psychology

What I (also) talk about when I talk about struggling

Karim AdiprasitoLeave a comment

In reference to some recent posts like this and nightlong discussions with Dasha Poliakova, I wanted to clarify a metapoint of why I actually made the post. And there is a point besides the point of me actually struggling, or me dying to those Rune Bears or difficult exploration projects.

It is that I am aware that I am, even if a strange person, in a position of power. And as such, people look up to someone like me, whether it is with hate or admiration. I additionally have some power over my employees, what happens in my field etc. I certainly don’t feel that way, but I understand that I can be intimidating.

Hence talking about struggling is not actually only talking about struggling. It is also serves a higher objective, in that it shows it is okay to struggle, and it is ok to talk to me about struggling. I think the former is just evidently good, the latter is more subtle. But I have made the experience (on myself and others) that a struggling person in your care is still very capable of hiding, of subterfuge and of distraction, wasting much more of their time on trying to distract you with presents or niceties you than on getting better. Hence, you (as a person encountering someone struggling) may not notice anything, or think everything is fine. Especially if they are scared of you, because they perceive you as authority (even if you feel just as small yourself).

I do not make up a struggle, and you should not either. You do not have to emulate the specific struggles of your students. It can be something as simple to admitting you are struggling to understand a paper today, or have trouble figuring out a problem (not that not understanding that paper is entirely your fault). It shows those around you and under your care that you have experience with it.

And again, there is a metapoint to this post: if you are in a position of power, if you have people under your care, this might be something for you to consider. Plus you can do it from bed at 5pm while frustrasted and laying down a paper about analytic torsion (or just still snuggling).

I don’t believe in functioning

Karim Adiprasito1 Comment

I am a bit depressed. Probably an understatement.

I honestly am most of the time. Not as severely as others, probably, but that really should not matter. One can hardly compare in these matters.

What one can compare is, probably, the strategies of dealing with it. I often hear that one should work through it, and that just sitting down, doing your work and dealing with it helps. Or take a vacation and then come back, functioning.

But for myself, I don’t believe in functioning. I believe that the heart of every depression and anxiety is a core pattern that has to be identified and understood. And even that might not be the end. And that often needs time and thought and another person to talk to.

So that is my idea, I would guess. The problem needs logic (in the sense of analyzing the issue) and kindness (in the sense that the person needs time and warmth).

In the first aspect, it is not unlike a scientific problem. To get to the root of the issue requires making a hypothesis, testing it, discarding it. Going back to the logic of what is there that affects you, and slowly working yourself to the core issue of the problem. Just like with scientific problems, or any other (Hello Dr. House) you might have a process that helps you go through that. Whether that is writing it down, or needing another person to reflect. Just like any problem, that is often hard. Compounded here with additionally the issue that you might be in pain when doing it.

My personal go to is, to overstretch a metaphor, to find a transcendental point. To step outside from everything, and one by one add assumptions again until what pains me is found. As opposed to the process of restriction, where one closes out influences (i.e; look at simple examples first) I look at everything and try to find out the things making it tick. Either way, that process takes time.

And as with every other problem, take whatever route you need.

But I believe a core issue is there somewhere.

The secondary point is often more difficult. One needs a safety net, some time and patience. One needs a warm home while working through that issue, and that is not always the easiest. One needs the resources one needs. Try to find that place for yourself, if you are in need. And, more importantly, if you are in a position where you can give the resources, give them.

That is the somewhat asinine point of this stupid text: it feels like putting the responsibility on the person in need. It is not, of course. But the person in need is often the first person to read this.

And then, if you find that issue? Then one can try to deal with it. Sometimes in can be resolved. Sometimes it cannot. But one can live with it. However, just like you probably have that mole checked out, it is better to know the issue than to ignore it. After all, it is better to actually find out if that leg can be saved first before you write it off. And after that, you can start to cope.

Anyway, that’s my way. What’s yours?

Vampire/Love and Pain by Munch




Inside Man, shitty chess and exp(anxiety)

Karim AdiprasitoLeave a comment
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is stanley-tucci-inside-man-1663777468.jpg
Just look how they butchered my boy

I was watching the new series “Inside Man”, or trying to without jumping off the nearest building, and I came to three conclusions:

  1. Moffat should never be allowed to create more than the pilot of a show. He has a (very) cool idea to start with, but the rest of the show has to bend around increasingly unlikely nonsense to make his plot work to the conclusion he wants to reach.
  2. Kustin-Miller unprojection is cool, and every commutative algebraist should know it; it gives us a way to normalize the seemingly arbitrary. Thank you Stavros for telling me about it. This just because my head drifted off to greener pastures.
  3. People love shitty chess. And they really should not.

Now, let me explain, or rather put up a disclaimer first: By shitty chess, I do not mean the entire Carlsen-Niemann affair. Though perhaps a larger meta-point surrounding deductive (that which is strictly logical) versus inductive reasoning (that is, a game of probabilities) could be made.

Because the reason characters like Sherlock Holmes are so alluring, and the reason we fall for the trap that is Moffat’s skills of giving us a convincing plot, is that we are collectively obsessed with the myth of having everything under control. And perhaps herein lies the issue: when our reasoning invariably fails, we invariably turn to panic and wild plot devices like little men in the derrière. And it is one of the reasons we are collectively anxious all the time (except those that are anyway half in the grave; byebye at this point.)

Continue reading →