The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
So these three things, how alert or sleepy you are, that's one, how good or bad you feel, that's two, and then whether or not most of your attention is directed outward, or whether or not it's directed inward. And much of what we call emotions are made up by those three things.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
there are three axes two emotion, three continuum that interact, the level of alertness and calmness, how good or bad you feel, and whether or not you're mainly focused inward or outward, because those are going to form a useful tool kit for the information going forward.
the way this works is the following you need to ask yourself at any point you could do this right now if you like what's your level of autonomic arousal autonomic arousal is just the Continuum the range of alert to calm... and there's this other axis this other question which is what we call veilance now veilance is a value do you feel good or bad... and then there's a third thing which is how much we are intercepting and how much we are excepting all right so how much our attention is focused internally on what we're feeling and how much it's focused exter internally and this is always going to be in a dynamic balance