• schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    What it noticed in my small family system and from working with two- and three-year-olds, we are definitely individuals on a biological level, though this obviously acts (and interacts) with the environment.

    I also think that “nature” and “being like your parents” are two different things that often get conflated; there such wild variation everytime you pull the lever on the chromosonal slot machine, you may be naturally quite different from your parents.

    I trained as a therapist and was quite shocked to learn how poor the research is on modalities on close examination. For instance, every study automatically selects for people who are congruent w/ the treatment because anyone who isn’t, drops out; so any study will have higher success rate than it ever would in the real world where therapists think in terms of conditions and not personal fit.

    • The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Very true. I’ve never worked with kids, but after having kids myself and seeing this “chromosomal slot machine” pull in action, it’s so apparent that a lot of personality is baked in. I used to be quite the behaviorist/blank-slatist too.

      On the note of research selection bias, how about the realization that most research is done on college students who are trying to get class credit, and that most of the research work is also being done by students? And that it’s almost never going to be replicated? I think the general public has this idea that most science is being done by a bunch of specialized men/women in labcoats with decades of experience, not hungover 20-somethings talking to hungover 20-somethings. In reality, that’s probably 99% of it.