I must add that this feeling "people judging you" is mostly YOU. That is we THINK what other people are thinking, as we don't have direct link to their brains. The intensity of this feeling is related to your personal feeling of your self worth, which again doesn't have much to do with any realistic criteria. From my personal experience people love you, find you interesting, miss you when you are not there, etc. much more that you think.
> The intensity of this feeling is related to your personal feeling of your self worth
Calling none sense. IT'S NOT IN YOUR HEAD!
There are objective levels to it.
Say I work in film making and specialize on actors wardrobes , I can make a good living, perhaps even reach a 7 figures net worth.
Fast forward award seasons comes around, during the afterparties everybody wants to talk and interact with the stars. Even if in my head my self-confidence is sky high and I am super social, approaching everybody, these people would avoid me and judge me as a weirdo, both during the party (to my face) and afterwards.
In that moment I am an obstacle to their real social goal of the night: interacting with Jennifer Lawrance, taking a picture with her, or even getting any reaction from her (including negative ones and extremely negative ones such as flipping the bird or telling people off).
This is an extreme example , of course, but generally people go to social gatherings and have a pretty clear idea of the person or even the profile of people they want to interact with.
This means that people do , in fact, judge or pre-classify or create standings in their minds, and if you aren't one of those sought after people then an interaction with you will most likely received as a disappointment compared to an ideal scenario that they had built in their own minds.
I don't fully disagree, but I am constantly judging others (much to my dismay). And, then I also see articles like "Research indicates that only about half of perceived friendships are mutual" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12246819).
I don't think this is completely true, because I'm fairly sure I have an accurate idea about how people feel about me, and am rarely surprised. I do think it is more true for some than others.
Like you, I blame it on the Illusion of Transparency: when we try to guess what other people are thinking about us, we do so with complete awareness of ourselves, so that model we make of other people is unnaturally good at seeing our flaws, especially the ones we're making an effort to conceal. Not only are people generally great at lying (they're not going to see through you), but they're likely also not paying that much attention to you.
I very much disagree. Near every single person I talk to on any regular basis talks about other people "behind their back", whether it is to say good thing or bad things. Those are judgements.
For every comment I have ever read about how "that person working at X store doesn't care about what you do / buy", I know a handful of people who are that person working at that store who talk to no end about the various kinds of customers who enter their store. It's great feel good motivator to those who are oblivious to the lie, but it is a lie none the less.
I had an upbringing where I was very much judged. And even in adulthood, my experience is that I like myself fairly well, but I am well aware that other people do not normally take to me, are not capable of grasping what I’m about or seeing any value in it, etc.
If several possible motivations describe the same behavior, why go for the most cynical one? It is not a sign of intellectual rigor. There is a wide array of emotions, and not every action is driven on fear and selfishness, in fact the best things most certainly aren't.
I heard similar phrasing used by one psychotherapist that I admire, "I am different from my wishes" and "I am different from my (past) behavior". He once said jokingly that if someone realizes that, he can give them a "60 year warranty on their mental health".
What I also find interesting is that this idea is rather old, it can be found in Christianity, for example, where "devil is tempting you", that is thoughts and wishes you have might not be your own (but from some demon tempting you). It may sound a bit silly in modern times, but it boils down to the same idea.
Because people live in a busy world, where knowledge is not transferred with enough love and integrity. And also people are afraid to say "I don't know" and what little they know they tend not to share.
To make things more specific, those labs had uncertainty budget with something like 20 terms for the things they measured. Each of those terms had associated probability distribution etc. They had uncertainty budgets for all the methods they did etc., and some of those where probably dated, done by someone else, etc. etc. Who checks that? Is the check rigorous enough? Are some assumptions made that don't hold to scrutiny?
So it is actually very easy for error to creep in, I would say actually very likely.
I wonder how rich people even come up with the idea that they are above normal human beings. The idea feels completely unnatural to me, and I strongly believe that one would have to be educated into the idea. Something like school for racists or upbringing for racists. Racist is not the right word but it is the closest matching the description I can think of.
Humans have an incredible capacity for rationalizing that which benefits them. There is no special upbringing or education needed, it’s been happening since the dawn of time.
Actually I was going for equality. Not equality of outcome, but equality of basic human rights. Let's take a recent example. Nobody deserves to be a sex slave trapped in an Epstein's island. Wouldn't you agree? But yet a bunch of rich people thought it was fine. As long as it is not their daughter. I would argue this is not natural and initial human instinct. You would have to corrupt your sense of meaning pretty badly to come to this point. Like take some lessons in lack of empathy and sadism. And please don't try to draw fake symmetry between me and people like this.
Have you considered that a society with hierarchy provides some advantage that creates an evolutionary equilibrium? It’s seen in many, many species of animals, especially mammals and primates.
This reminds of a quote by Nikola Tesla: “The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.” I always preferred clarity over "cleverness" not just in programming, but also when say reading a book on a technical subject. Clarity evokes feeling of beauty I would dare say.
“Simplicity is a great virtue but it requires hard work to achieve it and education to appreciate it. And to make matters worse: complexity sells better.” - Dijkstra
I think there is no substitute for old style learning, teacher, classroom and stress of memorizing about 20 words for the next class. Did anyone use those small format notebooks with two columns so you can effectively examine yourself? One column for foreign word and second for mother tongue word?
Thats how we learned English in school and for me I can say I never learned the vocabulary and I was not great in English examens either. The reason I am a C2 English speaker by now is that school gave me a good foundation (but did not bring me to fluency) and then mostly by using the language on the web due to my interests and the availability of information. I learned a lot just of English as a side product of some other productive or recreational activity.
I think it is great for vocabulary. But vocabulary is only a part of knowing a language. Apps mostly aim at vocabulary, and while approach is similar I think it is much better to stare at a paper notebook then your smartphone screen.
How come shortsighted thinking became so popular? Cut jobs, close factories for short term gain of the elites, but in the long term? There may be no one left to rule...
economists do not factor these risks and costs into their assessments. globalized free trade and labor are generally always assessed as win-win by economists.
