Thursday, 11 April 2024 ------------------------ Hello. All is well. In the second chapter, we learn about the scientific method. This is a circular process with inductive and deductive reasoning. A theory is a set of ideas to explain a thing. A hypothesis is a falsifiable / testable prediction, usually an if-then statement, to test a theory. By collecting and analyzing data to test the hypothesis, we can confirm or modify our theory. We can form theories form inductive reasoning, generalizing observations, and test theories by deductive reasoning with testable hypotheses. This is generally more reliable than intuition and anecdotal experiences to collect objective, shared knowledge. I'd say you can only prove a theory false, and it's important to know the purpose of the knowledge. If it's for guiding your life in practice, knowledge obtained from a scientific process is not necessarily what is ideal or possible due to its systematic rigorous approach. From previous entry, the Big Five is a model that breaks down personality into five factors. As said, this model confuses me because I find my scoring for each factor depending on the social context. What is personality? What I gather is that it's referring to predisposition which makes more sense to me. While we may have predispositions genetically, I think a lot of our personality comes down to learned experience for survival. I think personality relates to masking. I realize everyone masks. Why I'm more aware of my masking is because it's not intuitive for me. My masking requires more conscious effort. I find my personality shifts dependent on my social status and how well I can predict in a given context. I'll use the definition for each factor from Wikipedia. Let's start with openness (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious). I find this dependent on the level of fear I have for my safety. Because of my inattentive nature, I guess you could say I score high, while learned experience to avoid rejection, makes me score low. Next is conscientiousness (efficient/organized vs. extravagant/careless). Here it's opposite, I'm naturally impulsive and careless, but from learned experience, mindfulness, stimulants, controlling my environment, I can score high. Next is extraversion (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved). This one is quite interesting. I think I score high by nature, but because of debilitation and antisocial tendencies, I score low by learned experience. I'm energized by my immature outgoing behavior, but because it quickly leads to antisocial behavior, requiring restraint, and together with sensory issues, I find myself drained, becoming reserved and seeking solitude. While running Minecraft servers, I would be a goof with players. Because of my position, they'd tolerate my behavior when I fool around. Because many players were younger than me, I felt less uncomfortable being childish. Interestingly, when I started taking stimulants, I felt as if a rapid maturation started, becoming more serious. While I did enjoy my time goofing around, I prefer the stability that comes with maturity. I also didn't want to be Peter Pan for the rest of my life, haha. Online, trying to find people like me, I found myself relating to people that have been diagnosed with ADHD and autism, known as AuDHD. I have only been assessed for ADHD to access stimulants, but I find myself having autistic traits. I'm generally skeptical of diagnosing disorders. For example, I believe anyone can get a diagnosis for ADHD if they'd like. I had two separate assessments done because I found the first on pathetic, and the second one was also a bit unsatisfactory but better. It seems possible to manipulate psychiatrists and psychologists, they're just people in the end, many not up to date with the DSM. Anyhow, from personal experiences, it feels like the two clash with each other, ADHD and autism. Taking stimulants, my autistic tendencies have become more pronounced. I've decided to distance myself from any online community. I don't want my thinking to be influenced, and I find a lot of people have become miserable or hateful. I don't find that odd, but I want to avoid becoming that myself. Next is agreeableness (friendly/compassionate vs. critical/judgmental). This one is hard for me to make sense of, but I believe my nature scores low, but I score high from learned experience. It's interesting because I find I take a practical approach to this. If I think social harmony is more important, I will be agreeable or nudge the person to agree with me or find a middle ground. If I'm having a meltdown (the case, majority of the time in school) due to overstimulation, I will just nod and smile to whatever, unless they become physical, then I turn unpredictably volatile and hostile. A lot of people will innocently tease. When I've had enough, I will unpredictably flip my script, grip them, usually shake 'em a bit till I see their facial expression or tone change. Not a perfect process as you can lose control for a moment. It's important to judge who is worth confronting. Some have no impulse control and may cause you irreparable damage. If I sense that, I'll flee, which I've fortunately only had to experience once as it's quite traumatizing. Even if you try to be prosocial, some are actively looking for trouble. In this instance, it was two people approaching me on the street, confronting me for allegedly calling them a racial slur when I hadn't even paid attention to them before this. Anyhow, in formal settings, e.g. school group assignments, I like having control. If I get too comfortable, I can become very critical, crossing the line to bullying, feeling ashamed and guilty after. I don't fear confrontation or peer pressure itself. If asked why I don't drink alcohol by peers, I'll unashamedly say it's because I'm boring, which many were dumbfounded by. Seen as boring is a big no no in that context. Sometimes I find it funny to make it awkward, like talking in a friendly tone with a peer who I saw littering about how I really dislike people that litter, sensing their uneasy reciprocal friendliness. Yes, I was very popular in school. Finally, neuroticism (sensitive/nervous vs. resilient/confident). I guess my nature scores high. Then again, I usually become less nervous in immediate chaos or danger compared to others. Without stimulants, I do my best work under high-pressure. For example, when someone was attacking my Minecraft server, where others panic, I enter a flow state and calmly deal with it. Funny story, I once got kicked out by a bare metal host (boldly advertising DDoS protection on their front page) because an attack on our machines impacted the whole data center. It's like if things are good I'm uneasy, but when things hit the fan I'm at ease. I'd say I'm highly sensitive but still highly resilient. I guess I risk long-term burnout, which is probably what I've been experiencing the past two years, but I don't think that would have happened if I didn't lose my story. As said, with a story, you can endure almost anything.