Showing 429 to 432

Rosa Parks (1913–2005)

Birthday: 4 February

California and Missouri commemorate Rosa Parks Day on her birthday, February 4, while Ohio, Oregon, and Texas commemorate the anniversary of her arrest, December 1.

What links here

Created (2 years ago)

Imre Lakatos (1922–1974)

Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend were friends and critics. Both studied under Karl Popper.

Lakatos saw himself as merely extending Popper's ideas, which changed over time and were interpreted by many in conflicting ways.

Feyerabend argued that Lakatos's methodology was not a methodology at all, but merely "words that sound like the elements of a methodology".[29] He argued that Lakatos's methodology was no different in practice from epistemological anarchism, Feyerabend's own position.

Lakatos contrasted Popper0, the "naive falsificationist" who demanded unconditional rejection of any theory in the face of any anomaly (an interpretation Lakatos saw as erroneous but that he nevertheless referred to often); Popper1, the more nuanced and conservatively interpreted philosopher; and Popper2, the "sophisticated methodological falsificationist" that Lakatos claims is the logical extension of the correctly interpreted ideas of Popper1 (and who is therefore essentially Lakatos himself).

On pseudoscience

According to the demarcation criterion of pseudoscience proposed by Lakatos, a theory is pseudoscientific if it fails to make any novel predictions of previously unknown phenomena or its predictions were mostly falsified, in contrast with scientific theories, which predict novel fact(s).[25] Progressive scientific theories are those that have their novel facts confirmed, and degenerate scientific theories, which can degenerate so much that they become pseudo-science, are those whose predictions of novel facts are refuted. . As he put it:

"A given fact is explained scientifically only if a new fact is predicted with it… "

In his 1973 Scientific Method Lecture 1[27] at the London School of Economics, he also claimed that "nobody to date has yet found a demarcation criterion according to which Darwin can be described as scientific".

Almost 20 years after Lakatos's 1973 challenge to the scientificity of Darwin, in her 1991 The Ant and the Peacock, LSE lecturer and ex-colleague of Lakatos, Helena Cronin, attempted to establish that Darwinian theory was empirically scientific in respect of at least being supported by evidence of likeness in the diversity of life forms in the world, explained by descent with modification. She wrote that

our usual idea of corroboration as requiring the successful prediction of novel facts… Darwinian theory was not strong on temporally novel predictions. … however familiar the evidence and whatever role it played in the construction of the theory, it still confirms the theory.[28]

What links here

Created (2 years ago)

Stimming hotkey

How to stop visiting random websites and make ADHD work for you? Idea: create a Stimming hotkey.

It's a nonjudgmental hotkey you can press at any time. Put it on the F5 key or somewhere.

What it does: deliver you a distraction, without expectations on you. It can be called repeatedly if the current distraction does not appeal to you.

It could be:

  • a random flashcard (here is an use of in-Emacs flashcards)
  • a random item from your Elfeed (Atom/RSS feeds)
  • a random book or web excerpt (if you have an incremental reading system)
  • a random book
  • a random web bookmark

Note that it should be carefully designed to avoid punishing you for anything. So when you decline to do a flashcard, it does not count as a fail. When you decline to continue reading an elfeed item (but may want to read it later), it won't mark the item as read. If you've jumped to a book and for whatever reason scrolled up from your last SavePlace point, it'll just restore that SavePlace point.

An alternative: actually use Anki's Incremental Reading add-on, with the recognition that it's just for stimming and needs not be a complete collection of everything you wish to read. So Anki is always open on a separate desktop & showing the IR deck.

What links here

  • My problem with org-fc, org-noter
Created (2 years ago)

Cognitive reframings

The following INEFFECTIVE prompts/questions usually lead my mind to generate oceans of silence:

  • "Consider the implications."
  • "What do you think?"
  • "What did I do wrong?"
  • "Why is (s)he unhappy?"
  • …

By reframing the question, my mind can suddenly generate many answers.

EFFECTIVE REFRAMINGS:

  • "What did I do wrong?" -> "What would I do differently, if I move back in time and try again?"
  • "We don't have anything in common, what do I talk about with this friend?" -> "What if something has happened to him/her?" (this generates caring and then suddenly–)
  • "I need to write about this topic but my mind draws a blank" -> "OK, what if I zoom in on [some tiny detail of it], what can I say about that?"

Avoid causing harm with your inner chatter🔗

Bruce🔗

A story about harmful inner chatter: Stuck in the Middle with Bruce. I think that story's more to do with impostor syndrome, Calvinism or aliefs rooted in the Law of Jante, than with #adhd, but it's a hell of a perspective.

Come to think, the concept of Bruce could be responsible for what I call Midas prioritization, in which case it's a huge part of (your) ADHD.

What links here

Created (2 years ago)
Showing 429 to 432