How To Break Anything

Thoughts and insights on culture and human behavior, living blissfully at the intersection of rationality and irrationality (but mostly irrationality) 
Filed under

perception

 

"Your environment, no matter how good or no matter how bad, eventually becomes normal to you": acclimation vs normalization

I ran into this video the other day on I Luv Juice, caught by the environment quote captured in the title above.

It reminded me that once upon a time I was reflecting on acclimation, a thought that I find worth considering often:

"I find it important to remember that humans acclimate to everything.

This means that things we think are bad/painful/ridiculous become ok after enough exposure and time. It also means that the things we think are good/exciting/worthwhile become ok after enough exposure and time."

It's important to note that I'm talking about acclimation in that post, which is closely related but is not the same as normalization. Both are about perception, but acclimation is concerned with affinity while normalization is a bit more complex, concerned with one's perception of how the world should function.

When I talk about acclimation, I talk about how one's affinity for a new emotional state eventually shifts away from like/dislike with exposure; this is one's affinity for a new job, new city, recent breakup, or disliked food. In the post I help qualify with the statement "this is not to say that things stay that way; I'm talking about a relatively short timeline."

Perhaps author Bernard Benson captures part of this with the following thought:

"All we really want is otherness, tossing from side to side, greeting each toss with shouts of welcome, and contempt for the previous toss."

As you see in the video above, normalization is a different beast, and a bit more complicated. Normalization is concerned with one's expectations from their environment and the world, captured best with the intension (linguistically speaking - not 'intention') of the word 'should.' That is to say that normalization is the state of subconsciously assessing your environment as operating as it 'should.'

Normalization is entirely environmental, and helps explain why you have the beliefs, values, and worldview you do. It helps explain how others have developed those things as well. It helps explain why when those things clash between you and others, only by exposing each other to new environmental norms (either directly or cognitively) can your differences be resolved. I started exploring this once with the idea that the only cure is exposure.

On a more entrepreneurially inspiring note, it helps to see how Brian in the video above uses this understanding to change the lives of students in the disadvantaged environment of New Orleans' 9th Ward.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   experience   exposure   perception  

Comments [0]

What time travel might look like - perception, relativity, etc

A bit of abstract thinking out loud, since there's been a good amount of buzz on time travel floating around lately with Stephen Hawking's most recent comments.

The thing about time travel is that because we humans are naturally blinded to see things only from our own individual perspectives, I suspect our natural assumptions about distorting time are a bit backwards.

That is to say: we think about "time travel" as a phenomenon primarily concerned about how we would be seeing the world through time.

This phenomenon might better be described as the way the rest of the world sees us.

This isn't too profound on some level - special relativity and general relativity is precisely about the perception of others.

A way to clarify this is to think about the event horizon, which is the point in space at which light can no longer escape the gravity of a black hole. As a primer:

Special relativity illustrates that because 'time' is intrinsically interwoven with perception, that perception (particularly what we 'see' on a watch) will change at very high speeds and within high gravitational fields - as we approach the speed of light (either through our moving fast enough or it's moving slow enough thanks to gravity), the perception of what it 'shows' us changes completely. This is why time slows down at high speeds and in high gravitational fields, measured by the comparison of two watches that have moved through different conditions. 

One key point about relativity is that you don't notice this, others do. In fact, that's precisely why the term 'relativity' is used. 

Back to the event horizon: 

If you were able to observe someone moving towards a black hole, what you would be observing is the light reflecting off them. At some point - just past the event horizon - this light would never be able to escape the gravity of the black hole. At this point in the gravitational field, their watch would slow down to the point that it has actually stopped. The light that you perceive would be frozen. They of course would continue moving towards the black hole, and would perceive all the grisly experiences that come along with things like being ripped apart by gravity, but for you, they have been frozen in time. 

I'm wondering if this is what we will discover "time travel" to be: not our own individual selves moving through space-time, but the relative perception of the world moving around us.

In other words, when we "travel through time," we won't notice - others will. 

[img/meaningful metaphor via fernando]

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   perception   perspective   philosophy   time  

Comments [0]

Entrepreneurship IS art - thoughts on "This Is Clutch: Banksy dupes the art world"

Exit Through The Gift Shop is an excellent story, and I do recommend you watch it. I like this analysis, particularly the last paragraph below (though as in the title above I'd argue that entrepreneurship is art):

"At first I was pissed at Thierry for desecrating the art world, in fact I thought Banksy was too; but then I had an idea of what Mr. Brainwash was. He's not an artist, he's an entrepreneur. The film starts out with an anecdote explaining how he became successful selling vintage fashion. He found a profitable model for buying cheap clothes and marking them up 400%. It worked because people bought it. Well the same was true with his art; but then I thought, what if that was Banksy's plan from the start - after all he did get a lot of investors to spend their money on what has now been outed as superficial art."

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   culture   perception  

Comments [0]

re: persistence of 'identity' online: "In 20 Years No One Will Be Qualified to Be President"

Another  potential outcome is that we as a culture will learn to be more tolerant of what people do in their personal lives, especially as youth. Americans are plagued by an endearing notion of “Character”–that what we do in our personal lives speaks to our fitness for professional tasks. When complete lives are increasingly archived, we may need to step back from that ideal and let our leaders be human.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   identity   perception  

Comments [0]

When we finally figure out quantum mechanics, humanity will look back on the Newtonian era like we were a bunch of Neanderthals.

Classical diagram

Classical Physics
According to classical physics, an electron will pass through a potential barrier if it possesses enough kinetic energy to overcome the barrier.If it has less kinetic energy than the height of the potential barrier then it will be unable to pass through the barrier under any conditions.
Quantum tunnelling diagram
Quantum Mechanics

Quantum mechanics shows that electrons can be described as waves under certain conditions, and a finite probability exists of an electron tunnelling through a classically forbidden barrier due to its wavelike properties.When a wave meets a potential barrier, the wave does not instantly go to zero, but starts to decay exponentially within the potential barrier. If the wave has not reached zero by the time it has reached the other side of the barrier then there is a finite probability that it will be found on the other side of the barrier - the wave has effectively "tunnelled" through the non-conductive barrier.
"Principles of Quantum Tunnelling: Classical physics and Quantum mechanics" via QTC Science

 

(Which of course means our current perceptions of the world, down to their very fundamental assumptions - they're all so utterly silly.)

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   future   perception  

Comments [0]

"Everything Is Amazing And Nobody Is Happy"

This has always been the case, and will continue to be the case in the future. Today is not special.

(this is pretty much just a reiteration of my last post re "the future is scary." How appropriate.)

UPDATE: @linneamc passed along this clip that I got a good laugh out of. I'd ultimately say that we'll always be able to laugh at our ridiculous expectations; again, the present is no exception. 

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   future   happiness   perception  

Comments [2]

More insight on cultural externalities and the arbitrary nature of what is important to us

Conrad put together a good collection of examples here: The good old days of advertising

(the 'more' part refers to my earlier post re: Tim Stock's The Structure Of Trends)

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   culture   human insight   perception  

Comments [0]

I think the concept of things being 'ruined' is absurd.

Mostly because it's hard from me to think that the last x number of years of humanity [choose your own number, anywhere from 30-3000] have been an exercise in things getting worse. I mean, when did things first start to get 'ruined'??

Most people you ask this question, should they happen to be on the 'things need saving' side of the world, will give you a very predictable answer. Humanity stopped progressing usually when they were either in their early 20's, or when they were established in their careers.

Which I of course find laughably hilarious.

 

Who will save book publishing?

What will save the newspapers?

What means 'save'?

If by save you mean, "what will keep things just as they are?" then the answer is nothing will. It's over.

If by save you mean, "who will keep the jobs of the pressmen and the delivery guys and the squadrons of accountants and box makers and transshippers and bookstore buyers and assistant editors and coffee boys," then the answer is still nothing will. Not the Kindle, not the iPad, not an act of Congress.

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   doomsday   perception   time-orientation  

Comments [0]

"Derek Sivers: Weird, or just different?"

I love this for the perspective on how our fundamental assumptions can always be completely wrong.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   perception  

Comments [0]

My Blogroll: