Skip Navigation
Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
Cadenza @lemmy.world

What "little" experiences changed the way you percieved things ?

Idk if "little experience" means something in English, but what I meant is non-life changing/threatening. Things that would otherwise go unnoticed.

For me, it was when I stopped drinking acoholic beverages because.. I ended up finding it boring, I guess.

I started noticing how low key hostile my environment is towards people who dont drink. People started thinking I was sick, depressed, converted to islam, being snob, etc.

Bartenders started to openly mock me when I asked for a lemonade (they still do) : "We dont do that here", "Go to a physician if you need that", "you're in a bar you know ?".

I started realizing how hostile my country/region/groups can be to people who dont drink. Never realized that before.

Edit : typo

84 comments

  • Worked with someone senior to me in my org, who would always complain about how people don’t know how to work well or get too distracted by new technology etc. It was often compelling and made you feel guilty about not being better.

    Then I realised they were unconsciously talking about themselves. They were always distracted by their emails and computer and hardly ever getting good work done.

    You hear about people projecting. But to see it in person and realise that a whole person’s seemingly insightful or valuable position on what’s “good” was just self-centred abuse is quite another thing.

    I was never one to take authority seriously, quite the opposite really, but this really removed what little ability I had to perceive someone with respect without massive amounts of evidence and proof.

    There are few hero’s amongst us. We’re all pretty flawed and broken.

  • When we started wearing masks at work, I started to get called ma'am a lot.

    I started hormones the next year.

    • Talk about a ripple effect :) Even though I suppose you were already considering this at that time, no ? Anyway, that's very nice, thanks for sharing !

      • I'd considered it and dismissed the idea before, but I think I was just scared of transitioning.

        Then I got to feel what I was missing and knew what I was missing out on :)

  • For me, it was the combination of two Linguistic tidbits of info, from uni classes:

    • verb modality being split between epistemic and deontic
    • Linguistics itself being descriptive, while normative grammar being prescriptive.

    I won't go further on what those posh words mean because they were just the "trigger". What changed the way that I perceive things was that, by their powers combined, I realised that there's a deep distinction between

    • what we know, what we don't know, what's true or false
    • what we want, what we don't want, what we consider good or bad

    and that we should never mix both things inside our heads.

    • I love this ! I sont exactly know the meaning of these words, but the idea itself is crystal clear !

      • I sont exactly know the meaning of these words,

        The posh words? They aren't too important, but:

        Modality is how a language allows you to talk about either reality or your attitude towards something (all languages do it). It's split into a bunch of categories, but the biggest ones are

        • epistemic - you're talking about reality, things that are either true or false. For example, "the bar doesn't sell you lemonade". And
        • deontic - you're talking about your attitude towards something; either "this is good/allowed/should be done" or "this is bad/disapproved/shouldn't be done". For example, "the bar should sell you lemonade."

        In the meantime, a grammar for any given language can be either

        • descriptive - it informs the reader how speakers of that language speak it; this is what Linguistics does. For example, "a lot of English speakers use «[noun] and me» as the subject." is a descriptive statement.
        • prescriptive - it tells you how the author believes that you should be using that language. For example, "people shouldn't say «[noun] and me», they should say «[noun] and I»" would be a prescriptive statement.

        You probably noticed that the underlying distinction between epistemic vs. deontic is the same as the one between descriptive and prescriptive. That was what "clicked" me years ago, that made me realise that this distinction is everywhere. And that, if we want clarity of reasoning, we should keep this distinction in mind.

    • I used to mix them up. Once I learned the difference and started making effort to communicate clearly then I began being seen as promotion material in my industry

      • It has also a big impact in our personal lives. For example, it's damn easier to avoid wishful thinking and doomerism if you keep them distinct, because then you start asking yourself "is this what I really see? Or am I letting my wishes and fears cloud my mind?".

  • Living in different countries made me realize how little people usually know about others. I like to remind people that calling things "strange", "weird" or saying "Nobody would do xyz" is often wrong and people just a flight away actually find this normal

    Still in that country I worked for a company made of 100% foreigners. When I joined the boss took me under his wing and try teaching me the ways in this country and how to get sh*t done. It took a disagreement on product roadmap for me to realize that he was not technically good, he was actually racist and I definitely didn't want him as a role model. Now I'm extra careful on seeing the signs early

  • Taking anthropology courses in college made a significant change to the way I view the world. I don't necessarily know or understand anyone else's way of thinking about things, but I am always aware that alternatives exist. It made me more accepting of differences and more open to new ideas. There are an infinite number of "right ways" to do things. (Although there are still wrong ways too.)

84 comments