5 ms·
This isn't news to me, but I like having a handy little article that I can send to people to point to and say "See? It's not just me. Science."
by ruminasean 10y ago
This isn't news to me, but I like having a handy little article that I can send to people to point to and say "See? It's not just me. Science."
- cel1ne 10y agoThere's a book you might want to recommend: "The emotional life of your brain" by Richard Davidson. Written by a neuroscientist, it gives a thorough, scientifically tested framework for classifying traits of personality and changing them.
- hive_mind 10y agoNice reco. Which contemplative exercise do you find most useful?
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y agoI feel compelled to link to this[1] bit of writing by Yudkowsky. Science! It's not a real explanation, so much as a curiosity-stopper. You don't actually know anything more than you knew before I said the magic word. But you turn away, satisfied that nothing unusual is going on. 1. http://lesswrong.com/lw/j3/science_as_curiositystopper/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/j3/science_as_curiositystopper/
- evincarofautumn 10y agoI think it’s more along the lines of “I have changed my personality before, so it’s obvious to me that it can be done; however, it may not be obvious to others without some evidence that it’s a recognised phenomenon”. In that case, “Science!” is intended not to sate curiosity, but to dispel doubt—and maybe then even pique curiosity.