Glen, Here's a test. After one makes a contribution, do other people make contributions? The poster's motives don't really make a difference, if the post moves the discussion forward.
Also, does posting move the POSTER'S thinking forward. If being "the smartest person in in the room" from time to time helps you (one) to get one's thoughts together and move forward, then go for it! Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of glen?C Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2019 8:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [FRIAM] Imposter complex (was: A Question For Tomorrow) On 5/1/19 10:55 PM, David Eric Smith wrote: > I agree. See the earlier post about Smolin versus Aaronson. Some people use > common language to show you how smart they are; others use it to give you a > tool to become smarter yourself. We do the best we can to identify who is > who, in areas we can’t referee on our own. My schizotypy kicked in when I read this last night. First, I reacted like a choir member. "Yes! Amen!" Then I thought, "Oh sh¡t. Maybe I'm the former. What am I doing with my life?" Then I thought, "Nah. Eric's just wrong. The dichotomy is false. Everyone engages in a little of both from context to context." But then I thought, "Hey, this sounds like the problems I had when I was hired into a dot-com after Swarm Corp failed." Taking a mid- to high-level technical position after your company fails can be difficult. I was hired as part "information architect" and part "engineering manager", neither of which I felt good at, or even really understood what those words meant. The person who hired me said I was suffering from "imposter complex", which when I just now googled it, seems to be better termed "imposter syndrome". I still don't know if that was true, then, or is even true now. After I get a pint in me, I invoke Dunning-Kruger and believe my doubts are evidence that I'm competent enough to avoid over-estimating my competence. But I don't have a similar trick to reflectively police my own rhetoric and distinguish when I've been talking to "show how smart I am" versus talking to contribute to the competence of everyone involved. I used to keep a diary (well, a "journal" because men aren't supposed to keep diaries). And it was relatively obvious re-reading what I'd wrote where I'd been childish or self-centered in an entry versus thoughtful and productive. Even if I still kept a journal, though, such discrimination was only in hind-sight. It would be good to have Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) style discriminators that could be applied in real-time. Anyone have any suggestions? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
