3 ms·
I've always thought that choosing good experiences is always important even if passive, because our intuitions are always undergoing tuning and calibration.
by marmaduke 10y ago
I've always thought that choosing good experiences is always important even if passive, because our intuitions are always undergoing tuning and calibration.
- DenisM 10y agoCan you expand on that? I feel like you're onto something, but I don't want to put words in your mouth. So what is the story with calibration?
- marmaduke 10y agoI see intuition as something which integrates over hundreds of experiences, weighted by emotion. Arguably, our intuition adapts to our experience to improve our prediction of outcomes, so that, given some situation, we can quickly understand what's going on, and situate ourselves. For the sake of example, if you binge watch TV series about terrorist situations (e.g. 24), you may be calibrating your intuition in terms of survival, bombs, torture etc. As a result, you may be less inclined to reflect thoughtfully, e.g. on whether to buy food which is organic or not, rather buy bas ed on whether it's produced in a country associated with terrorism or whatever. That could be a totes bulls hit example, but my point and theory is that our intuitions are built from millions of tiny moments where we observe cause-effect, hypothesis-experiment-result etc. The conséquence is that we can strive to improve or cultivate our intuition, by avoiding passive consumption of prepackaged reality like TV and actively interact with real world (however you determine what that is). I suspect there are a number of ways to support this view, from psychological, behavioral and neuroscience literature, but then I'd be guilty of exactly the thought process the posted article seeks to deride. Nevertheless my degree was in these subjects, so I doubt these ideas are original or unfounded.