It turns out procrastination is not typically a function of laziness, apathy or work ethic as it is often regarded to be. It’s a neurotic self-defense behavior that develops to protect a person’s sense of self-worth.
You see, procrastinators tend to be people who have, for whatever reason, developed to perceive an unusually strong association between their performance and their value as a person. This makes failure or criticism disproportionately painful, which leads naturally to hesitancy when it comes to the prospect of doing anything that reflects their ability — which is pretty much everything.
But in real life, you can’t avoid doing things. We have to earn a living, do our taxes, have difficult conversations sometimes. Human life requires confronting uncertainty and risk, so pressure mounts. Procrastination gives a person a temporary hit of relief from this pressure of “having to do” things, which is a self-rewarding behavior. So it continues and becomes the normal way to respond to these pressures.
Particularly prone to serious procrastination problems are children who grew up with unusually high expectations placed on them. Their older siblings may have been high achievers, leaving big shoes to fill, or their parents may have had neurotic and inhuman expectations of their own, or else they exhibited exceptional talents early on, and thereafter “average” performances were met with concern and suspicion from parents and teachers.”
This totally justifies every excuse I’ve been giving myself from not doing that thing I’m supposed to do.
This article just AIRED. ME. OUT.
A very intense couple of days serving as primary caregiver for my almost 89 year old granny with advanced Parkinson’s while my 90 year old gramps gets checked out in hospital after what they thought might have been another minor stroke (no signs of it, however!). He’ll be home today, and my dad is there now making sure all is well.
A lot to think about now that I’m back.
But mainly, I feel so grateful to still have them both.
|—||says Ellen Ullman, whose brilliance I wrote about for Salon. (via maudnewton)|
Let’s be crystal fucking clear here: if you don’t believe that all people deserve the absolute same rights - including marriage - then I’m not being an asshole when I call you bigoted; I’m being accurate.
One of us believes it’s perfectly acceptable to separate people out as worthy or unworthy based on their perceived or actual sexual orientation, that some people deserve more or less “rights” as human beings, and that certain types of people have “chosen” to be denied some of the most basic aspects of the human experience.
The other one’s me.
“A revealing way of describing science fiction is to say that it is part of a literary mode which one may call ‘fabril’*. ‘Fabril’ is the opposite of ‘pastoral’. But while the pastoral is an established and much discussed literary mode, recognized as such since early antiquity, its dark opposite has not yet been accepted, or even named, by the law-givers of literature. Yet the opposite is a clear one. Pastoral literature is rural, nostalgic, conservative. It idealizes the past and tends to convert complexities into simplicity; its central image is the shepherd. Fabril literature (of which science fiction is now by far the most prominent genre) is overwhelmingly urban, disruptive, future-orientated, eager for novelty; its central image is the ‘faber’, the smith or blacksmith in older usage, but now extended in science fiction to mean the creator of artifacts in general - metallic, crystalline, genetic, or even social… What science fiction has been doing over the decades of this century has been steadily to extend the perceived boundaries of Culture (technology, government, social organization, all seen as affecting - if not absolutely determining - the way human beings act and feel), while at the same time becoming more and more aware of the immense scale of Nature, against which human beings are set and against which they are ultimately powerless… What science fiction has had to offer many readers is Truth.”
*As far as I am aware, this word has never been used in print. I owe it to Dr. James Bradley, of the University of British Columbia, who coined word and concept in his study of early Germanic smithcraft. Tom Shippy in his introduction to ‘The Oxford Book of Science Fiction Stories’ (Oxford University Press, 1992)”
Not only is this a great quote describing a fascinating development in literature and culture… it’s based around a coinage by a prof at my alma mater. ;-)
Actually, they’re being waaaaaaay too kind. I wasn’t suggesting toxoplasmosis as a metaphor for memes. I was suggesting that memes are an emergent form of life that use humans to propagate.
We always talk about this stuff with us (humans) at the center. Maybe we’re just nodes that happen to have a flicker of self awareness.
Later, when someone writes a Matrix-esque film about how the sentient Internet actually created humanity so that it could exist, I want to see Kenyatta credited as an EP.