#Curiosity and learning

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Curiosity

The philosophy of curiosity explores the nature, origins, and implications of human curiosity, which drives individuals to seek knowledge, explore new experiences, and ask questions about the world around them. Curiosity has long been recognized as a fundamental aspect of human cognition and behavior, playing a central role in scientific inquiry, philosophical reflection, and everyday life. Here are some key aspects and theories within the philosophy of curiosity:

Epistemic Curiosity: Epistemic curiosity refers to the desire for knowledge and understanding, motivating individuals to seek information, explore new ideas, and engage in intellectual pursuits. Philosophers have debated the nature of epistemic curiosity, its origins in human cognition, and its role in shaping scientific progress and cultural development.

Aesthetic Curiosity: Aesthetic curiosity pertains to the exploration of beauty, art, and creativity, driving individuals to seek out new experiences, appreciate diverse forms of expression, and engage with works of literature, music, visual art, and other cultural artifacts. Aesthetic curiosity raises questions about the nature of artistic inspiration, cultural interpretation, and subjective experience.

Existential Curiosity: Existential curiosity concerns the exploration of existential questions about the nature of existence, meaning, and purpose, motivating individuals to reflect on their own lives, values, and beliefs. Existential curiosity encompasses inquiries into topics such as the nature of consciousness, the search for transcendence, and the quest for personal fulfillment.

Philosophical Curiosity: Philosophical curiosity involves the pursuit of philosophical inquiry, critical thinking, and self-reflection, prompting individuals to question assumptions, challenge conventional wisdom, and explore fundamental concepts such as truth, morality, justice, and reality. Philosophical curiosity underlies the practice of philosophy as a discipline and informs broader intellectual endeavors.

Ethical Curiosity: Ethical curiosity concerns the exploration of ethical questions and moral dilemmas, motivating individuals to consider the consequences of their actions, empathize with others, and strive for moral growth and development. Ethical curiosity raises questions about the nature of moral values, ethical principles, and the pursuit of the good life.

Cognitive Curiosity: Cognitive curiosity encompasses the exploration of cognitive processes, mental states, and psychological phenomena, driving individuals to understand how the mind works, how knowledge is acquired, and how beliefs are formed. Cognitive curiosity informs research in fields such as psychology, neuroscience, and cognitive science.

Cultural Curiosity: Cultural curiosity involves the exploration of diverse cultures, traditions, and worldviews, prompting individuals to learn about different societies, languages, and customs, and to appreciate the richness of human diversity. Cultural curiosity fosters intercultural understanding, global awareness, and cross-cultural communication.

Metacognitive Curiosity: Metacognitive curiosity pertains to the exploration of one's own cognitive processes and learning strategies, motivating individuals to reflect on their own thinking, monitor their own understanding, and adapt their learning strategies to achieve greater intellectual growth and self-improvement.

Overall, the philosophy of curiosity explores the multifaceted nature of human curiosity and its profound influence on knowledge, creativity, personal growth, and the human condition.

[latest-info]

How to Make Learning a Lifelong Adventure

Introduction: The Joy of Lifelong Learning Have you ever wondered what it takes to keep the flame of curiosity alive throughout your life? Why do some people seem to thrive on learning new things while others stagnate? Lifelong learning isn’t just about formal education; it’s a mindset, a lifestyle. In this article, we will explore how you can make learning an ongoing adventure, full of…

[paranormeow7]

liberal hunger games posting is so funny because like. the hunger games are sold as books for teenagers. these are generally basic political statements about war and capitalism and exploitation meant to be understood by teenagers. these are not radical stances. we should have all learned these things by now. but one thing I have noticed is that the American public just simply do not know a lot of things about the world that other people already know, and even more embarrassingly, they end up needing to learn these things from children’s media. It’s not a good look to realize that you need to be kind to others because you watched a Bluey episode about it at the age of 25.

if you are seeing this post donate to @mosabsdr

[snazzycicada]

[serpentface]

how do you come up with the ways cultures in your setting stylize people/animals/the world in general in their artwork, i.e. jewlery, rock carvings, statues, etc? Each culture in your world seems to have a very unique "art style" and I love it a lot - makes them seem that much more 'real'. This is something I struggle with a lot in my own worldbuilding and I'd love to pick your brain if possible 😁

I think a starting point is to have a research process based in the material realities of the culture you're designing for. Ask yourself questions like:

Where do they live? What's the climate/ecosystem(s) they are based in? What geographic features are present/absent?

What is their main subsistence method? (hunter gatherer, seasonal pastoralist, nomadic pastoralist, settled agriculturalist, a mix, etc)

What access to broader trade networks do they have and to whom? Are there foreign materials that will be easily accessible in trade and common in use, or valuable trade materials used sparingly in limited capacities?

Etc

And then do some research based on the answers, in order to get a sense of what materials they would have routine access to (ie dyes, metal, textiles, etc) and other possible variables that would shape how the art is made and what it's used for. This is just a foundational step and won't likely play much into designing a Style.

If you narrow these questions down very specifically, (ie in the context of the Korya post- grassland based mounted nomads, pastoralist and hunter-gatherer subsistence, access to wider trade networks and metals), you can direct your research to specific real world instances that fit this general idea. This is not to lift culturally specific concepts from the real world and slap them into your own setting, but to notice commonalities this lifestyle enforces - (ie in the previous example- mounted nomadic peoples are highly mobile and need to easily carry their wealth (often on clothing and tack) therefore small, elaborate decorative artwork that can easily be carried from place to place is a very likely feature)

For the details of the art itself, I come up with loose 'style guides' (usually just in my head) and go from there.

Here's some example questions for forming a style (some are more baseline than others)

Are geometric patterns favored? Organic patterns? Representative patterns (flowers, animals, stars, etc)? Abstract patterns?

Is there favored material(s)? Beads, bone, clay, metals, stones, etc.

When depicting people/animals, is realism favored? Heavy stylization? The emotional impression of an animal? Are key features accentuated?

How perspective typically executed? Does art attempt to capture 3d depth? Does it favor showing the whole body in 2 dimensions (ie much of Ancient Egyptian art, with the body shown in a mix of profile and forward facing perspective so all key attributes are shown)? Will limbs overlap? Are bodies shown static? In motion?

Does artwork of people attempt to beautify them? Does it favor the culture's conception of the ideal body?

Are there common visual motifs? Important symbols? Key subject matters?

What is the art used for? Are its functions aesthetic, tutelary, spiritual, magical? (Will often exist in combination, or have different examples for each purpose)

Who is represented? Is there interest in everyday people? Does art focus on glorifying warriors, heroes, kings?

Are there conventions for representing important figures? (IE gods/kings/etc being depicted larger than culturally lesser subjects)

Is there visual shorthand to depict objects/concepts that are difficult to execute with clarity (the sun, moon, water), or are invisible (wind, the soul), or have no physical component (speech)?

Etc

Deciding on answers to any of these questions will at least give you a unique baseline, and you can fill in the rest of the gaps and specify a style further until it is distinct. Many of these questions are not mutually exclusive, both in the sense of elements being combined (patterns with both geometric and organic elements) or a culture having multiple visual styles (3d art objects having unique features, religious artwork having its own conventions, etc).

Also when you're getting in depth, you should have cultural syncretism in mind. Cultures that routinely interact (whether this interaction is exchange or exploitation) inevitably exchange ideas, which can be especially visible in art. Doing research on how this synthesizing of ideas works in practice is very helpful- what is adopted or left out from an external influence, what is retained from an internal influence, what is unique to this synthesis, AND WHY. (I find Greco-Buddhist art really interesting, that's one of many such examples)

Looking at real world examples that fit your parameters can be helpful (ie if I've decided on geometric patterns in my 'style guide', I'll look at actual geometric patterns). And I strongly encourage trying to actually LEARN about what you're seeing. All art exists in a context, and having an understanding of how the context shapes art, how art does and doesn't relate to broader aspects of a society, etc, can help you when synthesizing your own.

[cobaltfluff]

suuuuper late pocky day akeshus ;w;

[hello-eeveev]

going with orym’s ecosystem analogy, as I think that’s the strongest, most defensible argument for not killing the gods:

it is not inherently wrong to ‘feed’ off the energy of other beings. animals kill plants to eat them, those animals die and are eaten in turn, whether by other animals or by the process of decomposition feeding plants and fungi. animals breathe out carbon dioxide, which plants absorb and convert into oxygen, which we breathe in. this is how life works.

life needs things to live, but it also needs things to die and it needs things to use other things. we do not—and cannot—exist in isolation from each other.

the gods are here. they have been incorporated into exandria’s ecosystem for millennia. we cannot go back and change that, so how do we move forward with it?

[shittalkerxox]

Another idea to do with this post I made;

They aren't raised together. The deal between Shiva and David is still intact when they're born, and when Shiva ends up having 3 kids, it presents a perfect opportunity for David Cain to put in a proper experiment with these kids. He takes Cass, raises her as he did in canon, and tells Shiva to raise Tim how she sees fit, and then they give Jason to a struggling couple in Gotham city, just to see if their genetics really do create the perfect child assassins, or if they have to foster the ability into them, and who's better at it.

Tim and Cass end up meeting when they're around 5 or 6, and they end up fighting then, too. It's a pretty even fight, all things considered, but eventually Cass ends up with a knife to Tim's throat, and Tim ends up with two daggers pointed from behind Cass's head and their parents decide to stop things there.

Jason, meanwhile, is being raised just as he was in canon. His dad gets arrested around this time, and he's left alone with his mother, completely clueless to his siblings currently battling it out in a different continent.

David forces Cass to kill when they're 8, and it fucks Cass up. She ends up hunting Tim and Shiva down, and while she still hasn't figured out talking, Tim is able to get that something bad just happened, and they have to go now. So, they run off together and end up in Gotham about 2 years later.

They're 10 when they run into Jason, who immediately gets freaked out because he and Tim look literally identical, but there are a few basic differences, and Cass just looks like them if they were a girl. Jason, newly homeless after his mother's death a few months before, shows Tim and Cass the basics of Gotham, and in exchange, Tim and Cass show Jason how to handle being homeless (and how to fight properly)

Tim and Cass technically can speak English, Tim moreso, but it's definitely not a perfected thing, and Jason becomes a sort of translator for them.

When Jason ends up stealing Batman's tires 2 years later, he runs to get back to Cass and Tim, who are admittedly and annoyingly better at fighting than him. Bruce obviously follows him, and when he stumbles across 3 kids who look a hell of a lot like Lady Shiva, he just has to take them home.

(Other post on this AU)

[karineverse]

If I befriend an Ink fictive I'm gonna make so many questions

[casualavocados]

I actually think it's more complicated than that. I think, if bad people think it's bad, then, maybe it's good.

HIS DARK MATERIALS 2.01 | The City Of Magpies

[saitoakirachan-fangirls]

Obsessed with the idea of a lowkey unethical scientist Wakaba who experimented on Akechi and the complicated feelings generated from this within Futaba and Akechi.

Akechi and Wakaba's relationship was surprisingly cordial. If anything, he quite liked her because she was the smartest of the bunch and also the nicest to him. I mean, he still killed her, but. You know. She would talk about her young daughter and about Featherman, knowing that he's a fan of the show. She would ask how he felt after the experiments and gave him more grace than the others when he couldn't generate the result they were hoping for. (This is both because she's kinder and because she doesn't mind not "getting results." As far as she's concerned, any data is "results.") And yet.

And yet she didn't stop doing horrible experiments on him. Akechi was a child-shaped resource to her. Like a video game child, where you want to be nicer because it's cute and it looks like the real thing, but when it comes down to it, it's not really a person. She won't push as much as the others, and she always asks if he's okay. But, well, that's not her child. So if he says it's fine and the experiment isn't compromised, then who is she to doubt him? Isn't the knowledge obtained through these experiments more precious than the feelings of a teen she barely knew, and who insisted he was fine anyway? Yes, a palace collapsing kills the people inside (they made sure that to double check). Yes, this kid can cause psychotic breakdowns (it proved her hypothesis right). Yes, killing a shadow kills the person. But can't you see? This is all in the name of science. It's bigger than her or him or all of them.

Akechi's feelings about her flip-flops a lot depending on his mental state. Sometimes, he tries to justify killing her because she deserves it for what she did to him (the others wanted to do worse before she stopped them), it was her own fault for researching something so dangerous without knowing how to protect herself (how could she have predicted her team turning on her?) and he was just following orders anyway (a lot of corrupt adults are also "just following orders"), but more often, he settles on her being innocent. Since it was his decision to participate in the experiments, he needs to shoulder all the responsibility for his own pain. It was his choice, because he was obviously in control this whole time. He's a free agent. He's manipulating the adults here, don't you see? He wasn't a child anymore.

When Futaba learned about her human experiments, especially the ones on Akechi, she was shocked and horrified. "My mom was a fucking monster!" And Akechi is like, "Yeah the experiments sucked but I consented to everything." "You were 14-15???" And for a long time she is unable to really reconcile the image of her workaholic but loving mother with an obsessive scientist willing to turn a blind eye to the ethically bankrupt act of using a teen as a brain magic lab rat.

Idk, I just thought it would be funny and depressing if Futaba started thinking her mother was a horrible monster while Akechi has to defend Wakaba cause the truth is that she was kind of horrible but also like, a person. She was Futaba's loving mother, Sojiro's best friend, and an advocate for women in STEM. To her experiment subjects (because Akechi wasn't the only one, let's be real), she was a demon, but to other, she was a genuinely good person. Morally grey Wakaba Isshiki my beloved.

Also also, every adult who was involved with Akechi in any significant way pre-series dehumanized him :3c

[thejournallo]

DAILY REMINDER:

Your manifestations are coming. Stop stressing about what is already yours.

I don't see you stressing over things that you already have.

[uncanny-tranny]

Quick trans tip for those experiencing breast growth:

If you're interested in wearing a bra, please make sure to size correctly. Absolutely, bras can sometimes feel uncomfortable after wearing them for an extended amount of time, but if it actively hurts, please make sure it's the right size. You shouldn't feel like you can't breathe, or your circulation is restricted, or like the band/wires are digging into your skin. Bra sizing can make such a difference, and there're so many wild misconceptions about how bras work that it can be very confusing at times (even for cis people!). Breasts will develop for years, so please regularly check your size if you plan on wearing bras. There are some pretty accurate online calculators and forums, and when you start understanding how measurements translate into sizes, it makes a lot more sense.

If anybody has anything to add, please do! I'm not directly experienced in this, but I want all trans people to be educated and empowered in what makes them comfortable💛