Perfectionistic motivations due to the fact that important people in one’s life expect one to be perfect.
Wikipedia
That’s not quite the definition I got from the TEDRadio Hour podcast episode below. It was more like
A definition of perfectionism people get from seeing others’ curated posts on social media.
That is, people selectively posts only what they want to tell about their lives, which is usually a vast imbalance of the good things, often exaggerated for falsified, and others who view enough of it start setting that amalgamation of all they see as their idea of a perfect life, as if someone had it and they didn’t, when even the truth is those who posted all that stuff don’t even have a life close to it. It’s a perfection that’s socially prescribed to them via social media.
The name is obvious for what it is. The impetus to do so in this day and age of hurrying through things, and slow reading’s benefits, are less obvious, as described in the TEDRadio Hour podcast below.
The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining how and why sentient organisms have qualia or phenomenal experiences — how and why it is that some internal states are felt states, such as heat or pain, rather than unfelt states, as in a thermostat or a toaster.
Art that modifies biased, misleading, and/or symbolically inappropriate art, rather than destroy or remove that art, so what that art wasn’t fair about isn’t forgotten like it was never done or might not happen again.
There’s next to nothing online about this I was able to find in a quick Internet search.
Except that I know it came from the TEDTalk below by Titus Kaphar, and I LOVE the concept!
With more on how art changes us from the TEDRadio Hour podcast episode below…
But here’s what you do with this, think about how you’d amend art that is biased or misleading!
Of course, that’d require you to be aware enough to recognize what art needed amendment.
Then be creative for how you can amend it.
I’ll refrain from giving examples of art amendment only because it would be fully of judgmental controversy. I would have to pass judgment on what art I thought needed amending, and why. Then I’d have to give ideas of how I thought I could amend it, which people would judge to see if it would make the art any better. That’s after they’d judge my judgment on the art needing amending and my reason/s for it.
Now, I’m not shy about courting controversy, but I am strategic about it. A blog post where it’s hard to have a conversation about it isn’t my idea of such a venue. Put me in a crowd where I can have face to face dialogue? Then hell yeah! Bring it!
That’s not to suggest I’d be looking for a combative scene, hoping to win or something. No. That’s where I’d love to engage and see what becomes of it all, whether I’m right, wrong, or we all would come up with something better than any of us might have been able to come up with on our own. That’s my kind of courting controversy!
In plainer language, it confirms that a child has reached an age where they realize a person can see the world differently from how they do. That’s if the child passes the test, of course. Sad state of the world is such that there are more than enough adults these days who would fail this test.
Digital Citizen 