Plasmism - Get Shit Done

[caspex]

17 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

By the way, "properties" here would be "mechanisms" (or processes) in the causality language framework. For example, object A increases the temperature of object B through the mechanism/process of heat transduction. To infer causal relationships in science, you often have to point to a causal mechanism (a way that explains the causal relationship), or else you're simply stuck with correlation. That's essentially the problem of consciousness in the materialist framework (not the idealist one of course): how does neurons firing cause colors, sounds, tastes, to be experienced? If you can't point to a mechanism there (in a way that links the two phenomena in a satisfactory way; i.e. it must actually feel like it explains the relationship, or else you feel like the mechanism is incomplete and needs a second mechanism to explain it further), then you're stuck with a correlative relationship (i.e. when A increases, B increases).

Also, interesting how the definition of causality on Wikipedia actually contains the word "influence":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality

Hm. I was under the impression that 'Cause' denotes a factor that the effect is dependent upon while 'Influence' being a factor that may not be the sole determinant. Which is why I used the word Influence and not Cause.

I do think these things will be important in developing a framework for effectively engineering influences or predicting outcomes in the context of cognition and behavior and I am sure a lot of the specific research is already conducted in fields of psychology and such. However for now I am trying to thaw out the definitions, goals and philosophy of Plasmism.

Thing is Plasmism is something that unexpectedly popped into my head during Upasana as an insight and I am trying to thaw it out since then. I can see it but can't quite put it into words.

Until I can properly define what Plasmism really is I can't decide on whether it should be given a separate name instead of something like 'Determinism with a focus on personal development'.

I think it is worth it, at least personally, to see this through.

Edited 16 hours ago by caspex

[caspex]

2 hours ago, Stick said:

Can I join this religion?

If there's enough influence, you won't have a choice 

[Carl-Richard]

Just now, caspex said:

Hm. I was under the impression that 'Cause' denotes a factor that the effect is dependent upon while 'Influence' being a factor that may not be the sole determinant. Which is why I used the word Influence and not Cause.

Nope, it doesn't have to be a sole determinant. That would simply be a perfect 1-to-1 causal relationship (or a collinear correlation which is causal). Very few causal relationships are like that. In the heat transduction example, it's often the case that the heat is tranduced from (and to) other objects as well not currently under consideration.

[caspex]

Just now, Carl-Richard said:

Nope, it doesn't have to be a sole determinant. That would simply be a perfect 1-to-1 causal relationship (or a collinear correlation which is causal). Very few causal relationships are like that. In the heat transduction example, it's often the case that the heat is tranduced from (and to) other objects as well not currently under consideration.

Aside from the Wikipedia article, can you tell me any good resources to learn more about causality?

[Carl-Richard]

13 minutes ago, caspex said:

Aside from the Wikipedia article, can you tell me any good resources to learn more about causality?

I'm simply going by what I remember from my statistics courses in psychology (and Bernardo Kastrup talking about it as a side note in various videos). So essentially a statistics book (maybe specifically inferential statistics). They go through the bare minimum of concepts like causality vs correlation (and related concepts like mediation, moderation, perhaps less relevant in this case).

Edited 15 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[UnbornTao]

Is thinking about doing something, or talking about it, the same activity as doing it?

The action is what shows that intention was present.

Oftentimes we confuse desiring something with having intended to carry it out.

[Wilhelm44]

12 hours ago, caspex said:

 

Not really. Realigning your values is only a part of it. If you do that you are helping yourself out by modifying your internal influences (more motivation, finding more meaning in the work, etc.). 

Plasmism is wider in that where it accepts the fact that external influences play a major role in shaping your actions as well. 

The goal with Plasmism, at least for personal development, is to create a system of influences in one's life that pushes one towards their goals. I am not suggesting complete effortlessness but what I am suggesting should be the difference between success and failure.
In my experience this is what successful people do naturally anyways. They either are lucky enough to have those influences or build those influences themselves. 

What I have noticed in people, regarding internal influences, who are considered 'Great' throughout history is this: There are two cases, they are either born with certain influences already active within or develop them in childhood/later in life. 

I heard Professor Jiang once say that Ivy League universities require you to write an essay not really to judge your character but to judge whether you have any underlying trauma that can push you towards success, ultimately benefiting the university having you as their alumini. (His point is more nuanced than just this statement but I paraphrase.)
This makes sense from the perspective of Plasmism. If you developed a compulsion towards achievement and perfectionism, due to your poor upbringing, you are more likely to attain success given the opportunity than somebody who is satisfied in themselves and their conditions. After all, you have this 24/7 internal influence within you influencing you constantly to achieve or be perfect. 

Now I am not suggesting developing trauma within, internal influences and internal strength can be built in healthier ways. I was thinking of a new term for this called 'Internal Anchors'. Internal Influences like perfectionism that pervade most aspects of your life. 

I haven't really defined what I mean by external or internal influences yet as I am still working on it so it would be foolish to talk extensively on the topic just yet.
Also, it's important to note that you'd need supporting influences to even be successful at getting really clear on your values and whys. 

Aha, yeah and the external influences can be quite subtle. Simply putting on different clothes already brings change. I heard of a woman who's depression lifted simply after removing an old item from her home that was linked to a bad breakup.

[HopefulMan]

@caspex thank you for the detailed answer. I'm feeling quite lazy right now, but I will read it a couple more times and think about it.

Great stuff. Do you have social media or just create content here? 

[caspex]

13 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Is thinking about doing something, or talking about it, the same activity as doing it?

The action is what shows that intention was present.

Oftentimes we confuse desiring something with having intended to carry it out.

What causes a desire to convert into an intention?

Edited 2 hours ago by caspex

[caspex]

59 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Aha, yeah and the external influences can be quite subtle. Simply putting on different clothes already brings change. I heard of a woman who's depression lifted simply after removing an old item from her home that was linked to a bad breakup.

That makes sense. If you could link me a source for this that'd be great. I am collecting examples.

[caspex]

19 minutes ago, HopefulMan said:

@caspex thank you for the detailed answer. I'm feeling quite lazy right now, but I will read it a couple more times and think about it.

Great stuff. Do you have social media or just create content here? 

Nothing else.

[UnbornTao]

2 hours ago, caspex said:

What causes a desire to convert into an intention?

I would'’t necessarily view it as a progression from desire to intention. What defines intention is whether it gets carried out. Desire is merely imagining something, and by itself, it doesn't require anything to be actualized. It's mentally wishing for something.

Actually, it is you who causes it - by making real whatever you "tell yourself" you're going to do.

Edited 29 minutes ago by UnbornTao

[Wilhelm44]

18 minutes ago, caspex said:

That makes sense. If you could link me a source for this that'd be great. I am collecting examples.

I worked with a neuroscience coach, Dax Moy, he was a paratrooper in British special forces, then took up neuroscience for his PTSD. Its NLP type stuff with a lot of emphasis on how different environments influence us, and by how making small tweaks to our environment can have big effects.