I’m pretty certain I’m low oxytocin (a genetic test indicates a high probability of that in me which was sufficient confirmation for me that it’s likely confirmed) So while tribalism may be the norm, and I may well fall into tribal patterns, I may lack the kind of comrade sense that one is supposed to have apparently when among “one’s own”. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3029708/

I’m pretty certain I’m low oxytocin (a genetic test indicates a high probability of that in me which was sufficient confirmation for me that it’s likely confirmed)
So while tribalism may be the norm, and I may well fall into tribal patterns, I may lack the kind of comrade sense that one is supposed to have apparently when among “one’s own”.

 

Also, if the articles I’m reading about autism are correct (and I’m fairly certain I’m on the autistic spectrum), I am in a state of “constant mild surprise”, that is to say, I’m just as surprised to see socks in my drawer as I am to see a cabbage.
In short, a low-key “ready for anything” mode.
This also means that I’m less likely to have the kind of dramatic moral surprises (what I call pearl clutching) that many have over things. I may express the sentiments but they are conscious efforts of what I think are social norms, much as one says “Bless you” upon a sneeze.
What I believe/don’t believe isn’t relevant really.
I see what’s plausible and seems to fit for now. I’m always ready to update IF something better comes along. If nothing better comes along and it’s a fit, then it stays.
I don’t have strong beliefs about any of this. For me it’s in the realm of “seems reasonable”, which is also a perpetual state of mild skepticism but only rarely to the level of full “prove it to me” denial unless it’s too powerful / socially expedient in communication.
—-
I’m not a big fan of Bayes generally as I never could understand commingling belief/evidence stuff.
But if it is true that I am on the autistic spectrum, then of course I would not understand it as for me, belief revision is a continual, ongoing thing that never ends. I don’t get that solid certainty sense that regular people get.
 I don’t think I have a choice. That’s the thing. Recalibration is continual. It’s all noise and signal.
===
Occasionally I find a really good new generalization — and that’s rare. When I do, it’s like the floor is glass and I break through to a deeper level of understanding.
Floor’s never solid.
====
Once upon a time, I read a story that I wish I could find again, about a young student and master by the riverbank.
I don’t remember the details and I’m only ok at autobiography stories, rarely at other people’s stories.
But a student asked the master about achieving whatever state they seek and was told to sit by the river and be aware of the babbling of the water and the breeze through the trees.
The student did so for a night and a day and returned to the master. Student told master of everything he heard and experienced.
“Now return to the riverbank and stay until you are no longer there.”
====
oh wow there it is. Definitely in that book somewhere. Cool. Love being able to tie vague familiarity and recollections into artifacts.===
Oh this is perfect! Yes, I’ve been looking for a view that makes sense to me as I’m likely on the autistic spectrum but most accounts rarely make sense.
 
What I found today for that uses a hierarchical Bayesian was the first account that made sense. Yet, even in that view, conflicting opinions abound — and I still have a general distrust of Bayesian, particularly when it’s used in physics (as then it encapsulates the beliefs of the scientists, which is bothersome to me).
 
But this is even better so far. I’m enjoying the read.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


× seven = 63

Leave a Reply