. Thinking isn't a problem with no clinging. If someone tells you desires, goals, and actions in the world are the problem, that's wrong. Desires, goals, and actions aren't a problem with no clinging. If someone tells you that selfing is the problem, that's wrong. Selfing isn't a problem with no clinging. If someone tells you that clinging is the problem, that's half right. But clinging isn't nearly as much a problem with no clinging to not-clinging. If someone tells you that not doing their special kind of practice is the problem, that's wrong. Various practices can help to experience clinging directly, but there's no special kind that exclusively works. Practicing less clinging is often more like practicing folding origami than it is an imagined special spiritual journey. There's nothing to forgive (though it sometimes helps, to model the forgiveness that was wanted but not felt) your childish parts for clinging. Clinging to parents is how a child survives.
Some practices work by temporarily suppressing the correlates of clinging, to make it more likely that you'll notice something interesting. It is common to mistakenly turn a formal practice instruction into a suggestion for how to live life.
Some practices work by inverting the movement of clinging, since once your hand is clenched you do need to unclench it in order to grab the next thing. If you do this enough times you can eventually notice that it's weird that your hand is already clenched so much of the time.
Another feature of low trust societies is a breakdown in the ability to spend more money to get better outcomes. You can spend more money, but the quality of the outcome is fairly random. You've likely observed with with brands over the last ten years.
Instead, better outcomes become more a function of knowing the right people, who have domain expertise. Or doing exhaustive research yourself, which pulls everyone away from spending their time on their comparative advantage.
The effect over time is that trust chains shrink in length. Complex economic interactions become prohibitively expensive, as you need to check every step manually. This was observed in late Rome, with the loss of more complex supply chains.
'Low trust society' can be a bit abstract. Concretely, it means that you expect the people around you to lie on a regular basis and face no repercussion for doing so. More broadly, you get so used to this that you don't notice that it is draining.
Draining to know that if you call out such behavior you will face hostility and get no backup from others who have little enough slack that they don't want to risk social discord.
Children, who have not yet been conditioned into helplessness around this, lose interest in contributing to people and processes that are low integrity. Low integrity can be thought of as physical: a vessel with low integrity leaks if you pour things into it.
I posit there is a latent genre I will refer to as Epistemic Horror, in which characters and/or the audience struggle to separate delusions from reality. That this genre has many works that don't fit well into their more usual genre listings, and that this genre is important.🧵
Part of the problem with the genre is that for some works, their inclusion in the genre can slightly spoil the effect. I think this tradeoff is worth it, but just to warn those who disagree, the next post is a list of such works
A non-exhaustive list:
Rashomon
The Trial
The Idiot
The Man Who Was Thursday
House of Leaves
Antimemetics Division
The Investigation
Memoirs Found in a Bathtub
Jacob's Ladder
The Truman Show
Vanilla Sky
Mulholland Drive
Perfect Blue
The Magus
The Crying of Lot 49
Life of Pi
A few years ago Ken McLeod made a great post on Facebook about how to approach meditation questions. I lost track of my link to it for a long time and am happy I found it again! 🧵
As noted in An Arrow to the Heart, the word sutra has the same root as the word suture, to join or to meet. In the Buddhist tradition, a sutra refers to the meeting of the teacher’s mind and the student’s mind, one of the reasons that most of the sutras are set up as Q&A sessions
The Diamond Sutra opens with Subhuti asking Buddha, “How does a bodhisattva stand? How does a bodhisattva walk? How does a bodhisattva quiet the mind?”
'Craving' is not desire but specifically desire born of ignorance as to how things really are. Where the desire comes from, what it is really made of, and what its true consequences are.
How does one tell the difference? Trace a desire to its root and you'll find one of two things, your actual values or a snarly loop with no ground. How does one trace a desire to its root? Training in Core Transformation causes the mind to habitually trace such patterns.
This discernment is what is meant by 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome' (kusala and akusala) rather than any sort of moral gloss.