In Australia, the main solar access comes from the sun’s path in the north. When people talk about orientation, they generally mean how your house – and especially living spaces – are orientated with regard to true or ‘solar’ north. All references to north in Your Home are to solar north, not magnetic north.
I'm assuming then that this would be the south in the northern hemisphere.
However, types are not so much the definition of something as they are a framework for how we organize and communicate about the world by identifying patterns and shared characteristics.
How we label something isn't what it is, but a way of interpreting what it given what we know collectively. This object may be entirely different to another group of people. Unfortunately how to label things and concepts within our languages are affected by our worldview at the time and are the basic elements that last with us as a culture. We can change them, but since they are frameworks for our entire worldview. We have to unlearn them before when can even imagine something else.
Thus, RHs are just as bound to avoid medical terminology as other herbalists. Additionally, state licenses for non-physician health care providers such as midwives, acupuncturists, and naturopaths also have their limitations, which must be honored.
RH - Registered Herbalist. A credential not a license. Remember that.
Many, many herbalists—whether by vocation, avocation, or circumstance—teach in some capacity during their careers.
A few good ideas for this would be SkillShare or teachable.
Most people lived in an enforced state of pluralisticignorance, in which everyone assumed that everyone elsesupported the state.
This is an interesting concept and seems like one that would unfortunately work quite well for controling the masses.
Plato leaves many of his dialogues open – often generating a sense of confusion in the discussants, who have been presented with a series of puzzling questions.
Plato identified a problem and set the person on the path to realizing their errors. He also left the answer open ended so to speak because it was up to the individual to seek out the answer in accordance with their own morality etc.
Now, beyond a realisation that the characters in the dialogue do not know what they thought they knew, how does this kind of inquiry improve its participants? Perhaps it leads to humility and greater hesitation in unjust action (such as prosecuting Socrates, or one’s own father).
The problem with assuming that the admittance of not knowing is the answer is... that it relinquishes responsibilty. When the person admits they don't know, they are essentially taking the easy road out. Instead of admitting that they don't know and seeking an answer out.
Use the scientific method and develop a hypothesis for what's causing the unexpected behavior. Then test your hypothesis. Try again, and if a solution still eludes you, put the problem aside and come back to it later.
A bit like decision journals. Perhaps a template would be useful?
Snapchat, an app that — like Facebook a decade before — billed itself as the pro-privacy alternative to the status quo
Companies that say they are pro-privacy today won't always be and when they are no longer pro-privacy, they will still have all your information long after you leave.
Then came a fabulist named Robert Bork,
Robert Bork did for monopolies what chemists did for synthetic/toxic chemical corps.He was the person who sewed doubt about anti-monopoly laws and gave monopolists the loop hole they needed to take advantage of the laws to do what they wanted.
Crucially, Apple’s use of copyright locks gives it the power to make editorial decisions about which apps you may and may not install on your own device. Apple has used this power to reject dictionaries for containing obscene words; to limit political speech, especially from apps that make sensitive political commentary such as an app that notifies you every time a U.S. drone kills someone somewhere in the world; and to object to a game that commented on the Israel-Palestine conflict.
If your phone can limit what words you know and use, what news you have access to etc. based on corporate policy, do you really have freedom of speech? This reminds me of the time I read that TinyLetter was censoring writers who mentioned 'bitcoin' and sent out letters with a banned words list.
psychological manipulation tactics like “negging” — offering unsolicited negative feedback to women to lower their self-esteem and prick their interest.
What kind of bullshit is this?!?! 0_0
monopolistic domination deprives your target of an escape route.
Google, Facebook, etc. The bigger the monopoly, the less choices for leaving are available and the stronger their grip on you is. Think of Google being synonymous with email, meetings, calendar, phones via android, and even affordable computers. ... For those who cannot afford to leave the system or give extensive amounts of time to leaving it, there is no other option but to be a dataset.
But even if you wanted to advertise your Nazi movement on a billboard or prime-time TV or the sports section, you would struggle to find anyone willing to sell you the space for your ad partly because they disagree with your views and partly because they fear censure (boycott, reputational damage, etc.) from other people who disagree with your views.Targeted ads solve this problem: On the internet, every ad unit can be different for every person, meaning that you can buy ads that are only shown to people who appear to be Nazis and not to people who hate Nazis. When there’s spillover — when someone who hates racism is shown a racist recruiting ad — there is some fallout; the platform or publication might get an angry public or private denunciation. But the nature of the risk assumed by an online ad buyer is different than the risks to a traditional publisher or billboard owner who might want to run a Nazi ad.
It's more cost effective to exploit the tendency's of people, their view points and reinforces them with targeted messages than it is to put a bunch of money into something that would cause derision and financial fallout from people who find the message intolerable.
One example of how monopolism aids in persuasion is through dominance: Google makes editorial decisions about its algorithms that determine the sort order of the responses to our queries. If a cabal of fraudsters have set out to trick the world into thinking that the Brooklyn Bridge is 5,800 feet long, and if Google gives a high search rank to this group in response to queries like “How long is the Brooklyn Bridge?” then the first eight or 10 screens’ worth of Google results could be wrong. And since most people don’t go beyond the first couple of results — let alone the first page of results — Google’s choice means that many people will be deceived.
This is a really interesting point and one that certain groups can afford to do for example, other monopolists, governments etc.
Zuboff argues that “surveillance capitalism” is a unique creature of the tech industry and that it is unlike any other abusive commercial practice in history, one that is “constituted by unexpected and often illegible mechanisms of extraction, commodification, and control that effectively exile persons from their own behavior while producing new markets of behavioral prediction and modification. Surveillance capitalism challenges democratic norms and departs in key ways from the centuries-long evolution of market capitalism.
Zuboff seems to be saying that surveillance capitalism isn't like other industries because the ways it extracts information, control, and sale our of information is caused via unconscious manipulation that allows them to control us through prediction and modification creating a closed loop system that challenges democracy through it's control of our minds, thoughts, and information. Hm....
Zuboff goes on to call this a 'rogue capitalism' as if normal capitalism wasn't a flawed system in and of itself. ... However, both operate on the foundations of infinite expanse through finite means. Whether the finite is how much information a person generates or how many trees a planet is capable of growing.
There’s a critical piece missing from the debate, though. All these solutions assume that tech companies are a fixture, that their dominance over the internet is a permanent fact.
In reference to big tech and policy allowing for hyper surveillance of speech etc.
once an industry is monopolized, everyone qualified to understand and regulate it probably came from one of the dominant companies.
This reminds me a bit of what happened with chemists pre-industrial revolutions when they all started coming from the upper classes and promoted corporations and toxins on the people because it was profitable to them. Closed loop profit systems at the expense of the many.
Accidentally and deliberately, monopolies create all kinds of malignant outcomes. If the company that has a monopoly on search starts serving wrong answers, people will believe them – not because of mind control, but because of dominance.
This is true because we have blind faith in companies that tell us they are good or useful to us. Even if they have a monopoly on information. This means when they decides to throw in propaganda etc. We do not notice it for what it is. We don't question it. We don't look for a source. This is like what Facebook does with it's algorithm. ...
A classic example of social proof occurred in the Arizona Petrified Forest. The theft of unusual petrified wood by visitors was becoming a serious issue, depleting the ancient woodland. Staff put up a sign stating: ‘Many past visitors have removed the petrified wood from the park, destroying the natural state of the Petrified Forest.’ This was intended to deter theft, but it had the opposite effect.
What others are doing no matter how terrible can be justified under the effect of social proof. The mind is essentially highjacked.
At the more consequential end of the spectrum, we rely on social proof to inform moral choices- whether to assist an inebriated football enthusiast who falls on the sidewalk or step forward as a whistleblower.
This reminds me of the case in New York where a woman was being stabbed and about 40 people heard her cries for help but no one did anything about it. Social proof caused moral and emotional calcification (Apathy).
It was the murder of Kitty Genovese. Here's a link: Murder of Kitty Genovese
An active attitude means ownership. You own your failures. An active mindset means you are responsible for things you control.
You need to actively recognize when something you've done has failed, when you were caught unprepared, slipped up, or weren't careful. Especially so because these were bad or flawed decisions. Keep a records of these and make note on why it didn't work and how you should change your behavior in the future.
When the language you use about things going on in your life is passive, you slowly convince yourself that nothing is your responsibility.
Toxic mindset. You need to always know what you have control over, what your options are, and actively seek better circumstances for yourself and others.
The passive mindset is defined by an attitude, an assumption that life happens to you and you’re not responsible. People with this mindset also say things like, “Why does this always happen to me?”
Some things are within our control, we can plan for the future but we cannot control it, we can plan for bad things to happen but they might not, we can seek out knowledge and possibly get an advantage later in life. Some things are more guaranteed than others but... Without actively seeking out better circumstances or preparing for the worst, we never get better, we never buffer the harm. It is better to be prepared for what might happen than to give into fate and accept whatever may come. Preparation has an opportunity cost though and it's higher on the chronically ill, disabled, poor, etc.
When you’re in a distracted state, new information can’t fix itself in your mind, and you end up with gaps in your understanding.
ADHD means that you are always in a state of distraction or hyperfocus. Plan accordingly, know when you will be able to focus and when you won't. Make things interesting. Have fun. Shift or mix up your study methods when your hyperfocus is waning, play a game, listen to a podcast, do your goldlists at this time etc.
Another reason we’re bad at learning is that the modern world erodes our attention spans by training us to be in a constant state of distraction.
You need time to do the lesson, read the book etc. Time to form ideas about it, time to form questions, time to research the answers, and time to review it at a later date.
One reason why we’re bad at learning is that we bring a lot of baggage to it—baggage we often pick up early in life and then struggle to let go of later. If you can let go of assumptions about what you should do, you can learn much more effectively. One major piece of baggage we accrue is the belief that if we’re not visibly active, we’re not learning. This is incorrect. Learning requires time to reflect. It requires discussing what you’ve learned and letting your mind wander. You need to let go of trying to look smart, and focus instead on trying to be smart.
Perhaps this is why the goldlist method works for learning languages but only when you are actively working on that language. If you let your learning slip, the goldlists are useless because you are not actively reinforcing your learning.
Our minds revise history to preserve our view of ourselves.
A decision journal allows us to remain objective about our decision making processes, our reasoning, etc. It allows us to weigh risk, make better decisions, and know the times when we shouldn't be making decisions at all...
So we see that Darwin’s great success, by his own analysis, owed to his ability to see, note, and learn from objections to his cherished thoughts.
Don't just see this flaws, the exceptions, write them down, learn from them, learn why they are what they are.
Charlie Munger: He paid special attention to collecting facts which did not agree with his prior conceptions. He called this a golden rule.
Always be unbiased in your research and knowledge gathering, look for the flaws, look for the exception. Never assume you know everything on a specific topic.
Because in learning geology Darwin ground a conceptual lens — a device for bringing into focus and clarifying the problems to which he turned his attention. When his attention shifted to problems beyond geology, the lens remained and Darwin used it in exploring new problems.
Once a concept was learned, it was applied and tested in other subjects (thus forming constructs) an interconnectedness between ideas, theories, etc. Once one thing was learned, it could be applied, edited, tested, added to, etc. Creating an interconnected web of knowledge referenced and experimented upon in his commonplace notebooks.
These were further data in Darwin’s mental model of the accumulation of gradual changes, but more importantly, displayed his attention to detail.
Darwin's mental model was to form 'constructs' to connect everything no matter how minute, in order to understand.
Over the years he collected an enormous quantity of interconnected facts. He looked for patterns but was intrigued equally by exceptions to the patterns, and exceptions to the exceptions. He tested his ideas against complicated groups of organisms with complicated stories, such as the barnacles, the orchids, the social insects, the primroses, and the hominids.
Darwin used intense focus of subjects along with forming constructs between concepts and studying the exceptions to establish rules. It was about learning the topic in it's entirety with all it's variations.
By encouraging us to think in terms of ecosystems rather than political systems, comparisons of endangered languages to endangered species obscure the simple realization that language death is anything but a natural phenomenon. It is, on the contrary, a profoundly social phenomenon
Languages die because the politics surrounding their continued existence like the people that use it are considered less than human unless they adapt and throw away their languages, cultures, and religions. Language death occurs because a lack of humanity. Language death occurs because of colonization. They also die when they become outdated due to assimilation, cultural destruction, global warming, displaced etc.
After the collapse of Sargon's state, Lagash again thrived under its independent kings (ensis), Ur-Baba and Gudea, and had extensive commercial communications with distant realms
The Statue of Gudea was most likely commissioned after the collapse of Sargon's state. Gudea was after the Akkadians took over Lagash and Sumer as a whole.
Control of feral cats and foxes will be critical.
When animals have survived the fires their struggle isn't over. They have to deal with injuries, dehydration, starvation, and predation.
As he argued his piece, he explained that the language we use to describe the natural world shapes our worldview and reinforces it, encoding values that are subconsciously triggered when we speak, read or listen to our peers.
Language like place encodes knowledge. Language was how we learned about place through stories and mythologies.
For Robinson, this knowledge of a place is tantamount to working to preserve it.
Without knowledge of place we cannot begin to preserve it. Knowledge of place allows us to understand what's missing, what we have lost, and if it's better to help reverse the damage we have caused over the centuries or leave it be to rest and transform. Nature doesn't need us, we need nature.
If Wilding is a book about taking solace in the environment by looking into the future, Tim Robinson’s Listening to the Wind offers a kind of peace by revisiting a region’s past.
Optimism in the face of uncertainty promotes the best in nature writing during the Anthropocene.