hypothesis: interweaving study of a subject with the subject's history works so well because it leverages social cognition faculties toward the process, at the cost of using up some of the student's Dunbar number on the subject's historical figures
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @chaosprime @GlitchesBrew
I could have sworn Dunbar's Number is the number of people it's feasible to actively maintain individual relationships with, not the number of story characters it's possible to know in detail.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @stellahymmne @GlitchesBrew
Chaos Retweeted Chaos
not very phenomenological of you to imply there's a differencehttps://twitter.com/chaosprime/status/1076592747262472192 …
Chaos added,
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime @GlitchesBrew
bold of you to assume I have principles and am not just being brazenly intuitive as always but seriously if relationship capacity can be used up by the dead or imaginary (short of active tulpamancy) then a good story is a socially damaging memetohazard, even propaganda aside.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
i kinda think it can, though at a level of investment that if not active tulpamancy is definitely haphazard passive tulpamancy. people talk about it all the time tbh, the characters who they feel they have a personal relationship with, like Jesus
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.