Venting How we are not ourselves.

[Unbearable Mr. Bear]

I've been thinking lately: How much of me is me? The direct and obvious answer is "Well you are you, period.", but I've thinking about something more nuanced...

Ever since we're able to receive stimuli, our brain is constantly being written. While we do have some essential functions in the cerebellum, most higher thinking is done by our largely programmable brain. Of course, it is organic, but eventually, with enough stimuli, it starts making connections, and thus functions, and thus larger functions.

However, we are able to receive stimuli still inside the womb. Yes, our brains are very underdeveloped there, but they are very, very malleable. We can hear things outside the womb, to a limited degree. When we're born, however, we are positively bombarded by stimui: loud sounds, new tactile feelings, maybe even taste. To a lesser extent, this continues in our infancy: Our brains were practically an open-source project where EVERY commit was accepted, and of course, it made a mess, a big mess. A mess we're trying to sort out to this day.

So that's my theory. We are not ourselves, but rather the ones doing the constant unraveling of chaotic stimuli received early in our lives, to build something resembling adequacy. It's like we're fixing the code on our heads that was crammed by a million stimuli without care or reason. I don't mean this as a way to deny the individual, but rather to show that we're given a dump of messy code at our early life, and we have no choice but to do something about it, and some piles are just much bigger than others. Maybe our piles are just bigger, and that's why we struggle?

We have a lifetime of spaghetti code in front of us. Am I really surprised some just want to abandon this project?

 

[Forever Sleep]

I certainly think troubles/ trauma in childhood can deeply affect the way we develop. I'm sure certain things have the potential to dominate our whole lives. That's what really gets to me about child abuse.

I'm not sure though really- it depends what you consider to be 'you'. I feel more like we are changing all the time. Responding to our experiences. I don't think we necessarily need to be young for something to massively shift our personality.

Take a catastrophic event- like a spouse or child dying, being wrongly or rightly imprisoned, surviving a brutal rail crash. You can quite imagine how those events could deeply change a person emotionally and possibly, their views on life. Would they be a more familiar version of themselves- had those things not happened? Probably.

Really though- it depends how you define it. Is your personilty only about your genetics or, is it your genetics plus, all you've experienced thus far? I'd say, the latter.

I think we certainly make a lot of development in our early years- certainly. The brain's ability to learn is huge at that stage. So sure- if things go to shit then, I'm sure we are deeply impacted.

People do make changes throughout though. Phenomena like the midlife crisis. I think becoming parents changes people. We change during our reproductive cycles. All those hormones rushing about.

I guess the weirder sensation for people is when they feel they've changed and, they don't like the changes. We see it here- people can sometimes identify the point at which they made a choice maybe or, something happened that knocked them off course I suppose- is how they might see it. They wish they could go back and stay on track.

Maybe I interpreted it wrong but, it also sounded a bit like you were proposing that we were more 'whole' when we were young. The shock of stimuli coming into the world messed everything up and, we then grow up trying to put it back together again? It's an interesting idea.

I go more along the lines that we start off with a gentic blueprint for our brain. It likely already has more potential in some areas than others due to the genetics of our parents. It may even carry genetic predispositions to illness.

But- I see it more as a sponge- rather than something fully formed. With varying absorbancy/ potential to learn, orchestrate movement, talent in specific subjects etc. Then, whatever happens from then on to that 'sponge' brain dictates whether it makes use of its potential or not. That's more how I see it.

 

[Dejected 55]

The earlier the bad stuff happens to you, the more traumatic the results and the longer lasting the effects. I understand quite a bit at 55, but when something traumatic happens it still hurts. Imagine the trauma happening when you aren't old enough to understand... so much worse... and when those things knock you askew from your natural path, you don't even always know it or the extent of it even if you are more self-aware.

Not trauma per se... but I've long pointed out to people from studies I've read about human development... human babies are designed to learn at an amazing rate. Barring birth defects, you can't stop a baby from learning. They have to learn language and how to walk as they are growing and being bombarded with sensations they don't understand and have to build a context by which to understand. Then, young children absorb knowledge better than a sponge. You can't stop a young child from learning if you try. You can try and cut them off from information, but short of that, you can't stop them from learning anything that comes into their sphere and you really have to struggle to keep them from wanting to find new things to learn.

Then we put kids in school. Public or private, daycare or whatever... almost immediately school and other formal education turns a large percentage of kids off of learning. Nobody has really done any meaningful studies about this that I've seen... but the learning machines that we are designed to be, we have invented a social structure that discourages so many from jump. Then, of the kids who aren't turned off immediately, another large chunk is discouraged and life is made more difficult. Only a small group manages to emerge seemingly without being deterred from learning at the pace humans are designed to function.

Why? How? Who does this serve? Is it by design or by accident? Do we care at all to address it?

 

[Unbearable Mr. Bear]

The brain never stops learning, that is true, but I tried to do an analogy to fixing code that you didn't write. You CAN write code, but you have to make it fit with the code already in your brain, so you need to delve and untangle the stuff before adding. And in the end, it just feels like you're cleaning the mess of others.

I think genetics don't change the initial blank state, but rather the rate of absorption/change certain areas of the brain has throughout its life. As you said, some people have difficulty learning after a certain age or on certain topics, and it's not because of lack of effort, and some people learn fast enough to become prodigies, but only on very specific things.

I don't think the "Whole" thing is true. We are a blank state at first, but without stimuli, we keep being that. Better, worse...I don't know, maybe purer, but there is no way to shut off every single stimulus we get. In the end, something will write on our heads.

Perhaps we could diminish or choose the stimuli more carefully? For the person to be able to maintain and also add their own parts, instead of being bombarded and then having mental burnout? Maybe that's why modern society, how it overstimulates us, makes us more ill? Hmm...thanks for the insights, that made me think of things...and I usually don't, hahahah.

Then we put kids in school. Public or private, daycare or whatever... almost immediately school and other formal education turns a large percentage of kids off of learning. Nobody has really done any meaningful studies about this that I've seen... but the learning machines that we are designed to be, we have invented a social structure that discourages so many from jump. Then, of the kids who aren't turned off immediately, another large chunk is discouraged and life is made more difficult. Only a small group manages to emerge seemingly without being deterred from learning at the pace humans are designed to function.

Probably because we learn better by example and in a more freestyle manner. Too much structure atrophies our learning drive.

 

[Forever Sleep]

The brain never stops learning, that is true, but I tried to do an analogy to fixing code that you didn't write. You CAN write code, but you have to make it fit with the code already in your brain, so you need to delve and untangle the stuff before adding. And in the end, it just feels like you're cleaning the mess of others.

I think genetics don't change the initial blank state, but rather the rate of absorption/change certain areas of the brain has throughout its life. As you said, some people have difficulty learning after a certain age or on certain topics, and it's not because of lack of effort, and some people learn fast enough to become prodigies, but only on very specific things.

I don't think the "Whole" thing is true. We are a blank state at first, but without stimuli, we keep being that. Better, worse...I don't know, maybe purer, but there is no way to shut off every single stimulus we get. In the end, something will write on our heads.

Perhaps we could diminish or choose the stimuli more carefully? For the person to be able to maintain and also add their own parts, instead of being bombarded and then having mental burnout? Maybe that's why modern society, how it overstimulates us, makes us more ill? Hmm...thanks for the insights, that made me think of things...and I usually don't, hahahah.

Probably because we learn better by example and in a more freestyle manner. Too much structure atrophies our learning drive.

I definitely agree that damaging stuff, even incorrect stuff we learn early or, even as we're learning can become very hard to then fix- because it's become a habit pretty much.

I tried to get better at rowing at one point. I was watching videos on how to properly do a stroke. The proper posture, the proper motion. The 'tutor' said something interesting- changing the: 'practice makes perfect' to: 'practice makes permanent'. It's hard to then adjust either physical habits or mental habits we get stuck in.

I've even questioned how that relates to negative thinking and ideation. Am I in part having these thoughts because it's become habitual for my brain to go there?

That's also why I think it's so important in teaching to be encouraging. Obviously, some constructive criticism is necessary. But, not all students thrive under criticism. Some do of course- they fight to prove the tutor wrong but, it's crushing for some of us. I can still remember being humiliated by teachers 32 years ago! They made me terrified of a subject I now actually need from time to time.

Do you wonder about the education system itself? In my Dad's day, there were different types of schools. Grammar schools that focussed on more academic subjects and Technical schools, which focussed more on teaching someone trade and craft skills.

I think it's a tricky subject. On the one hand, it means a student can focus more on their strengths- right from the start. As it turns out, I doubt I've ever used what I learnt in German, Geography, Chemistry, Physics, I'm sure a lot of other subjects. Maybe that brain space could have been better served focussing on my strengths.

There again, boxing children in so early on can vastly limit what they are qualified to do. Plus, tutors get it wrong sometimes too- when they assess what they think we should pursue. Some are multitalented too and, unsure that stage what they want to pursue. I think it's actually safer to keep learning broad until we are a bit older and better capable of choosing ourselves.

Regarding information overload- definitely. I think that's impacted us all but I'm sure it will be affecting the younger generations. Even just media itself- we're so accustomed now to instant gratification. Wanting to watch or play something and in seconds, it's there.

But, we hop and skip between so many things now- who has the concentration or patience to sit through a whole film now even? Maybe, our narrow concentration span when it comes to media is affecting concentration in general.

How much of our fast paced lifestyles are influencing conditions like ADHD? Maybe it's just bias but, I don't remember so many behavioural problems in pupils when I was growing up. We had special needs students definitely- who needed more help with writing and maths. I don't remember kids being hyper or overly sexual or even violent that much or, to the same extent.

Even visiting a teacher once, I was horrified to see their class! It was like a pack of wild animals! Maybe we were like that and, I don't remember but, I think things are shifting. There definitely wasn't the level of serious violence there is now. Sorry- I've meandered off topic quite a bit there.

 

[Pluto]

 

[Unbearable Mr. Bear]

I definitely agree that damaging stuff, even incorrect stuff we learn early or, even as we're learning can become very hard to then fix- because it's become a habit pretty much.

I tried to get better at rowing at one point. I was watching videos on how to properly do a stroke. The proper posture, the proper motion. The 'tutor' said something interesting- changing the: 'practice makes perfect' to: 'practice makes permanent'. It's hard to then adjust either physical habits or mental habits we get stuck in.

I've even questioned how that relates to negative thinking and ideation. Am I in part having these thoughts because it's become habitual for my brain to go there?

That's also why I think it's so important in teaching to be encouraging. Obviously, some constructive criticism is necessary. But, not all students thrive under criticism. Some do of course- they fight to prove the tutor wrong but, it's crushing for some of us. I can still remember being humiliated by teachers 32 years ago! They made me terrified of a subject I now actually need from time to time.

Do you wonder about the education system itself? In my Dad's day, there were different types of schools. Grammar schools that focussed on more academic subjects and Technical schools, which focussed more on teaching someone trade and craft skills.

I think it's a tricky subject. On the one hand, it means a student can focus more on their strengths- right from the start. As it turns out, I doubt I've ever used what I learnt in German, Geography, Chemistry, Physics, I'm sure a lot of other subjects. Maybe that brain space could have been better served focussing on my strengths.

There again, boxing children in so early on can vastly limit what they are qualified to do. Plus, tutors get it wrong sometimes too- when they assess what they think we should pursue. Some are multitalented too and, unsure that stage what they want to pursue. I think it's actually safer to keep learning broad until we are a bit older and better capable of choosing ourselves.

Regarding information overload- definitely. I think that's impacted us all but I'm sure it will be affecting the younger generations. Even just media itself- we're so accustomed now to instant gratification. Wanting to watch or play something and in seconds, it's there.

But, we hop and skip between so many things now- who has the concentration or patience to sit through a whole film now even? Maybe, our narrow concentration span when it comes to media is affecting concentration in general.

How much of our fast paced lifestyles are influencing conditions like ADHD? Maybe it's just bias but, I don't remember so many behavioural problems in pupils when I was growing up. We had special needs students definitely- who needed more help with writing and maths. I don't remember kids being hyper or overly sexual or even violent that much or, to the same extent.

Even visiting a teacher once, I was horrified to see their class! It was like a pack of wild animals! Maybe we were like that and, I don't remember but, I think things are shifting. There definitely wasn't the level of serious violence there is now. Sorry- I've meandered off topic quite a bit there.

Oh, don't worry. Sometimes we get off topic cause our minds wander towards similar topics, and really, that also happens when learning: We tend to follow the connections already made inside our brain so we can easily access new information. That's why things like acronym learning and pairing concepts together work.

The education system simply did not change much in the last...millennium? Yeah, I think it's LOOOONG overdue for a rework, or at least a rethinking. Maybe "If it's not broken, don't fix it." applies here...but it is kinda broken...yeah hahahah. I think, instead of the school being a place where we learn subjects, it should be a place that encourages learning of all kinds. We are curious being by nature. A kid spots a piano: Oh, it makes sound, right keys sound higher than left, two keys together sound cool, and so on, and so forth, without any external help. Of course, after a while, they'll need to get to read, or watch, or have someone that knows about it help them, but the seeds are there, and they plant themselves!

Information overload is a problem, but at least adults can try and limit their intake. Children? They're sponges, and if we fill them too fast with things that are ephemeral, we get no room for anything else. But as you said, even adults can be affected, specially if they have some condition. I, for example, have Autism, which means I have hyperfocus from time to time on a special subject, so it can be beneficial because the internet has instant information about even obscure topics for me to peruse. That said, it also overloads me from time to time.

As for the wild class...uhm, I remember when I was a wee lad that classes were always wild at some point, but at least when the teacher said "yo shudup time to learn some shit" we actually sat down and, you know, tried to...well, most of us, anyway, hhahahahah!