Kiera Clutterbuck
-
Posts
427 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Kiera Clutterbuck
-
-
18 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:
Just so I am clear, it is ok for us foreigners to the US to make fun of the stupidity of their politicians (republicans one at the least) but not their beauty pageant contestants?
Pet Peeve: People who don't take into account context in comparisons create invalid comparisons. An inability to comprehend context and a tendency to make invalid comparisons are not qualities a "free thinker" would embody.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:55 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
By creating a body in SL, dressing them up, and having experiences with that body in an environment, many begin to identify emotionally with their character and so emotionally experience their avatar similar (to a degree) to how they'd experience themselves in real life.
Mayyyyyyyyyyyybe it's because many of the avatars I create aren't human but...I've never really had this experience. I do express various complex emotions through them (primarily in photography), but I don't really feel much connection to the avatars themselves, outside of that.
I also feel somewhat shielded from the peeping eyeballs and derendering shenanigans due to that. But hey, maybe there's someone out there who's really that curious to see undead bits. Have at it.
Yeah could be having a human avatar would evoke more body identification and the feelings that can go along with it.
Could be having friends, especially romance, causes more identification.
Could be how some view SL as only a game with unreal characters, whereas some view it as a platform where real experiences are taking place.
Could be some are unable to feel anything is real unless there is a concrete physical presence like we have in real life.
Could be so many things I haven't thought of.-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:
Ignorance of the facts doesn't just stifle your ability to innovate, it hampers your ability to detect errors in the leaps that others make.
Paul Rulkens references the "lizard brain" in his "Strategic Failure" talk. Seth Godin does as well in "The Dip". The lizard brain theory of human brain evolution was debunked when I was a child, yet Rulkens and Godin still reference it. That might be a minor quibble, but it argues for taking care in crediting thinkers with being "free".
https://medicine.yale.edu/news/yale-medicine-magazine/article/a-theory-abandoned-but-still-compelling/
https://cos.northeastern.edu/news/its-time-to-correct-neuroscience-myths/I really liked the 2nd link leading to the neuroscientist Lisa Feldman Barrett I wasn't aware of. She does a great job dispelling common myths about the brain. I found a good video on YouTube where she goes into greater detail about the myth of the "lizard brain":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EybxFWtLlAw&t=2220sThis "lizard brain" myth has been used in court cases to mitigate sentences for men who murder their wives, as if some monster inside them ushered forth uncontrollably and did the damage. Interestingly, this myth has not worked so well for women when they try to mitigate their sentence for the same crime. I might believe there are biological factors which inhibit impulse control (for both men and women, and even to a greater degree with men regarding anger) but to base this on the "lizard brain" is outdated science.
Not to mention this "lizard brain" myth is such an insult to animals, as if they are simply imperfect sub-humans and not creatures defined on their own terms and in balance with their environment.
So yeah, the guy in the video isn't such a "free thinker" if he still believes in notions disproved 50 years ago, and this does make me wary of further notions he has about brain optimization. He presents an idea, as you say, that's been around a long while (that few think outside the box and we tend to operate on auto-pilot most of the time), but I wouldn't trust him to garner ideas for methods to think in more novel ways.
-
3
-
-
16 hours ago, Vanessa Amethyst said:
If its anyone who survives that situation you describe it will be people who live in rural areas with more immediate access to food civilization started with the plough and it will end with it as well the further you are from a farm the deeper your into a Technological trap. and most modern farmers would not make it unless they are amish
Good point. Technology does have us in a trap doesn't it. It's not our tool anymore, it's our master.
I can only imagine city folks trying to be farmers again. I'd laugh at the thought if I didn't realize the tragedy of it.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:
Why anyone would care about people seeing their naked avatar (pixels) is totally beyond me.
Personally it wouldn't bother me either other than being around someone who appears to have a very strange hobby of peering at avatar private parts. LOL But I remember when it would have bothered me during a time I was more focused on creating and identifying with my body.
By creating a body in SL, dressing them up, and having experiences with that body in an environment, many begin to identify emotionally with their character and so emotionally experience their avatar similar (to a degree) to how they'd experience themselves in real life. For example, it's much like we might cry when a character we identify with dies in a movie we're watching, or goes through pain. We know someone really didn't die or that their troubles aren't real, but because we know what this pain feels like like we cry as if we are that character.
SL really wouldn't be much fun for many if they didn't identify with their avatar in such a way, or identify with a home to the degree they might want privacy similar to what they need in real life, for example. Perhaps there are some who bring their emotions into SL more than others who remain more distant emotionally.
I wonder if I could create more identification again if I spent more time related to 'body things' instead of building items not related to avatar bodies.
-
1
-
2
-
-
18 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:
If you want to process you emotions about thread closures
-
1
-
1
-
-
The year is 2085, preparing for the final battle to be the last person standing from the bygone century.
-
1
-
-
Unfortunately I foresee a major culling of the Earth's population in the near future (20 years maybe?)as we run out of accessible oil needed to feed the billions who currently inhabit the planet.
Likely it would be those from previous decades who would survive further into this century, as some of those a bit older are more likely wealthy and so can insulate themselves (to a degree) from the coming disaster.But enjoy the beauty of life while you can, is my motto. Nobody ever said we'd get out of it alive anyway, so they say.
-
14 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:
By free thinker I mean in part, this:
The example you provided speaks to how an individual within a business can become more innovative. They claim 97% stay stuck and don't innovate while the 3% think outside the box and create successful novel approaches to problems.
In order to innovate and be in that 3% category one has to grasp the current state of knowledge though; one can't leap into something new if they have no idea what presently exists or is in the process of being discovered. This feature applies to both desirable changes in business and desired changes to society, and even to the changes we contemplate regarding AR's and how they should be used on the forum here.
To change, to innovate, necessitates perusing tons of tentatively settled discoveries, or the current theories in science painstakingly discovered by trained professionals. Yet time and again I witness a pooh-poohing of this established knowledge, labeling it "fake" with the belief it is part of some elite and nefarious conspiracy seeking only to gain control, and then a latching on to some cockamamie theory coming out of nowhere without any grounding, without any floor with which to leap from that is necessary for innovation.
I'll give you an example of myself as I contemplate a forum that could be better, one that I imagine might have less need for AR's if threads were allowed to drift into any old topic without being AR'ed. I may want this, I may see it as valuable to my interests and love of spontaneity, but I really have no grounding to insist my way is better because I don't know what happened in the past here which caused them to set these rules. My thoughts of innovation could very well create disaster if put into practice, as the amount of civility we do see on the forum results from a degree of control, and part of that control might be the partial on-topic enforcement occurring here.
In other words, there is established knowledge here I'm unaware of, just as there is established knowledge in the soft and hard sciences most are unaware of. I can't really innovate if I'm unaware of the facts with which to leap from anymore than one can be a part of that 3% the video speaks to unless there is a grounding in established knowledge. Otherwise the leap is just 'pie in the sky'.
-
1
-
-
-
2 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:
So, I wonder when we're going to get the next community page. It took what, a few months between the first and second?
My only suggestion would be they move the main community page link somewhere more noticeable. Unless it already is and I missed it somehow. I found it in the very bottom footer of the main homepage, which I dunno...if it's aimed at newbies, it might be easy for them to miss down there.
Is the 3rd community page going to be 'furry' for sure?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, blissfulbreeze said:2 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:Expand
THE INVENTION OF RACE
The concept of “race,” as we understand it today, evolved alongside the formation of the United States and was deeply connected with the evolution of two other terms, “white” and “slave.” The words “race,” “white,” and “slave” were all used by Europeans in the 1500s, and they brought these words with them to North America. However, the words did not have the meanings that they have today. Instead, the needs of the developing American society would transform those words’ meanings into new ideas.https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/historical-foundations-race
Correct. However, is it ok for a black person to use the term race? Back then or present? Either/or.
I get a sense it was not that you used the word 'race' that upset Silent, rather you mentioned someone who was prejudiced against a race. But you'll need to ask her.
Personally, I don't have a problem with anyone, no matter what color, using the word 'race', as it has come to denote something in modern times that, unfortunately, is false and means nothing. Clear as mud?
-
3 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:14 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
It was created in America by white people who wanted those they enslaved to be distinguishable so they could control them easier. That would be the black people they decided had something they called "race".
Oh Puleeze. White, black, yellow, red, green have known of other races for thousands of years and have had prejudices against other not like themselves just as long. When one overcomes prejudices against another race, the norm is to then find others to be prejudiced or bigoted towards. When you start to understand that the fear and anger directed at others is an actual addiction to the triggering of various chemicals (ie, endorphins, serotonin, adrenalin) within one's body, one starts to understand the true nature of the symptoms you rail against.
THE INVENTION OF RACE
The concept of “race,” as we understand it today, evolved alongside the formation of the United States and was deeply connected with the evolution of two other terms, “white” and “slave.” The words “race,” “white,” and “slave” were all used by Europeans in the 1500s, and they brought these words with them to North America. However, the words did not have the meanings that they have today. Instead, the needs of the developing American society would transform those words’ meanings into new ideas.https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/historical-foundations-race
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, blissfulbreeze said:5 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
It was created in America by white people who wanted those they enslaved to be distinguishable so they could control them easier. That would be the black people they decided had something they called "race".
Ok, so.. what if a black person used the word race? Does that mean that they are racist? What if a Spanish person used it, is that racist? Oh wait.. only if a white person says it. Gotcha.
I think this is an issue you're having with Silent, as she's the one who called you on this so you should ask her why.
I only cleared up your misconception of how the word 'race' came into being.
-
8 minutes ago, blissfulbreeze said:
Who made the definition of the word "Race"? Was it offensive back then? No. It was widely used.
It was created in America, the early colonies, by white people who wanted those they enslaved to be distinguishable so they could control them easier. That would be the black people they decided had something they called "race".
-
6 minutes ago, blissfulbreeze said:
It can be looked at in a way similar to how the human brain is prejudiced naturally based on past experiences... like Pit Bulls, they are looked at a lot in a negative way. If someone had one ore more negative past experiences with Pit Bulls, they probably will be cautious going forward. That is default human nature. Of course, there will be some that say.. "oh, I love Pit Bills even though I had bad past experiences". Good for you. Most people are not like you, but that does not mean I am invalidating your views. I am speaking of the majority, to make a point.
If someone has bad experiences with Florida, they may refrain from going there again. Again, default human nature prejudice.
If someone had bad experiences with a fast food place, they will probably refrain from going there again.
Should we be forced to keep going there just to not hurt their feelings?
Oh dear, I think I misread your original post I responded to.
But anyway, the topic of prejudice. It's quite complicated. I'd agree it's not easy to overcome, and I wouldn't advise trying to force someone to overcome it. However if somebody's prejudice harms another they should be confronted in the most gentle way possible.
BTW, I'm not sure it's human nature to be prejudiced, at least not in all things. Much prejudice is taught to us, and that's a good thing really because it means we can unteach it.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:
That's literally what Futa is.
Maybe there's a difference between fetishization vs simply being attracted to a certain type of body? I can't really explain it though.
-
1 minute ago, LittleMe Jewell said:9 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
I think we should give a little space for people to process their emotions from a thread that was shut down, as some people can be quite invested in a thread. It shouldn't go on too long though, or in a hostile manner.
Someone else's thread is not the place for you or anyone else to be processing your emotions on something that happened outside of that thread. If you want to process you emotions about thread closures, start up a thread for Emotions.
I'm sorry, LittleMe, but that seems pretty rigid. We aren't actually supposed to start a thread about a thread that closed, and so some go to the Peeve thread and usually just make a couple comments. I don't see the harm in such a minor event.
-
1
-
1
-
-
What I see: many threads go off-topic, sometimes for pages, and they are not reported.
Sometimes threads are closed, and the reason given is that they're "off-topic". I suspect someone just didn't like the topic it drifted into.
-
2
-
2
-
-
Just now, LittleMe Jewell said:3 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
I think we should give a little space for people to process their emotions from a thread that was shut down, as some people can be quite invested in a thread. It shouldn't go on too long though, or in a hostile manner.
Please tell me that is a joke.
Was going to type lots more. Made myself not do it.
If I told you it was a joke I would be lying, so I cannot tell you that.
-
5 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:
uses it as a way of talking about some topic that was very recently shut down in another thread.
I think we should give a little space for people to process their emotions from a thread that was shut down, as some people can be quite invested in a thread. It shouldn't go on too long though, or in a hostile manner.
-
1
-
2
-
-
I disagree with the inhibition of conversational drift too. The spontaneity inherent in threads that are allowed to morph on their own often makes them more interesting than a thread that sticks rigidly to a topic.
-
1
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
certain perspectives
Oh I feel it to, Miss Scylla. Its the woes of bein' a free spirit.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Paul Hexem said:1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
So, is every mention of moderation here "off topic" or, worse, a rule-breaking "criticism" of forum moderation?
Any system that can't handle analysis is a bad system, incuding a moderation one.
I don't know why, but I just want to say the word moderation a lot now.
-
1
-
3
-
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
To AR Is Human . . .
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Interesting book (Thinking Fast And Slow). And it's available for free if one is a a Prime member at Amazon.
Whenever I embark on a book I like to become more aware of what my current position is. I suspect he's going to emphasize the primacy of the slow thinking (conscious mind) over the fast thinking (intuition)? But I place more value in the intuitive process, or at the very least I think it should guide the conscious mind or be in the driver's seat.
But I haven't delved into it yet, so maybe he doesn't do what I'm imagining and at least emphasizes the value of the interplay between the two processes without choosing sides.