4 ms·

It's a very interesting dynamic. Humanistic psychology focuses extensively on ideas of locus of control (Rotter) and self-actualization (Maslow). The perspectiv

It's a very interesting dynamic. Humanistic psychology focuses extensively on ideas of locus of control (Rotter) and self-actualization (Maslow). The perspective has its shortcomings, but I think it manages to hit on a point that many of the others either miss or place little emphasis on. People in general tend to underestimate just how significant that can be. For example, I've always found the argument that certain voters (commonly poor white working-class) who vote for small-government are voting against their own economic interests to be rather interesting from a psych perspective. I'm a libertarian so I don't put much faith in the idea, but I think that issue could be traced back to the concept of locus of control. Voting for larger social spending might benefit them financially, but it also means accepting the belief that control over their life is externalized. The alternative--that control is internalized or even just the perception that it's internalized--is likely more palatable psychologically as a core self-evaluation, with a more beneficial influence on other CSEs (neuroticism, generalized self-efficacy, and self-esteem). That leads to better life satisfaction, and can contribute to later economic success according to the research. Reality is a lot more nuanced than that, but perception is absolutely fundamental in terms of how it can affect personality.

karmelapple 11y ago
Interesting point. The idea of a meritocracy is pretty ingrained into the tech world, and that means control over life is internal, not external. But tech is not a meritocracy. [1] [2] Accepting that you have less control over your life may change some of your outcomes, but I doubt it would completely crush one's spirit. I've accepted that I'll never flap my arms unaided and fly like a bird. I'm not depressed because of that realization. It's a known limitation of my life, and I can live with it, and I won't spend my weekends practicing my flapping and running skills. It actually helps me focus on areas I can affect change... such as building a jetpack. Knowing which things are outside of your control should help you realize what is and is not within your ability to change, and then you can figure out how to make the most success given which variables are mutable or immutable. You mention research about one's perception can affect later economic success; I'd be very interested in a reference. [1] http://istechameritocracy.com http://istechameritocracy.com [2] http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2014/02/06/272646267/how-the-meritocracy-myth-affects-women-in-technology http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2014/02/06/272...
- Karunamon 11y ago
  But tech is not a meritocracy But it should be, and the issues laid out in your links detail failures to reach that ideal. We can do better. That does not mean we stop trying or abandon the ideal that you should be known for your works above all else.
  - karmelapple 11y ago
    Nor did I suggest to stop striving for the ideal. But just like any other institutional problem (racism, sexism, etc), it does no good to simply ignore it while it negatively impacts you. Instead, acknowledging your current situation, and working to make it better, is key.
- tomp 11y ago
  > But tech is not a meritocracy. Some people say it is, others say it isn't. Neither use a lot of data in their arguments.
  - magicalist 11y ago
    Some people say it is, until you ask them if tech interviewing is sane. We can't even find a tech interview process that correlates well with performance and that's just who we let in the door before they even get to rise up as their value merits. Then you add questions of if who is chosen for promotion is sane, if what products a company chooses to focus on is sane, if what products the market chooses to make popular is sane. None of those are optimal in the sense that the "best" thing wins out. Marketing (of a product or self-promotion) and being in the right place at the right time dominate each of those steps. So how on earth would you take that and get a meritocracy out the other end?
    - smm2000 11y ago
      1. I think tech interviews are sane and screen for very specific skills - ability to master topic (everyone asks the same algo questions - there is no excuse not to master them even if you do not use knowledge day to day. It's no different from learning any other domain), ability to perform under pressure and ability to feign enthusiasm (it really suck to work with smb who visibly hates his job). Lack of those skills make person less productive in corporate environment. There is some randomness but overall process works very well. 2. Being good at self-promotion is a merit. Some have it and some not. You could not define merit as just technical skills.
dv_dt 11y ago
It's ironic to me the reputation for American pragmatism when compared to attitudes in many areas, particularly in the area healthcare. For better theoretical independence from government, we suffer for reduced practical independence due to healthcare costs, and lack of sick leave & vacations, etc. While Europeans seem to have come to the opposite balance of concerns on independence.
was8309 11y ago
sorry for late response, but thanks for this. locus of control is always a false story we tell ourselves, right? let's ask the archetypal solitary mountain man about his ability to control his environment. You've identified for me two of the basic hustles of the usa's right wing : - providing the illusion of locus of control - disassociating people/society from nature - homesteader mauled by a bear = heroics! - getting mugged in the city = decadence thank you

karmelapple 11y ago

Interesting point. The idea of a meritocracy is pretty ingrained into the tech world, and that means control over life is internal, not external. But tech is not a meritocracy. [1] [2] Accepting that you have less control over your life may change some of your outcomes, but I doubt it would completely crush one's spirit. I've accepted that I'll never flap my arms unaided and fly like a bird. I'm not depressed because of that realization. It's a known limitation of my life, and I can live with it, and I won't spend my weekends practicing my flapping and running skills. It actually helps me focus on areas I can affect change... such as building a jetpack. Knowing which things are outside of your control should help you realize what is and is not within your ability to change, and then you can figure out how to make the most success given which variables are mutable or immutable. You mention research about one's perception can affect later economic success; I'd be very interested in a reference. [1] http://istechameritocracy.com http://istechameritocracy.com [2] http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2014/02/06/272646267/how-the-meritocracy-myth-affects-women-in-technology http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2014/02/06/272...

Karunamon 11y ago
But tech is not a meritocracy But it should be, and the issues laid out in your links detail failures to reach that ideal. We can do better. That does not mean we stop trying or abandon the ideal that you should be known for your works above all else.
- karmelapple 11y ago
  Nor did I suggest to stop striving for the ideal. But just like any other institutional problem (racism, sexism, etc), it does no good to simply ignore it while it negatively impacts you. Instead, acknowledging your current situation, and working to make it better, is key.
tomp 11y ago
> But tech is not a meritocracy. Some people say it is, others say it isn't. Neither use a lot of data in their arguments.
- magicalist 11y ago
  Some people say it is, until you ask them if tech interviewing is sane. We can't even find a tech interview process that correlates well with performance and that's just who we let in the door before they even get to rise up as their value merits. Then you add questions of if who is chosen for promotion is sane, if what products a company chooses to focus on is sane, if what products the market chooses to make popular is sane. None of those are optimal in the sense that the "best" thing wins out. Marketing (of a product or self-promotion) and being in the right place at the right time dominate each of those steps. So how on earth would you take that and get a meritocracy out the other end?
  - smm2000 11y ago
    1. I think tech interviews are sane and screen for very specific skills - ability to master topic (everyone asks the same algo questions - there is no excuse not to master them even if you do not use knowledge day to day. It's no different from learning any other domain), ability to perform under pressure and ability to feign enthusiasm (it really suck to work with smb who visibly hates his job). Lack of those skills make person less productive in corporate environment. There is some randomness but overall process works very well. 2. Being good at self-promotion is a merit. Some have it and some not. You could not define merit as just technical skills.

dv_dt 11y ago

It's ironic to me the reputation for American pragmatism when compared to attitudes in many areas, particularly in the area healthcare. For better theoretical independence from government, we suffer for reduced practical independence due to healthcare costs, and lack of sick leave & vacations, etc. While Europeans seem to have come to the opposite balance of concerns on independence.

was8309 11y ago

sorry for late response, but thanks for this. locus of control is always a false story we tell ourselves, right? let's ask the archetypal solitary mountain man about his ability to control his environment. You've identified for me two of the basic hustles of the usa's right wing : - providing the illusion of locus of control - disassociating people/society from nature - homesteader mauled by a bear = heroics! - getting mugged in the city = decadence thank you