Conversation

There's a sort of Dark Tetrad of topics: social identity, intelligence, religion, and genetics-and-culture. People who only ever talk about those 4 things... I tend to run from them. For mental health, those topics should not consume >20% of your intellectual bandwidth.
15
143
Replying to
Is social identity supposed to mean what it sounds like at face value, or be a reference to more specific types of political/cultural positions? Of those topics a broad interpretation of social identity might be the most likely to take up bandwidth for a wide range of people.
1
2
Replying to and
It’s easier to talk less (or not at all) about those things if they’re not causing friction in your life, right? That seems obvious. So I wouldn’t personally hold straight white guys & ppl who’re multiply minorities to the same share-of-speech %…
1
9
Replying to and
Yes. It’s still painful and injurious to mental health if you’re forced by circumstances to spend more than 20%. I mean just because you are forced into a gunfight doesn’t mean you’re anymore bulletproof. This is scorched-mind stuff.
1
5
Replying to and
On what basis can you possibly decide that for other people’s mental health? Just your own. You don’t have to *read* people who post >20% on these topics, sure. But that’s on you, not them.
1
Replying to and
I think there’s shared neurological common absolute limits. Humans don’t vary that much in capacity for social conflict trauma. Everybody I know who has been at high percentages has suffered burnout/PTSD. I can tell a 2 ton weight will crush any human without knowing specifics.
2
2
Replying to and
Talking about gender, sexual orientation, race etc isn’t necessarily “social conflict trauma”, though. That seems a huge elision. They can also be fields of interest, academic research, belonging, even pleasure.
2
5