Re:The war on food waste is a waste of time
by dredmorbius on Thursday February 27, 2020 @06:05PM
(#22438951)
First: strong agreement.
Second: I'm starting to think that grief is less about loss than it is about model change.
The more deeply embedded, and identity-providing that model is, the deeper the grief.
This seems to follow a continuum, with benign instances ranging from humour (often based on violated expectations when in an open mental state) and surprise, to anger (feeling agency against change), fear (lack of agency, but an option to withdraw), panic (disordered action), and ultimately depression or freezing (no sensible action).
Individually, adapting to major shocks means rescaling expectations and rewriting our own world models and life plans.
Collectively, it's all of that plus the challenge of coming up on a social basis a new set of tribal myths to replace the old standard.
(This is mostly my own construct, though it borrows heavily from a few sources, notably Kubler-Ross, as well as others. I'd be very surprised if there were no similar extant concept in circulation.)
Alvin Toffler expresses a quite similar notion toward the end of Chapter 8 of Future Shock, "Information: The Kinetic Image":
Change, roraring through society, widens the gap between what we believe and what really is, between the existing images and the reality they are supposed to freflect. When this gap is only moderate, we can cope more or less rationally with change, we can react sanely to new conditions, we have a grip on reality. When this gap grows too wide, however, we find ourselves increaingly unable to cope, we respond inappropriately, we become ineffectual, witdraw or simply panic. At the final extreme, when the gap grows too wide, we suffer psychosis --- or even death.
The passage continues for another five paragraphs, recommended. One of the sources is Harold D. Lasswell's work on education, learning, and relearning, particularly concerning the limits on this.
I've long been a fan of applying K-R to existential threats and Big Problems:
Second: I'm starting to think that grief is less about loss than it is about model change.
The more deeply embedded, and identity-providing that model is, the deeper the grief.
This seems to follow a continuum, with benign instances ranging from humour (often based on violated expectations when in an open mental state) and surprise, to anger (feeling agency against change), fear (lack of agency, but an option to withdraw), panic (disordered action), and ultimately depression or freezing (no sensible action).
Individually, adapting to major shocks means rescaling expectations and rewriting our own world models and life plans.
Collectively, it's all of that plus the challenge of coming up on a social basis a new set of tribal myths to replace the old standard.
(This is mostly my own construct, though it borrows heavily from a few sources, notably Kubler-Ross, as well as others. I'd be very surprised if there were no similar extant concept in circulation.)
Alvin Toffler expresses a quite similar notion toward the end of Chapter 8 of Future Shock, "Information: The Kinetic Image":
Change, roraring through society, widens the gap between what we believe and what really is, between the existing images and the reality they are supposed to freflect. When this gap is only moderate, we can cope more or less rationally with change, we can react sanely to new conditions, we have a grip on reality. When this gap grows too wide, however, we find ourselves increaingly unable to cope, we respond inappropriately, we become ineffectual, witdraw or simply panic. At the final extreme, when the gap grows too wide, we suffer psychosis --- or even death.
The passage continues for another five paragraphs, recommended. One of the sources is Harold D. Lasswell's work on education, learning, and relearning, particularly concerning the limits on this.
I've long been a fan of applying K-R to existential threats and Big Problems:
https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/237qw6/is_tact...