8 ms·

Helplessness is not learned (2022)

145 points by robtherobber 3y ago

mo_42 3y ago
I very much appreciate this article as it explains how science advances. I read the book by Seligman and highly recommend it also to people outside the field. On the other hand it seems like the author needs to justify that science can be wrong and needs refinements. It’s very tedious. I remember during my PhD that I had to put these disclaimers on top too. I would expect that this is implicitly clear especially in an academic context.
- Sakos 3y ago
  A large part of the world doesn't understand this about academic papers or science in general. I don't see how this is clear at all.
PoignardAzur 3y ago
tl;dr Helplessness is the default, what the brain learns is control, examples of "learned helplessness" are actually the brain "unlearning" control. Honestly doesn't seem like a very meaningful distinction to me.
- coastermug 3y ago
  I could see it being useful in helping people in these situations. Teaching someone to have control, as opposed to “unlearning” their helplessness (which presumably if default, can’t be done).
- gjadi 3y ago
  My understanding is that "learned helplessness" is not "unlearned control" but "not-learned control". Someone who can't read isn't someone who forgot how to, but someone who never learned how to. I think it's helpful because that means that everyone has to learn control. As opposed to just a few people who would need to learn it to fight their helplessness. So, maybe something that should be taught at school?
  - im3w1l 3y ago
    Reading is something you learn but many behaviors are done instinctively or intuitively.
  - darkerside 3y ago
    Imagine every book you picked up were nonsense, but you were forced to "read" them, over and over every day. Over time, your brain might stop parsing the letters and words because it has learned that there is no semantic reason in them anymore, to the point that you might read a meaningful work and no longer be able to understand it. That is learned helplessness.
    - gjadi 3y ago
      I don't understand what you're trying to say. The article says that there is no such thing as "learned helplessness". To match what the article says, I can turn your example into: when you don't know how to read, reading means nothing. One has to learn to read in order to make sense of the words. You do not learn to ignore words by reading without knowing how to ("learned helplessness"), you learn to read words.
      - technothrasher 3y ago
        It's not about having to learn to read. The example the parent poster was making was you already know how to read, but one day find that every book you pick up is filled with nonsense rather than real words. Eventually to stop bothering to try to read anything. That's what they were describing as 'learned helplessness'. The new paper seems to just re-word it as 'learned loss of control'. I don't see the huge difference. Just because the default state on most things is helplessness doesn't mean you cannot learn to fall back into helplessness again. But if the new wording helps with constructing treatment plans for mental health issues, sounds fine enough to me.
        darkerside 3y ago
        Yes, this is well stated. I understand why people write articles thqt lead with a provocative statement, but I think it's important for us all to read between those lines.
- tgaj 3y ago
  "unlearning" or even "never learned" I think the distinction is important when trying to fix that. Learning new skill is something different then trying to unlearn something. You probably need to use other methods.
- hgsgm 3y ago
  Both the original research and the reversal are a typical case of a narrow scientific truth being misused to paint broad strokes.
- hgsgm 3y ago
  As long as you can go back and forth between the too, both are relevant.
Errancer 3y ago
This article seems to relay on the idea that by default we can take no action and therefore we don't acquire helplessness as it is the default. But it doesn't seem to make sense? The norm is that we make actions all the time and agency is expected. When one loses their agency then we are talking about learned helplessness. If we want to say "Oh, in fact those people did not learn helplessness since there is nothing like this to learn, it is more accurate to say that they find their circumstances so dire that all actions seem to them unreasonable effort as it won't allow them to change those circumstances." then I guess that true but it seems trivial. It is like saying that if you are so depressed that you don't eat then it is not depression but a default state since you need a reason to eat and you just fail to have that reason. Which is like, the point? We expect healthy people to take care of themselves and if they feel like there is no reason for them to do so then they are not back to some natural state which is fine. So I feel like there is no big discovery here. It is just terminological adjustment so that we can avoid possible misinterpretations plus some new fact from the neuroscience which doesn't change anything about our psychological understanding. So yea, the big fanfare about "debunking" and how the science progresses are out of place. This is a one paragraph news without citation.
- Gare 3y ago
  > The norm is that we make actions all the time and agency is expected. Agency about things we percieve we can control. There are vastly many more things which are out of our control, or require gargantuan effort to change, or would be extremely risky.
  - Errancer 3y ago
    I don't think I understand how your comment relate to what I wrote.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  > So yea, the big fanfare about "debunking" and how the science progresses are out of place. This is a one paragraph news without citation. Wait, what?! This post is summarizing and then (past the sponsor blurb) literally citing the paper on this. Not just any paper, but one by the same authors who first created the theory of "learned helplessness" - and one in which they conclude they initially got the mechanism backwards. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920136/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920136/
im3w1l 3y ago
I can't agree with this. Maybe they disproved a particular version of learned helplessness, regarding this dorsal raphe nucleus, but it seems clear that that is not the end of the story. People and animals clearly learn to stop doing actions that have harmful consequences.
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  > People and animals clearly learn to stop doing actions that have harmful consequences. But that's not at all what learned helplessness is. On the contrary, learned helplessness is defined by the absence of proactive action that could remove a painful stimulus.
  - im3w1l 3y ago
    Well during the "learning" phase, they have harmful consequences. Or at the very least they are ineffective. Thats why you learn not to do them.
mjburgess 3y ago
I'm not sure why there's a few negative comments here. The dialectic the article sets up is clear: Prior: People acquire helplessness through reinforced external negative stimuli (dysphoric) Author: No, it isnt the presence of negative stimuli, but the absence of internal positive (control-promoting) This makes all the difference for understanding how to treat the issue; as well as how to communicate it. Let me give an example from my own life this morning. For quite awhile I've been leaving things in random places where they aren't tidy (prone to breaking, etc.). This morning, for the first time in awhile, I made the extra effort to move something to a better place. On the first model, and an intuitive one, it was the effort to pick up the items that was the negative stimuli. So the treatment is: learn to enjoy tidying, etc. Rather, I actually experienced the opposite, and I sort of realised it at the time. This week I began resetting all my schedules, alarms; started reorganising my day. And it's no coincidence that this tidying-act followed; as have many since i've done this. The heart of the change was actually just putting 4 alarms on my phone. So what has happened? I havent learnt to enjoy anything more. Rather, I've started rehabituating my self of control -- by even trivial changes, I am strengthening that sense. The items of my apartment more clearly appear as objects that I can control, rather than a chaotic environment that's beyond control. This I think is incredibly important in how we frame advice in these cases. If you have some "learned helplessness", don't focus on the tasks over which you're helpless. Do something quite radically different: practice taking small steps of control, which require minimal effort -- and so on.
- the_third_wave 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - krkartikay 3y ago
    That is not the first rule in the book. Although yes Jordan Peterson might say something like that. Just to get the facts clear: the first rule in his book states “Stand straight with your shoulders back.” which he discusses both in its literal (biological) meaning and the metaphorical meaning.
    - 3y ago
hkon 3y ago
So what you learn is passivity or apathy. Not sure if this brings us forward, but good to know.
- tgaj 3y ago
  No, that's the gist of the whole article. Some people do not learn how to control their life and I would say that's the important diference. You have to try to learn this new skill not to unlearn "helplessness".
  - hkon 3y ago
    It was this part that led me to think that. "And it’s only in situations where we think that investment of resources is worthwhile that part of our prefrontal cortex tells the dorsal raphe nucleus to chill and let us do something about it. In this context, it’s not helplessness that is learned, but control." The worthwhileness can be both positively and negatively reinforced externally. I have seen this numerous times when working in various teams. Not sure it is what applies here.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  This is a scientific article, not a self-help blog.
  - hkon 3y ago
    And what are you?
    - avgcorrection 3y ago
      I’m glad you asked. I’m part of the Average Correction (2032 YC) incubator which gives you microdoses of corrections to your lifestyle, allowing you to gradually (backed by science) converge on the optimal lifestyle (happiness, health, meaning). We do this by programming your brain with subliminal messages using our proprietary fork of ChatGPT which we call LifeGPT (patent pending; trademark disputed). Please follow us on YouTube, LinkedIn, Instagram TikTok Omegl FaceBook, Whatsapp, all under the same nick: avgcorrectionlifest4yle2032
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
darkerside 3y ago
When you can't escape suffering, you learn to cope with it in your mind instead of by escaping the stimulus. This allows you to adapt to a new normal and take what actions you can, optimizing for what you can control. I see an interesting parallel with mindfulness here.
- nyanpasu64 3y ago
  Isn't the right solution to {chronic pain, trauma and broken self-worth, inability to afford safe housing} to escape the internal/external situations incompatible with a fulfilling life, rather than to optimize for a "new normal" devoid of safety and a healthy environment? The problem arises when finding a better state is unattainable with the mental and financial resources available.
  - darkerside 3y ago
    The Buddha might tell us that all life is suffering, and we all need some level of mindfulness just to get through the day. Some pain is escapable and some is not, and what is healthy is more situational than most people realize.
- uoaei 3y ago
  Stoicism is the practice of vigilance in order to partition the world into things over which you have control vs no control. The goal is to shift your engagement with the world to only account for, but not fret over, the latter, while you spend your attention and time on the former.
LukeB42 3y ago
Everything in an organism is learned. If you think it isn't then you're not observing the right timescale.
- kayodelycaon 3y ago
  Read the article. They got the mechanism of “learned helplessness” wrong. It’s actually a “learned lack of control”. This makes every difference in how to treat people who have this problem. All you have to do is teach people how to feel they have control again.
kayodelycaon 3y ago
This makes perfect sense to me. I used to suffer severely from “learned helplessness”. I’d spent my entire life dealing with undiagnosed bipolar. Once I learned my mental issues had a name and could be coped with, it shook me out of that “helplessness”. Knowing what you have power over lets you focus on the things you can control.
- hgsgm 3y ago
  "A diagnosis" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uic_3vlI5BE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uic_3vlI5BE
jccalhoun 3y ago
I guess I've misinterpreted the meaning of "learned helplessness." I've always thought it meant that the person had learned that it was easier to get someone else to do it instead of doing it themselves by feigning helplessness. I guess feigned helplessness is a better term for what I was thinking of?
- kayodelycaon 3y ago
  Yeah, that’s unwillingness to do something they know they can do/learn if they wanted to. They aren’t helpless. Actual helplessness has an element of fear or lack of control. The person thinks they aren’t able to do something. Essentially, they’ve given up because they don’t feel any of their actions have control over the outcome.
- ouid 3y ago
  [dead]
- fknorangesite 3y ago
  > the person had learned that it was easier to get someone else to do it instead of doing it themselves by feigning helplessness. What you're describing is usually referred to as "weaponized incompetence."
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
staunton 3y ago
A the imho proper and useful concept of "learned helplessness" refers to a situation where someone learns that appearing helpless and asking others for help is the success strategy for achieving any goal. In an environment where this is true, most people will quickly learn this. The situation where this is bad is when a person learns this unconsciously and really believe themselves to be helpless, their learning immediately ruling out even the thought of solving any problems themselves. There is no reason why both negative and positive stimuli couldn't contribute to such learning. If you reward children every time they ask for help, or punish them every time they try something themselves, or both, there is a big chance they learn helplessness to some degree.
- the_af 3y ago
  But this is not what it's meant by "learned helplessness". You are describing an unrelated phenomenon. Learned helplessness has nothing to do with feigning helplessness to get what you want; it's instead about giving up and accepting a harmful situation that is perceived as unavoidable.
  - ransackdev 3y ago
    > it's instead about giving up and accepting a harmful situation that is perceived as unavoidable So we could clear up the confusion about what "learned helplessness" means by instead calling it, "hopelessness", or "despair"? Interestingly enough, the definitions of hopelessness and despair are circular references to each other: hopelessness | ˈhōpləsnəs | noun a feeling or state of despair; lack of hope despair | dəˈsper | noun the complete loss or absence of hope Huh, weird
lo_zamoyski 3y ago
Consider a human child. We are born objectively helpless. Over time, we develop bodily strength and (ideally) learn correct ways of relating to reality. This is effectively rooted in humility, which is not false modesty as we commonly seem to think, but a habit or disposition of assimilating the truth and conforming ourselves to it. (The opposing vice is pride which is a rebellion against truths that we don't like; the result is alienation from reality and delusion and, therefore, objective helplessness.) Conformity with the truth is a prerequisite of prudence (the ability to be able to discern our true good in any given situation), which is a prerequisite of justice (constancy of will in giving everyone their due), which is a prerequisite of fortitude (the ability to remain steadfast in the pursuit of the good in the face of fear), which is a prerequisite of temperance (the moderation of desire in light of our nature and thus objective good). The point? That we need to learn and acquire virtue to attain self-mastery which is true freedom. (Note the "self". It is not about controlling or dominating others.) There is no one so helpless as someone who is a slave to his passions.
kitanata 3y ago
There is one place where Learned Helplessness is super prevalent due to loss of control: The behavioral treatment of autism in children. Applied Behavioral Analysis uses operant conditioning theory and techniques used to coerce behavior and compliance in autistic children. It turns out though, that this “therapy” results in Learned Helplessness and PTSD/cPTSD in 46% of autistic people who later seek further therapy for trauma resulting from the practice. Autistic people see ABA as torture and abuse. Help me end it. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1__cTL6OryHG5Hr6vwl_sOmKuGpjco5k9b1SjVwyXZe8/edit https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1__cTL6OryHG5Hr6vwl_s...
snapplebobapple 3y ago
Thats kind of interesting when you think of it in the context of big government or monopoly or union monopsony vs individual agency of free markets. Just believing that the market is free gives you the sense of control to act on your ideas vs the alternative of perceiving you have no control because union, or government, or marxism, etc. Causes the failure we have seen in those systems.

145 points by robtherobber 3y ago

I very much appreciate this article as it explains how science advances. I read the book by Seligman and highly recommend it also to people outside the field. On the other hand it seems like the author needs to justify that science can be wrong and needs refinements. It’s very tedious. I remember during my PhD that I had to put these disclaimers on top too. I would expect that this is implicitly clear especially in an academic context.

Sakos 3y ago
A large part of the world doesn't understand this about academic papers or science in general. I don't see how this is clear at all.

PoignardAzur 3y ago

tl;dr Helplessness is the default, what the brain learns is control, examples of "learned helplessness" are actually the brain "unlearning" control. Honestly doesn't seem like a very meaningful distinction to me.

coastermug 3y ago
I could see it being useful in helping people in these situations. Teaching someone to have control, as opposed to “unlearning” their helplessness (which presumably if default, can’t be done).
gjadi 3y ago
My understanding is that "learned helplessness" is not "unlearned control" but "not-learned control". Someone who can't read isn't someone who forgot how to, but someone who never learned how to. I think it's helpful because that means that everyone has to learn control. As opposed to just a few people who would need to learn it to fight their helplessness. So, maybe something that should be taught at school?
- im3w1l 3y ago
  Reading is something you learn but many behaviors are done instinctively or intuitively.
- darkerside 3y ago
  Imagine every book you picked up were nonsense, but you were forced to "read" them, over and over every day. Over time, your brain might stop parsing the letters and words because it has learned that there is no semantic reason in them anymore, to the point that you might read a meaningful work and no longer be able to understand it. That is learned helplessness.
  - gjadi 3y ago
    I don't understand what you're trying to say. The article says that there is no such thing as "learned helplessness". To match what the article says, I can turn your example into: when you don't know how to read, reading means nothing. One has to learn to read in order to make sense of the words. You do not learn to ignore words by reading without knowing how to ("learned helplessness"), you learn to read words.
    - technothrasher 3y ago
      It's not about having to learn to read. The example the parent poster was making was you already know how to read, but one day find that every book you pick up is filled with nonsense rather than real words. Eventually to stop bothering to try to read anything. That's what they were describing as 'learned helplessness'. The new paper seems to just re-word it as 'learned loss of control'. I don't see the huge difference. Just because the default state on most things is helplessness doesn't mean you cannot learn to fall back into helplessness again. But if the new wording helps with constructing treatment plans for mental health issues, sounds fine enough to me.
      - darkerside 3y ago
        Yes, this is well stated. I understand why people write articles thqt lead with a provocative statement, but I think it's important for us all to read between those lines.
tgaj 3y ago
"unlearning" or even "never learned" I think the distinction is important when trying to fix that. Learning new skill is something different then trying to unlearn something. You probably need to use other methods.
hgsgm 3y ago
Both the original research and the reversal are a typical case of a narrow scientific truth being misused to paint broad strokes.
hgsgm 3y ago
As long as you can go back and forth between the too, both are relevant.

Errancer 3y ago

This article seems to relay on the idea that by default we can take no action and therefore we don't acquire helplessness as it is the default. But it doesn't seem to make sense? The norm is that we make actions all the time and agency is expected. When one loses their agency then we are talking about learned helplessness. If we want to say "Oh, in fact those people did not learn helplessness since there is nothing like this to learn, it is more accurate to say that they find their circumstances so dire that all actions seem to them unreasonable effort as it won't allow them to change those circumstances." then I guess that true but it seems trivial. It is like saying that if you are so depressed that you don't eat then it is not depression but a default state since you need a reason to eat and you just fail to have that reason. Which is like, the point? We expect healthy people to take care of themselves and if they feel like there is no reason for them to do so then they are not back to some natural state which is fine. So I feel like there is no big discovery here. It is just terminological adjustment so that we can avoid possible misinterpretations plus some new fact from the neuroscience which doesn't change anything about our psychological understanding. So yea, the big fanfare about "debunking" and how the science progresses are out of place. This is a one paragraph news without citation.

Gare 3y ago
> The norm is that we make actions all the time and agency is expected. Agency about things we percieve we can control. There are vastly many more things which are out of our control, or require gargantuan effort to change, or would be extremely risky.
- Errancer 3y ago
  I don't think I understand how your comment relate to what I wrote.
TeMPOraL 3y ago
> So yea, the big fanfare about "debunking" and how the science progresses are out of place. This is a one paragraph news without citation. Wait, what?! This post is summarizing and then (past the sponsor blurb) literally citing the paper on this. Not just any paper, but one by the same authors who first created the theory of "learned helplessness" - and one in which they conclude they initially got the mechanism backwards. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920136/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920136/

im3w1l 3y ago

I can't agree with this. Maybe they disproved a particular version of learned helplessness, regarding this dorsal raphe nucleus, but it seems clear that that is not the end of the story. People and animals clearly learn to stop doing actions that have harmful consequences.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> People and animals clearly learn to stop doing actions that have harmful consequences. But that's not at all what learned helplessness is. On the contrary, learned helplessness is defined by the absence of proactive action that could remove a painful stimulus.
- im3w1l 3y ago
  Well during the "learning" phase, they have harmful consequences. Or at the very least they are ineffective. Thats why you learn not to do them.

mjburgess 3y ago

I'm not sure why there's a few negative comments here. The dialectic the article sets up is clear: Prior: People acquire helplessness through reinforced external negative stimuli (dysphoric) Author: No, it isnt the presence of negative stimuli, but the absence of internal positive (control-promoting) This makes all the difference for understanding how to treat the issue; as well as how to communicate it. Let me give an example from my own life this morning. For quite awhile I've been leaving things in random places where they aren't tidy (prone to breaking, etc.). This morning, for the first time in awhile, I made the extra effort to move something to a better place. On the first model, and an intuitive one, it was the effort to pick up the items that was the negative stimuli. So the treatment is: learn to enjoy tidying, etc. Rather, I actually experienced the opposite, and I sort of realised it at the time. This week I began resetting all my schedules, alarms; started reorganising my day. And it's no coincidence that this tidying-act followed; as have many since i've done this. The heart of the change was actually just putting 4 alarms on my phone. So what has happened? I havent learnt to enjoy anything more. Rather, I've started rehabituating my self of control -- by even trivial changes, I am strengthening that sense. The items of my apartment more clearly appear as objects that I can control, rather than a chaotic environment that's beyond control. This I think is incredibly important in how we frame advice in these cases. If you have some "learned helplessness", don't focus on the tasks over which you're helpless. Do something quite radically different: practice taking small steps of control, which require minimal effort -- and so on.

the_third_wave 3y ago
[flagged]
- krkartikay 3y ago
  That is not the first rule in the book. Although yes Jordan Peterson might say something like that. Just to get the facts clear: the first rule in his book states “Stand straight with your shoulders back.” which he discusses both in its literal (biological) meaning and the metaphorical meaning.
  - 3y ago

hkon 3y ago

So what you learn is passivity or apathy. Not sure if this brings us forward, but good to know.

tgaj 3y ago
No, that's the gist of the whole article. Some people do not learn how to control their life and I would say that's the important diference. You have to try to learn this new skill not to unlearn "helplessness".
- hkon 3y ago
  It was this part that led me to think that. "And it’s only in situations where we think that investment of resources is worthwhile that part of our prefrontal cortex tells the dorsal raphe nucleus to chill and let us do something about it. In this context, it’s not helplessness that is learned, but control." The worthwhileness can be both positively and negatively reinforced externally. I have seen this numerous times when working in various teams. Not sure it is what applies here.
avgcorrection 3y ago
This is a scientific article, not a self-help blog.
- hkon 3y ago
  And what are you?
  - avgcorrection 3y ago
    I’m glad you asked. I’m part of the Average Correction (2032 YC) incubator which gives you microdoses of corrections to your lifestyle, allowing you to gradually (backed by science) converge on the optimal lifestyle (happiness, health, meaning). We do this by programming your brain with subliminal messages using our proprietary fork of ChatGPT which we call LifeGPT (patent pending; trademark disputed). Please follow us on YouTube, LinkedIn, Instagram TikTok Omegl FaceBook, Whatsapp, all under the same nick: avgcorrectionlifest4yle2032

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

darkerside 3y ago

When you can't escape suffering, you learn to cope with it in your mind instead of by escaping the stimulus. This allows you to adapt to a new normal and take what actions you can, optimizing for what you can control. I see an interesting parallel with mindfulness here.

nyanpasu64 3y ago
Isn't the right solution to {chronic pain, trauma and broken self-worth, inability to afford safe housing} to escape the internal/external situations incompatible with a fulfilling life, rather than to optimize for a "new normal" devoid of safety and a healthy environment? The problem arises when finding a better state is unattainable with the mental and financial resources available.
- darkerside 3y ago
  The Buddha might tell us that all life is suffering, and we all need some level of mindfulness just to get through the day. Some pain is escapable and some is not, and what is healthy is more situational than most people realize.
uoaei 3y ago
Stoicism is the practice of vigilance in order to partition the world into things over which you have control vs no control. The goal is to shift your engagement with the world to only account for, but not fret over, the latter, while you spend your attention and time on the former.

LukeB42 3y ago

Everything in an organism is learned. If you think it isn't then you're not observing the right timescale.

kayodelycaon 3y ago
Read the article. They got the mechanism of “learned helplessness” wrong. It’s actually a “learned lack of control”. This makes every difference in how to treat people who have this problem. All you have to do is teach people how to feel they have control again.

kayodelycaon 3y ago

This makes perfect sense to me. I used to suffer severely from “learned helplessness”. I’d spent my entire life dealing with undiagnosed bipolar. Once I learned my mental issues had a name and could be coped with, it shook me out of that “helplessness”. Knowing what you have power over lets you focus on the things you can control.

hgsgm 3y ago
"A diagnosis" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uic_3vlI5BE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uic_3vlI5BE

jccalhoun 3y ago

I guess I've misinterpreted the meaning of "learned helplessness." I've always thought it meant that the person had learned that it was easier to get someone else to do it instead of doing it themselves by feigning helplessness. I guess feigned helplessness is a better term for what I was thinking of?

kayodelycaon 3y ago
Yeah, that’s unwillingness to do something they know they can do/learn if they wanted to. They aren’t helpless. Actual helplessness has an element of fear or lack of control. The person thinks they aren’t able to do something. Essentially, they’ve given up because they don’t feel any of their actions have control over the outcome.
ouid 3y ago
[dead]
fknorangesite 3y ago
> the person had learned that it was easier to get someone else to do it instead of doing it themselves by feigning helplessness. What you're describing is usually referred to as "weaponized incompetence."
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

staunton 3y ago

A the imho proper and useful concept of "learned helplessness" refers to a situation where someone learns that appearing helpless and asking others for help is the success strategy for achieving any goal. In an environment where this is true, most people will quickly learn this. The situation where this is bad is when a person learns this unconsciously and really believe themselves to be helpless, their learning immediately ruling out even the thought of solving any problems themselves. There is no reason why both negative and positive stimuli couldn't contribute to such learning. If you reward children every time they ask for help, or punish them every time they try something themselves, or both, there is a big chance they learn helplessness to some degree.

the_af 3y ago
But this is not what it's meant by "learned helplessness". You are describing an unrelated phenomenon. Learned helplessness has nothing to do with feigning helplessness to get what you want; it's instead about giving up and accepting a harmful situation that is perceived as unavoidable.
- ransackdev 3y ago
  > it's instead about giving up and accepting a harmful situation that is perceived as unavoidable So we could clear up the confusion about what "learned helplessness" means by instead calling it, "hopelessness", or "despair"? Interestingly enough, the definitions of hopelessness and despair are circular references to each other: hopelessness | ˈhōpləsnəs | noun a feeling or state of despair; lack of hope despair | dəˈsper | noun the complete loss or absence of hope Huh, weird

lo_zamoyski 3y ago

Consider a human child. We are born objectively helpless. Over time, we develop bodily strength and (ideally) learn correct ways of relating to reality. This is effectively rooted in humility, which is not false modesty as we commonly seem to think, but a habit or disposition of assimilating the truth and conforming ourselves to it. (The opposing vice is pride which is a rebellion against truths that we don't like; the result is alienation from reality and delusion and, therefore, objective helplessness.) Conformity with the truth is a prerequisite of prudence (the ability to be able to discern our true good in any given situation), which is a prerequisite of justice (constancy of will in giving everyone their due), which is a prerequisite of fortitude (the ability to remain steadfast in the pursuit of the good in the face of fear), which is a prerequisite of temperance (the moderation of desire in light of our nature and thus objective good). The point? That we need to learn and acquire virtue to attain self-mastery which is true freedom. (Note the "self". It is not about controlling or dominating others.) There is no one so helpless as someone who is a slave to his passions.

kitanata 3y ago

There is one place where Learned Helplessness is super prevalent due to loss of control: The behavioral treatment of autism in children. Applied Behavioral Analysis uses operant conditioning theory and techniques used to coerce behavior and compliance in autistic children. It turns out though, that this “therapy” results in Learned Helplessness and PTSD/cPTSD in 46% of autistic people who later seek further therapy for trauma resulting from the practice. Autistic people see ABA as torture and abuse. Help me end it. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1__cTL6OryHG5Hr6vwl_sOmKuGpjco5k9b1SjVwyXZe8/edit https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1__cTL6OryHG5Hr6vwl_s...

snapplebobapple 3y ago

Thats kind of interesting when you think of it in the context of big government or monopoly or union monopsony vs individual agency of free markets. Just believing that the market is free gives you the sense of control to act on your ideas vs the alternative of perceiving you have no control because union, or government, or marxism, etc. Causes the failure we have seen in those systems.