Carl-Richard

I like how absolutely nobody takes the only advice that makes logical sense.

Golden oldie

I think Sv3rige content should be banned from this forum.

An unexpected terminal illness diagnosis is much more emotionally destabilizing than the stable progression towards old age.

I think there should be a law somewhere that says a sudden diagnosis of terminal illness should make a president unfit for office. We gotta update how government works along with modern, context-aware scientific frameworks like the biopsychosocial model.

Makes little sense.

I guess I think all this talk about genetics and no mentioning of actually genes or alleles should be pointed out. In my ideal autistic world, you should use "biological inheritance" instead. It's of course not a big deal though ?

Ok if you don't want to go that far, still the thing is that this conversation does not penetrate deeper than "genetics" as a blanket term for things that you cannot control. There are really no specifics (at least so far), because that would require science, which is most likely non-existent on this issue.

I think this genetics debate is really just about how much hope/doubt you have that you yourself will be enlightened one day (it's just a proxy for self-efficacy). Without any statistically rigorous empirical data, it's mostly just speculation muddled by bias.

Did he doubt it?

I think a better method is to find the limitations of the metaphor (aspects of it that are very concrete and make it more likely to not work): For example: Sex is... 1. an extreme (emotionally etc.) 2. mainly physical or sensory. 3. vulgar or offensive. In line with those points (and some of yours), sex could be a good metaphor for when communication has an extremely emotional impact, in a way that one is also physically moved (e.g. heart rate, bodily euphoria/dysphoria etc.), and in a way that is somehow vulgar or offensive, like a mindfuck (rape) or a mindblowing insight (orgasm). I think my initial reaction was mostly based on the feeling of lack of emotional resonance between the metaphor and the things described. It just felt wrong to me.

Metacognition.

I am, because I found it distasteful when it was given that much effort

The longer you draw out a metaphor, the less useful it becomes. It can also just be a bad metaphor. Let me demonstrate: Teaching is like taking a shit. You let out something deep inside, and people stare at it with disgust or fascination.

So all teachers fuck their students? Sex is an extreme, like a mindfuck. Using it to describe everything is a bit blunt.

BMI > MBTI

Ah it's an automatic thing. I'll turn it off.

"Changing gene expression" is equivalent with "changing behavior", so it's a redundant distinction.

I think I've met at least one person with BPD in my life (btw I'm not trying to paint all people with BPD under one brush). I heard this story from a friend. One time, one of his friends made a joke in bad taste, then he snapped and told him to leave his house. The three other friends and his gf who were there ended up leaving the house, the gf was crying, and afterwards, he sent messages to his gf with pictures of him cutting himself and threatening to kill himself if she didn't come back.

@Oeaohoo I just got into Dixie Dregs, and the fast stuff in this song (e.g. 2:16 and onwards) is pretty much the type of stuff I'm imagining, kinda like for reference, but it's still not it ?

Oh god, I would probably be better off trying to "sing" it, record it and play it by ear. I can't transcribe for shit ? Hahaha when he runs into that guy at the end and he doesn't give a shit ?

Omg it makes sense ? Yeah, but one problem with mechanistic practice is that it's easy to fall into "easy solutions" (licks, scale runs etc.), exactly because you've practiced them. I guess the way out is to either practice only very rundamentary movements or practice an impossibly huge variety of things to a point where things start to melt into each other. That said, the type of shit I'm able to imagine is pretty inhuman from a technical standpoint, not in terms of "computational density" (as Zappa once said), but simply sheer originality. I think it's generally not compatible with the mandatory constraints of learning an instrument and the prototypical modes of learning (licks etc.) that one has to internalize, at least in the beginning, and that always stick with you to some extent. For example, you can virtually always identify a blues-inspired line or a jazz-inspired line. That has to boil down to technique at some point. Even purely self-taught players will have to emulate music they've heard before, unless they're raised in a black box. Well, I should say that I can easily sit back and relax and appreciate all kinds of music, stripping away different conceptual layers, expectations etc. It's really only when I compare it to that inner perfectionism that I sometimes tap into that I feel that tension, which nowadays is not often (it was much worse before). Sometimes I just need something catchy and groovy like Tool. I really like I.O.U. in that it's generally more accessible, same with Wardenclyffe Tower.

?

@thisintegrated Self-help > intellectual > spiritual.