snek_boi

Not me, but a friend believed Obama was not American. Conversations over time (couple of months) changed them.

Not a proper conspiracy theory, but I used to be a dualist, thinking that souls exist and they’re separate from bodies. All of this changed with a long conversation with a materialist. He helped me see how my beliefs were historically determined, socially programmed, and not based on atemporal scientific principles. Overnight change to materialism.

The answer is contextual, just like people are contextual. Sometimes, my circles are all busy or stressed out and we can’t really be there for each other. Other times, strangers have saved me, like the couple that took me in when lockdowns started and I was far from home.

Have you heard of the Stanford Prison Experiment? Or the Princeton Seminarian experiment? Or the Milgram Experiment? All of them confirm that people are contextual. That’s lesson 1 in psychology, but we humans easily forget it. We focus on the person and forget the context. That folly of ours even has a name: Fundamental Attribution Error.

You have a good point! It does sound like my suggestions only help for repeated behaviors. For example, Tiny Habits seems to indicate that it'll work for habits but not for novel situations.

You explicitly mention that it's unlikely that research covers situations that are entirely novel and rare. Do you know about schema theory or relational frame theory? I ask because both of those theories explicitly deal with how entirely new information (such as entirely new situations) is processed in the human brain and how, depending on the schemas or relational frames that a person already had, the person will react in different ways.

But we don't have to go into the theoretical weeds. The popular books that I mentioned earlier deal with novelty. For example, Lakoff shows how, inside the head of any person, a small set of beliefs can end up guiding most of the person's moral thinking and therefore their choices. Not only that, but even the book titled Tiny Habits has sections dedicated to one-off behaviors. Heck, the book Drive deals with teams that are at the bleeding edge of knowledge and techniques, technologies and workflows that no human has ever dealt with before, and yet the book is able to show how there is a set of evidence-based principles that consistently motivate (or not) those very teams.

The fundamental issue is whether humans are able to recognize a situation and know what to do about it. Our brains have been endowed with the capacity to derive thoughts, to think up entirely new situations, to imagine scenarios. We can use that to increase the odds of responding effectively to situations we have never been in before.

Sure, recognizing the light when it's eclipsed by plenty of shadow can seem cartoonish. We can decide to close our eyes and be left in the darkness. We can decide not to pay attention or learn from something we deem unacceptable.

Is there absolutely nothing that China is doing that the rest of the world could learn from? Do you know how much China is investing in green energy in relation to the west? Do you think I am unable to recognize problems in China while at the same time recognizing that it is the single largest investor in green energy on Earth today? Do you think I'm unable to recognize that the United States has a great elite educational system? Or that I'm unable to recognize that the USA has amazing elite research facilities? Or that during the twentieth century it was a world leader in terms of State investments in strategic technologies?

I understand you're trying to increase the odds that people will intervene and that this horrible kidnapping would not be successful.

However, the fund for rewards is not the way to go.

Psychological research about human motivation shows that expecting external rewards reduces personal motivation (or, as psychologists would say it, extrinsic motivation can hinder intrinsic motivation). When humans do things because they expect external rewards, they stop doing it for the sake of it and expect higher and higher rewards over time.

Pay children to draw and they lose their interest in doodling or drawing for fun. Pay your team members for being kind and they will be less kind overall.

So what can we do? You talk to people. You understand their concerns and wishes, and you have them understand your concerns and wishes. You use frames that they already have in their head so that they can see your point of view. You set implementation intentions.

It's a matter of values and the capacity to do the behavior.

Of course, if you're in a dictatorial regime, stopping a state-approved kidnapping will be illegal and get you in lots of trouble. That's why activism also seeks to change root causes. What kinds of root causes? That will depend on who you are. Some people blame the electoral system in the USA, so maybe changing that could help. Other people will blame other causes and therefore will suggest other changes.

This may be abstract, and I wish I had the time to make it less so. Unfortunately, I don't have time right now, but you can check out sources that talk about this. Check out Drive by Pink to learn about motivation. Check out Don't think of an Elephant by George Lakoff to learn about moral reframing. Check out Rethinking Positive Thinking by Gabriele Oettingen or Tiny Habits to learn about implementation intentions.

How can I do this?

If you look at the human empowerment model, it will all depend on whether the technological conditions, the educational resources, and the connective resources have gotten worse or not. If not, then people will mobilize and the massive protests will demand change, regardless of the government’s forceful opposition.

The critical question is whether the institutions of a nation are more or less democratic than its people. The World Value Survey clearly shows that some people like hierarchy, strict gender roles that confine people into little boxes, and clearly-defined “me-versus-them” boundaries. Those people will not protest against dictatorships. The rest will.

If you want more information on this, check out Freedom Rising by Christian Welzel.

I’ve always poured it out, but I’ve never really sat and thought why…

Please mark it as NSFW :)

Not a troll post.

Fair enough. I'll take your question seriously.

Without any context, it sounds as if everything that you're perceiving right now is shit. Maybe your relationships are strained and you feel lonely or guilty. Maybe the news hits you harder every day. Maybe money is tight. Maybe you've suffered a great loss. Maybe nothing has happened at all and you're sitting there, contemplating whether life is worth it. I don't know your situation.

And whatever it is, it's valid. Heck, I sometimes feel like life is shit.

Now, I'm not here to say we should look at reality with rose-colored glasses or to look at reality with naive optimism. No. I'm here to say that we have a choice. We can choose what to focus on and how to respond to reality.

Is it really true that "everything is shit"? Is the fact that your body has managed, against all odds, to sustain your life shit? Is the fact that humans can grow and change shit? Is the fact that we can be better as people shit?

Still, shit happens. And we have to be ready to accept that. Regardless of how much shit there is, we can always choose how to respond to it.

For one, we play a massive role in our interpretation of shit. There's solid science behind this. You could look at theories of cognition such as the Theory of Constructed Emotion, Relational Frame Theory, or even the shallow but effective Cognitive Behavioral Therapy frameworks. All of those theories think it's crucial to notice the lens that you and I are looking at the world through. Not only should we notice the lens, but sometimes we should clean it or direct it elsewhere. Otherwise we spend our whole lives stooped over a pile of crap, when we could stand, look around, and notice the world around us from a different perspective.

But that's not the only thing that matters. We don't just want to see the world differently. We also want to live valued lives. Once again, this is possible regardless of how much shit there is. How so? Well, what kind of person do you want to be? A kind person? A person that is reflexive and open minded? A person that notices and appreciates beauty when it appears? A person who is proactive about their future and that of others? A person who is compassionate towards others? A person that's curious about the world and how to improve it?

It's not easy, being kind, appreciative, and proactive when you're bogged down by shit. But you're not alone. There's brilliant and insightful people who have dedicated their lives to finding out how to do it. If you're interested, I'm happy to talk about empirical ways of doing it. For now, it's more important to ask what the alternative is. Is a life spent stooping over shit a good life?