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.
He told me something interesting that I I think tells me that some people figured out this um thing that if somebody is stressed enough it um contorts the dopamine reward contingency um so that dopamine no longer encodes positive things. It just tries to prevent things from getting worse is what we're basically saying here.
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.
If you get to a state where you're really starving, things have not been going well for a long time. You've been making really bad decisions. The creek dried up. The, you know, some forest fire came through and ruined your your foraging area or whatever. things are going really really bad, are you going to really sit around and wait for the the rewards? The main thing you want to do is stay alive. If you don't stay alive, it doesn't matter what rewards you chase. And so, in a sense, flipping dopamine's meaning is exactly what you'd want to do. You're in an emergency state, and you want to use this reinforcement system, this expectation system to stay alive. You want to pay attention mainly to those things. You want to pay attention to them. You want to be motivated by them. We want to be motivated and pay attention and avoid the negative things. But that's an emergency state.