#categorization

[morphimus]

why did you tag that horse video with #chordate? the organizational system that implies fascinates me

#ask #Anonymous #jmc #horse #honse #wikipedia #chordate #taxonomy #categorization #high note post

[catherinadodson1976blog]

#data visualization #understanding #aiart #digitalart #ai #categorization #art #technology #ai world #artificial intelligence

[alostlittleriverlotus]

Also the "quiet BPD" subtype feels so much like some sort of divide between the "angry, mean stereotype" and this "poor quiet internalized victim" really. Like I've seen the other subtypes, but when I first learned about them years ago, it was high functioning/quiet BPD and I genuinely saw things that would heavily imply that they were better because they wouldn't take their anger out on others.

It just feels like another way to divide personality disorders and demonize them. I'm not saying people with BPD that use the term "quiet BPD" are doing this specifically, but it's very reminiscent and feels like how people with BPD separate themselves from the icky narcissists and antisocial people (/sarcastic) in this day and age. Like how people will make BPD into the "victim disorder" while NPD and ASPD are the "abusive disorders" and then cluster a and c and HPD are all just forgotten.

It just very much so reminds me of that. Or just dividing with introvert/extrovert or internlized/externalized. And considering I saw a comment literally describing quiet BPD as not being the angry/violent type- I- that just sounds so so so bad.

This comes from someone with BPD that has been both and experiences all the subtypes.

And then I saw someone say "aside from the fact I experience all four subtypes (not all at once, they fluctuate)" like yeah? That's just how disorders work? You're not going to be constantly angry or having episodes and you're not going to be constantly internalizing everything and blaming yourself. I just cannot fathom how people see this, these boxes and subtypes, and don't see how this is just normal. For like tons of disorders.

Not even just personality disorders. It feels like high/low functioning labels, introvert/extrovert, personality types, all of that stuff that tries to box us all in under one label and ignores the fact that people are different, people change, and people can be more than one thing.

This doesn't feel like bipolar 1/2 disorder or seasonal depression versus normal depression or social anxiety for generalized anxiety. This doesn't feel like an actual separation of diagnoses. It just feels like a disorder existing in multitudes and people have put them into 4 different subtypes.

I even used to say I had quiet BPD. And when my BPD was suddenly externalized again? I felt like a monster and evil and like I did something to make my BPD become external. Quiet BPD comes off as "I am more likely to hurt myself so I'm not that bad, I'm just a victim" rather than any actual type of diagnoses. BPD is BPD. It's gonna exist in multitudes, have contradicting elements, have different experiences, especially since every person is different with different disorders affecting them. What do subtypes do to help? What happens when you think you're just one or two types and then you suddenly act so differently than previously thought? And trust me, when that happened to me, it was terrifying. My whole world view of my BPD was thrown off which only made my rage episodes worse.

I just don't see the point to having subtypes to personality disorders. Personalities are complex as is, personality disorders are just as complex, so of course there's going to seemingly be "different types."

I dunno, man. And again, this isn't saying anyone that DOES use these and has BPD is suddenly bad or wrong or whatever for it. I used em once too and especially when you first learn about having BPD, I can see why it may be useful in ways. But I feel it's ultimately restricting and focuses too much on categorizing a complex disorder.

#bpd #aspd #npd #hpd #avpd #ppd #szpd #stpd #dpd #ocpd #actually borderline #actually histrionic #actually avoidant #actually dependent #actually paranoid #borderline personality disorder #subtypes #categorization #personality disorders #cluster b #cluster a #cluster c #rant

[imkeepinit]

#movie genre #movies #categorization

[addictivecontradiction]

The ballad of Buster Scruggs, 2018

#comedy #drama #musical #the ballad of buster scruggs #ethan coen #joel coen #jack london #stewart edward white #the mortal remains #brendan gleeson #tyne daly #saul rubinek #chelcie ross #jonjo o'neill #categorization

[mssnoozable]

Gamers suck at naming genres so badly.

What's that game? *oh its like that game doom I played so I guess I'll call it a doom like*

What about this? *oh that's just like that super old game rogue but a little less so it's a roguelite*

And these!? *that's an rpg because they used to have game mechanics like that for games where you played a role... but now you don't play any role and we just never bothered naming them.*

😠

#video games #game genres #taxonomy #categorization #rpg #roguelite #soulslike #metroidvania

[unstablenoodle]

Ok so I have something to share.

For my entire life, I have differentiated between different kinds of sweet. Specifically, I place them into two groups: opaque sweet and clear sweet. They are named as such because opaque sweet foods taste like you can’t see through them while clear sweet foods taste see-through. Pretty straight forward.

Except it is not. There are general patterns in categorization, but there are sufficient deviations. For example, cookies, cakes, pies, etc. are all opaque, and they are all confectionary items. However, honey is opaque as well, and bananas are more opaque than all of them. Here’s a table (not comprehensive):

As you can see, baked goods are always opaque while most fruits are clear, but there a sufficient number of deviations to argue that this is merely a correlation. It’s important to note also that if a source flavor is sweet, a derived flavoring or juice may not also be sweet.

What I didn’t show in this table was the combination category. Foods in this box lie somewhere along the spectrum. It includes foods like lemon squares, orange juice, MANGOS, and mint chocolate chip ice cream. I have a theory that these foods are the easiest to pair with the extremes and with non-sweet foods, but I digress.

Furthermore, opacity and clarity govern what texture or temperature is appropriate for the food. Would you heat up an orange? No. Would you heat up a brownie? Yes. Would you eat a cake with flesh-like membranes? I fucking hope not, but you would expect that quality in a juicy fruit. Clear foods tend to be best cold, and invite a wider variety of textures (slippery, membranes, chewy, crunchy) while opaque foods are meant to be soft or mousse-like.

This is not nearly all of it, but it’s a good general outline. Do y’all get what I’m saying?

#sweet #food #categorization #I have a 15 slide presentation on this #thoughts

[moonlit-tulip]

Two Styles of Ethical Argument

Or: the ethics post which I wish I'd read some time before or during the various ethics-related philosophy classes I took at school, but which I instead had to figure out for myself over the course of the past year.

There are two major styles of argument people tend to make, when arguing that people should follow or not follow particular ethical systems.

The first style—let's call it argument from instability—goes: there exist certain ethical systems which are unstable. Which, perhaps non-obviously, imply that one should adopt a different system. So, if one currently follows one of these systems, then one should, to fulfill one's own values better, abandon one's current system and/or adopt this other system.

A made-up example of an (unconvincing-to-me) argument from instability would be: "Preference utilitarianism implies that one should become a hedonic utilitarian, because everyone prefers that they be maximally happy and has no other preferences. Remembering that people prefer nothing but being maximally happy has mental overhead, though; thus, a person will fulfill people's preferences better if they lose the indirection-layer and just maximize their happiness directly."

The second style—let's call it argument from introspection—goes: there exist certain people who are wrong about which ethical system best represents their values. Who, perhaps non-obviously, value some outcome* A over some other outcome B even though the ethical system they believe themselves to be following ranks B as better than A. If one is currently one of these people, then one should, to understand one's own values better, abandon one's current system and/or adopt this other system.

A made-up example of an (unconvincing-to-me) argument from introspection would be: "Hedonic utilitarianism involves wanting the world to be full of happiness and not caring about other things except in terms of their effects on happiness. But consider the case of this Buddhist monk, who prefers to not be happy because happiness is a source of attachment to the world. Do you really think it's morally correct to force him to experience happiness against his will? If not, consider the possibility that you might actually be a preference utilitarian who just happens to be under the mistaken impression that most people have no preferences other than wanting to be maximally happy."

Both of these styles of argument will be potentially convincing to some people. But the styles are not the same, and sometimes a given person will be susceptible only to one or only to the other. (Arguments from instability are ineffective against people whose ethics don't imply they should change their ethics; arguments from introspection are ineffective against people whose ethical systems represent their values fully accurately.)

It can be easy, if one is sufficiently resistant to one of these styles of argument, to assume that only the style to which one is not resistant is valid ethical argumentation, while the style one is resistant to is some other confused thing. (During my ethics classes, I often found myself reading papers which were in retrospect making arguments from introspection but which, at the time, just made me go "why is this person making arguments about aesthetics and then publishing them as ethics papers?", because the "look, doesn't this implication of hedonic total utilitarianism just seem really unappealing, despite its effectiveness utility-maximization-wise? Wouldn't you rather just not?" genre of argument was very much not one to which I was susceptible.) But this assumption is incorrect. Both styles of argument can be made validly (and soundly); that their audiences are sometimes non-overlapping doesn't change that fact.

* Taking 'outcome' broadly, to include deontological actions, virtue-ethical states-of-personal-character, consequentialist states-of-the-overall-world, et cetera.

#Archive #Ethics #Philosophy #Categorization #Introspection #Self-Improvement #this post brought to you by a series of introspective realizations over the course of this year #which pointed me in the general direction of “my ethics were both underspecified and not-accurate-to-my-values even where fully specified” #and by my resulting meta-realization that the papers i'd previously dismissed were in fact trying to make arguments in similar directions #rather than just being weirdly mislabeled papers about aesthetics #(to be clear i still don't find any of those particular papers convincing in retrospect) #(nor am i even necessarily convinced that arguments from introspection are worth publishing most of the time) #(at least absent a specific reason to think people are actually falling into whatever introspection-failures the arguments are premised on) #(but i no longer think they're *invalid* as ethical arguments)

[helpmeimblorboing]

Personally I categorize horror as follows :

Primal horror

This is the original horror - made from darkness and death and slaughter. A mixture of the visceral carnage of an animal's jaws and the slow, psychological dread of the endless

Under it, are two more :

1. Psychological Horror

2. Visceral Horror

Visceral horror is easily explanable, and its categories are generally just gorefests - bestial horror, torture-porn horror, slasher horror, spectral horror, body horror.

But it's opposite is where things get interesting

Psychological Horror is the slow build-up. Tension. Dread without payoff. It doesn't necessarily need to include gore, but often does anyways. To me at least, this type is more disturbing than visceral

Under it are :

Liminal

Proximal

Dysphoric

Somatic

Domestic

Cosmic

Religious

Pseudo-scientific

Absurdist

Liminal horror is a popular enough concept already. The idea of an endless liman - an endless margin. No past, no future. Just the eternal now. The idea of this hazy, dreamlike "world between worlds", where the cake of conventions, and reality ceases to make sense, with the looming dread that it might never make sense again. Interestingly, this is why the "uncanny valley" exists - the transition, or "liman" between the non-human and the human. Liminal horror

Proximal horror is where a familiar environment is twisted against you. An intruder in your home. Your house becoming haunted. Being attacked in a place that is supposed to make you feel safe, adding to the sense of wrongness and the overwhelming fear

Dysphoric horror is where you are trapped inside a body not your own, either of another person, or in some cases, another species. Popular examples include "Finding Mari"

Somatic horror is sleep paralysis, or coma. Being trapped inside your own body, able to think and feel and see, but not to talk or move or gesture, or so much as blink

Domestic horror is the idea that the ones you love, and that you thought you knew, are actually completely different from who you thought they were

Cosmic - everyone knows this

Religious - everyone knows this as well

Pseudo-scientific - it's obvious, right ?

Absurdist - Disturbing, bizarre imagery. Weird, unnerving things. A full-grown man with the mind of an infant, weeping and mostly-naked in a baby costume. Dolls breathing. Eyes in the dark. Milk and vomit. Blood-soaked baby clothes. Pigs snuffling around a corpse

#horror #types of horror #writing community #creative writing #writing #writers on tumblr #writeblr #categorization #psychological horror #visceral horror

[demonicmnevice]

Is the protagonist of Pokemon Legends Arceus basically an (Disco Elysium) Innocence by the end of the plot?

They have extra-temporal knowledge of a future society which they make inevitable by claiming a great deal of clout in spheres academic, religious, economic, and most importantly martial. Everyone they influence commits harder to living with Pokemon because of their example. There might even be something worth comparing between spacetime distortions and the Pale.

Maybe being used by a literal divine patron to close a time loop is a point against, there's plenty I don't really get about the Innocentic system yet. Can folks who've played DE more exhaustively or even read the book weigh in?

#pokemon #Disco Elysium #Legends Arceus #Legends Arceus spoilers #categorization

[mud1888]

#lol #funny #humor #joke #protestant #catholic #hospital #categorization #old people

[heyitsnyixie]

I LOVE CATEGORIZING SHIT!!! WOE TAXONOMY CHART BE UPON YE!!

Blood colors

Category distinctions

I don't have refs for most of these, but I felt the primal urge to sort things

Not gonna lie, I think I might be neuro divergent

Lemme know if yall want non transparent versions.

I decided to go back to some old ideas and I'm going to radically restructure my world building.

(Gross old taxonomy chart btw)

They all used to have special pupil shapes, but that was annoying tbh

This shit was hard to read if you weren't me.

#fictional taxonomy chart #my oc shit #ibispaint my beloved #oc #my oc story #osuri #categorization #sorting things #worldbuilding

[howifeltabouthim]

These were impositions, defining categories that failed to recognize the muddle that is us, human beings.

Siri Hustvedt, from The Blazing World

#oversimplification #categorization #defies categorization #complex #i contain multitudes #human nature #humans #humanity #limitations #limiting #quotes #lit #words #excerpts #quote #literature #siri hustvedt #the blazing world

[alostlittleriverlotus]

Doing more research into BPD subtypes, it seems they come from Theodore Millon and at least in comments on posts, others seem to agree they are simply functioning levels. Theodore Millon was born in 1928 so it's not particularly modern. As well as it being just a theory he came up with that people with BPD can exhibit one or more or even none of these types. So if they can exhibit none then why do they need to be there?

He died in 2014 so he was still alive in the modern day, but still. The fact these types come from someone that, as far as I can tell, does not have BPD and was born that long ago only makes them feel more outdated.

I also don't see the benefit of categorizing the disorder or any personality disorder. It's not some separate thing like bipolar 1 versus bipolar 2. It really just feels limiting and like a box for a complex disorder to fit into which limits people imo more than it helps.

#bpd subtypes #borderline personality disorder #actually borderline #bpd #subtypes #categorization

[hybridappbuilder]

Flutter Widgets: Your ultimate weapon in crafting beautiful, responsive UIs.

Discover the different categories of widgets and take your app development to the next level.

#flutter app development #flutter widgets #categorization #mobile application services #mobile app development

[deepspace-diver]

Categorizing the artists in my 1105+ song playlist

https://deezer.page.link/YaLWd9qFdpHCujxr6

Shoutout to all of the really amazing music that's definitely autistic

Will wood

Jack stauber

Sodikken

Penelope scott

Tally hall

Hobo Johnson

Cavetown

Woodkid

Fandroid! (Bring him back. NOWWW)

Graham kartna

Shoutout to all of the sad, angry or emo boys

Mother mother

Wilbur soot

I dont know how but they found me

Radiohead

The backseat lovers

Pinkshift

Portugal, the man.

Vundabar

Tom Rosenthal

Glass animals

Sir chloe

Shoutout to the I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON AND IT'S GREAT

The Dresden dolls

Gary numan

Ninja sex party

Dazey and the scouts

100gecs

Bo burnham

Shoutout to the: It's mostly wholesome. Mostly...

Naethan apollo

The stupendium

Shoutout to the It's just a fucking vibe nevermind the mental illnesses :)

Saint motel

Insane clown posse

Soundroll

I monster

Tame impala

Oliver tree

Rare Americans

JT music

The living tombstone

Shoutout to the it's nostalgic fsr

Omori

Adele (fucking queen i stan her)

Evelyn stein

POTO music

Toby fox

C418

Caravan palace

Random encounters

Roar

Duster

Shoutout to the am i in a forest looking for eldritch horrors? Yes. Yes i am

The garden

Ghost and pals

Paseri onuma

Mystical musicals (og name is in Japanese)

Max frost

Crystal castles

Ladytron

Shoutout to the be nice to them or i will hurt you

Cavetown (yes again)

Dodie

Emmy meli

ABBA

Birdy

Feel free to add more and also listen to all of these :)

#my playlist #playlist #music #categorization #listen to it #rn