Four major systems are proposed based on genetic/neural and behavioral data: Self-learning; world learning; opportunity maximizing; and threat mitigation systems. Perturbations from normality of these systems lead to major psychological disorder clusters.
To Label or Not to Label, that is the question: Whether it’s nobler in the mind to suffer the taunts and stigma of same-age bullies, or by defying the label given by the insensitive society, and not taking a pill, end it!
The different types of mental disorders, though intimidating by their sheer number and complexity, can be clustered in a few discrete categories and groups, and this greatly aids our understanding of the mind and its maladies.
The field of creativity needs equal focus on products, processes, and people to advance further; an integrative approach and research program that rises above the distinctions of small c and Big C is more likely to be successful and fruitful in the long run.
Academic outcomes are dependent on multiple factors like innate ability, self control, hard work and positive mindset. Some of the outcomes may differentially depend on one factor rather than the other, but to succeed in life you need both smarts and character.
People on the autism spectrum are more likely to be intelligent; while ADHD leans towards the creativity side of the spectrum. These childhood disorders are the cost one pays for the evolution of intelligence and creativity.
That 'emotions arise from progress or hindrance in goal-pursuit' is a simplistic notion. Read the post to know the difference between approach and avoidance motivation, between promotion and prevention regulatory focus and how they interact together to give rise to all the myriad complex emotions and affective states.
The Factor structure of PANAS-X sheds important insights into the nature of basic emotions—that combined with insights from Eight rasas of Indian culture and the four dimensions of emotions, leads to a rich and useful taxonomy and classification system for emotions.
This post continues the previous discussion of opposition between creativity and intelligence and does this time by looking at one of the theories of creativity: Blind variation and selective retention, proposed by Campbell about 50 years ago .
Jonathan Fields, writes in the defense of the pursuit of Mastery; I reply why generalization may also be equally relevant and why earning livelihood from multiple sources is not a crime, or to be looked down on.
Steve argues that failures are necessary and overprotecting your child is counter-productive; I argue that exposing your child to failures, without adequate safety nets in place, can lead to great harm and an 'off hands' parenting style is not to be preferred.
What are the dangers of being enamored by a philosophy that happiness-is-entirely-in-the-mind? Can it lead to passivity? Can it lead to apathy towards those who are unhappy and suffering due to their circumstances? This is a response to Raj's post that believed these threats to be not real.
Raj argues that happiness lies in the head and it is our responsibility to reinterpret events in a positive light. I argue, that placing too much emphasis on personal responsibility, especially when the events are beyond control, is counter-productive.