In a world where people born into—or granted—privilege at young ages, relegates them to experiences devoid of the friction required to rear authentic understanding merited by experience, should the world we aim for be one of granting everyone the privilege of lacking the discomfort and strife of conflict and friction, how will we be able to continue rearing living organisms who exercise the cognitive relevance to understand virtues beyond their performative effects, and surrogate understandings?
In such a future, or in the presence of lack of understanding, I believe it will be necessary to create educational means to curate experiences (through consented simulation and curriculum of authentic assessment, maybe) that cultivate first hand through abrasive experience and demonstrated friction, a sincere understanding in the ethical purposes supporting law and regulation.
It doesn’t need to remain Emma Watson, but it was inspired by the recent public example of her relationship with J K Rowling.
This regarding a behaviour surrounding self-preservation and backtracking of previous statements and alliegences confidently made, not out of malicious intent, but out of ignorance and lack of moral integrity or understanding. Malcom Gladwell, is another example of statements we’re likely to see a lot more of in various, and diminishing capacities over the next 30 years. This concerning individuals who will have previously thrown others under the bus simply for maintaining the importance, and immutability of biological sex, during a national period of hysteria and large scale example of the asch effect. This can be measured with;
othering
ostracisation
vilification
socionomic discrimination
blacklisting
faculties adopting theory of identity, over biological priority
To the detriment of those needing care, those seeking to provide authentic care, and societal cohesion i.e. friends, family, sports, womens rights etc.
I appreciate that some may read this and simply not like what they’re reading, but at this point I’d like my directness not to be taken as insult, as this subject surrounding gender theory is likely going to develop quite dramatically over the next 6-12 months. I will also be publishing documents surrounding objective moraility, true principles, and contemporary language obfuscation to clarify aspects surrounding gender theory. I care about bringing people back to the same page. Always happy to hear construcive criticisms too.
I would argue that a privilege specifically emplies the lack of a corresponding friction. i.e. inhereted wealth = you are not born into frictions of poverty. It’s not an issue I take personally, I’m sure there are other problems a wealthy person may have, but poverty is not one of them. Can you explain why you think this isn’t the case? Or shed any additional information on what you’re trying to say here?
3.a. I would say that a merit based system, where inherted wealth indicates understanding lacks evidence and appears abstract. I don’t believe inhereted wealth is inextricably linked to poor understanding, or good understanding. Can you tell me why you believe inhereted wealth correlates with a good understanding?
3.b. “Authentic assessment involves tasks that reflect real-world challenges and require the application of knowledge and skills in practical contexts.”—“Authentic Assessment Guide - Learning and Teaching.” Bath.ac.uk, 2024, teachinghub.bath.ac.uk/guide/authentic-assessment-guide/.
I think it’s correct to be dubious of abstractly applied or seemingly blanket statements, so to clarify, I mean authentic and merited by way of their express definitions;
• Authentic—genuine.
• Merit—the quality of being particularly good or worthy.
i.e. without experience, how can a person claim authentic understanding, or claim to have merit in an area where they are not qualified by experience?
Sorry if the initial message was clumsily written, I’ve been approaching shortform as a very casual form of ‘shower thoughts’.
Thanks for your input.
Edit: Also I don’t appreciate the ‘smells like LLM’ reaction, I work very hard at trying to ideate my thoughts and reasons, and so it seems like a really lazy and reductive application of ‘disproval’.
The Emma Watson effect
In a world where people born into—or granted—privilege at young ages, relegates them to experiences devoid of the friction required to rear authentic understanding merited by experience, should the world we aim for be one of granting everyone the privilege of lacking the discomfort and strife of conflict and friction, how will we be able to continue rearing living organisms who exercise the cognitive relevance to understand virtues beyond their performative effects, and surrogate understandings?
In such a future, or in the presence of lack of understanding, I believe it will be necessary to create educational means to curate experiences (through consented simulation and curriculum of authentic assessment, maybe) that cultivate first hand through abrasive experience and demonstrated friction, a sincere understanding in the ethical purposes supporting law and regulation.
Why should this be named for Emma Watson?
“experiences devoid of the friction” --> this is not what the life of wealthy/privileged people is like
“required to rear authentic understanding merited by experience”
People born wealthy/privileged have a good understanding of the world.
I’m suspicious of the ‘authentic’ modifier, and of ‘merited’.
It doesn’t need to remain Emma Watson, but it was inspired by the recent public example of her relationship with J K Rowling.
This regarding a behaviour surrounding self-preservation and backtracking of previous statements and alliegences confidently made, not out of malicious intent, but out of ignorance and lack of moral integrity or understanding. Malcom Gladwell, is another example of statements we’re likely to see a lot more of in various, and diminishing capacities over the next 30 years. This concerning individuals who will have previously thrown others under the bus simply for maintaining the importance, and immutability of biological sex, during a national period of hysteria and large scale example of the asch effect. This can be measured with;
othering
ostracisation
vilification
socionomic discrimination
blacklisting
faculties adopting theory of identity, over biological priority
To the detriment of those needing care, those seeking to provide authentic care, and societal cohesion i.e. friends, family, sports, womens rights etc.
I appreciate that some may read this and simply not like what they’re reading, but at this point I’d like my directness not to be taken as insult, as this subject surrounding gender theory is likely going to develop quite dramatically over the next 6-12 months. I will also be publishing documents surrounding objective moraility, true principles, and contemporary language obfuscation to clarify aspects surrounding gender theory. I care about bringing people back to the same page. Always happy to hear construcive criticisms too.
I would argue that a privilege specifically emplies the lack of a corresponding friction. i.e. inhereted wealth = you are not born into frictions of poverty. It’s not an issue I take personally, I’m sure there are other problems a wealthy person may have, but poverty is not one of them. Can you explain why you think this isn’t the case? Or shed any additional information on what you’re trying to say here?
3.a. I would say that a merit based system, where inherted wealth indicates understanding lacks evidence and appears abstract. I don’t believe inhereted wealth is inextricably linked to poor understanding, or good understanding. Can you tell me why you believe inhereted wealth correlates with a good understanding?
3.b. “Authentic assessment involves tasks that reflect real-world challenges and require the application of knowledge and skills in practical contexts.”—“Authentic Assessment Guide - Learning and Teaching.” Bath.ac.uk, 2024, teachinghub.bath.ac.uk/guide/authentic-assessment-guide/.
I think it’s correct to be dubious of abstractly applied or seemingly blanket statements, so to clarify, I mean authentic and merited by way of their express definitions;
• Authentic—genuine.
• Merit—the quality of being particularly good or worthy.
i.e. without experience, how can a person claim authentic understanding, or claim to have merit in an area where they are not qualified by experience?
Sorry if the initial message was clumsily written, I’ve been approaching shortform as a very casual form of ‘shower thoughts’.
Thanks for your input.
Edit: Also I don’t appreciate the ‘smells like LLM’ reaction, I work very hard at trying to ideate my thoughts and reasons, and so it seems like a really lazy and reductive application of ‘disproval’.