On Personal Identity And Careers + The Prologue of my design of my next social network

Maybe the whole trigger was reading this article from bizzwriter that described 10 things an individual should do in their career profile to improve their chances getting a job. I was not at my best state at that time (having headache), and my teacher mental networks resonated most than the usual average time to express strongly "a step" about a theory of how to get a job in a labor market that contradicts with "my step" for the same topic. So I wrote this comment on that article. The reason I talk to recruiters or other consultants that work in such field was never in the bottom line to get a job from them, but for most of the time, learn how these career individuals how they treat our "personal identity", such as whether they get treated as humans with its own quirks or just only as cog machines. Anyways after a good sleep, I associated more memories to that trigger and here I am going to give you the full story why this is important.

It is important to represent our current character in order to grow it and not to keep it in a stale state. That does not happen in a world currently when we condemn the person by its whole history of what he did and not on its current character. Memories of our past events, sometimes they can or cannot represent our current character. It depends how much focus we put on those events, how much we allow those events to be triggered and be part of our normal routine. The second problem is that we place current character flaws as a dead end instead on a trail of how much improvement he did over his past character and how much potential the individual can attain from its current character with some adjustments. That is, in some respects, the wholly grail of how machine learning works. Why do we leave machines to be more sophisticated than humans and why people wish they attain the good characteristics of a robot, but they do know actually that it is not possible to attain to, for the current paradigm of society does not let it happen to be.

I talked the implications of the legal system and now it is time to also cover the labor market system. One of the common template I see for applying a job as a cultural norm is to "show only our strengths" and to "hide any unnecessary personal information". It is a copy paste template I see on many articles and it is time for that tradition to fade away. In actuality, that would be a good advice if on "average" most people showed a lot of personal information, especially information that does not represent their current character. However, on "average" actually most people currently hide most of their personal information, especially information related to their current character. Some organizations have seen that skills alone do not make the fit to make a healthy workplace environment, such as Zappos value "create fun and a little weirdness" so they created the idea of people creating a youtube video about themselves describing a part of their personal self as part of their resume. In here, we see the opposite, where any personal information is necessary as a decision whether the individual is a good hire or not. The point of those youtube videos is not to show all your personal information, but only on what you hold the most of your memories strongly, the things that drive you regardless of the cultural norms and work career roles society expects you to do. In other words, your true passions. I know that many employers always ask and want the job applicants to have a strong passion of what they are applying for. That is impossible to be attained if we hide our own character. And unfortunately, the best way to show our character is to express some of our personal information, because in many cases that personal information may not align with our past work experience, education, and other stuff that we put in a resume, leaving our strengths to not reach to the maximum potential. I also talked in my presentation about black box thinking on the manner we treat individuals flaws. We treat flaws as a dead end, making it impossible for trust and transparency to reach the maximum potential for the individual to improve itself.

The old educational traditional system had some drawbacks and strengths. However, the most potent of the traditional educational system was that it was a non-profit organization that cared people to improve their personal character instead of their skills. Now we condemn those traditional educational systems for not focusing on skills, being negligent on how potent the attributes of character you can attain from those existing institutions. It may be too late that those institutions to still teach the foundations of character as much as before, as they now adapt to only focus on skills that fit within the current labor market.

And here are the things that I learned from the past on some teachers that wanted to bring an impact, even for a little bit. One of the teachers said that when we try to create a topic, we should focus on writing a topic that fits within the future generations and not only for the current generation. The topic should focus on how broad it can be instead of only what's trending. The more broad, the more value the topic it is, as it can linger the same meaning across future generations. This can be applied to great philosophical excerpts, Thomas Kuhn Scientific Revolutions, oh, and maybe the science of Evolution (limited only to the hardware stuff, but still useful, that is how anthropology was created), Lorin Friesen Mental Symmetry (this one will be the king of the kings indeed), and even the recent article of Emergent Layers of Alex Danco, which describes how we change paradigm shifts through our own operating system from making a limited resource to scarce only within the scope of the hardware world (mental symmetry instead can expand also through our "own operating system" as well). That is possible because our operating system ingrained in our body has the template of using scientific thought. It is impossible to make a personal limited resource to scarce these days because we don't have a template ingrained in our operating system on how to handle this. Thus, our operating system is limited, but can be expanded, by upgrading our operating system with the module of mental symmetry. There can be more sophisticated models of mental symmetry, but so far, at the present moment, this is the best we have reached so far. Now, we go back to the topic of "hide uncessary personal information" in our job applications. Should we really do that? Is that the thing our future generations should focus on, to hide personal information, because most cases, we regard as "unnecessary"? The point is: What is the current pace of how much information we provide on our character to the public. If we provide too much information of our personal life, even information that does not represent to our current character, then I agree this advice should be enforced, but if its the other way around, where we don't show any of our personal information, even the ones that present our core character, then that average advice should not be such case. Evolution did a great thing to show how the hardware of this world works with a wonderful template. This brought the different branches of anthropology and learn the physiological adaptations of people through genes and in general the form of our bodies take shape to adapt those different new environments. However, evolution has nothing to attribute the personal character. In fact, cultural anthropology uses the same template of evolution to describe a software theory through a hardware theory. That is, that our norms are attributed by the physical environment, in other words, that everything is attributed to our embodiment. We even characterize that the people that lived a thousand years ago had different brains than the ones we currently have due to evolution, due to the hardware theory. Is that so or is it more fit to say that our operating system through our mind did a "software upgrade" to see perspectives in different ways in order to transform the world that fits the needs in an automated way? That is what I imply instead, by the establishment of scientific thought through our community, that advanced us to have an accelerated pace on creating products that improve our external world by understanding the theories and mechanisms of our external world. However, we lack the understanding of the personal individual much, as much as we can't automate it these days because we don't have the right formula of how our personal character forms. We live in pre-scientific days right now through understanding our own personal self where each of us have our own version on how it works. We need a template to uniform all these ideas into one and mental symmetry may be the template of the personal version of "scientific thought" that can lead us to create transparency and trust more than we do so today. The reason we don't want to know the personal information of others is because we are so incompetent on how to handle it that we prefer to dismiss it by living only through the theory of evolution and let the evolution do its own part, its own mysticism on how it will transform us, the way it is, is the way it is, and we cannot change it, unless the environment changes, is that so, or is it instead in the end all up to us? On the other hand, I feel pity expressing this major flaw because: If there is no existing theory to expand beyond just the theory of evolution, then by all means, in what way can we live or have a purpose in our life? If I don't give a solution, I am just giving no purpose to you, and that is not my intent, as my intent is there is another way to view things, another way to upgrade your operating system, in such a way, where you don't only focus the physical and ignore the personal, but to focus instead on "both" in order to make our life more complete than it used before. Currently, society ignores the personal in many cases, but we shouldn't, and we should embrace to be better, a motivation and hope to create a template, that can fit the personal through clear understanding on what is going on.

So then there was another teacher that gave us an essay to write with the following topic: "If you had to find a job, which job would you pick, one for the purpose of money or one that reflects your character?". This is a topic that is very controversial, as you know, character these days, has no meaning as much as to what are the demand skills of today. One of my economic teachers could just laugh and say in an ironic way "If you are majoring for art, good luck! If you are majoring for economics, then welcome to the real world to make a difference". I kind of admit that is how our present world is in some way. Art and literature majors have no much hope in career opportunities as much as math and technology. However, we have to understand that literature and art are a part or ways we cognitively think and some people are passionate to show of those skills. There is a major shift these days forcing women to focus on majors like math and science because those are the jobs in demand. Of course, I would agree by no wonder that those jobs are kind of the only option to have a sustainable life in a developed nation. I really care women to have a life that can afford. On the other hand, I am worried whether those skills they attain are things that they are really passionate or not. Why in society these days we value some majors over other majors? Why in society we focus on some cognitive styles over others? For instance, literature, it is a wonderful thing, it focuses on analyzing the individual itself. As opposed to science, we only focus on the physical things only. So then, ideally, I would say character is more important than money, as it is a big sacrifice to give up our development of our character which will result to depression (guess why many people take anti-depressant pills?) in exchange to something else that does not reflect us only to self satisfy our self with materialistic stuff. I created a flash presentation from Lane Friesen excerpts, which on some part of it, we see an individual that had a deep sense of responsibility, majored in a major that did not reflect her character and ended up having Parkinson disease due to contradicting her character with her job role during her daily life. In other words, we should have a balance of both instead of only focusing on materialistic stuff. In other words, when picking a job, unless it is your last resort, it is imperative to not ignore expressing your character as that is the only thing that will fulfill your most happiness.

In order to have a more clear explanation of the above, to substitute our current paradigm to another paradigm that upgrades our own operating system to use our environment more to our maximum potential, in order to not fill hurt but have a better substitute of the current theory of evolution, then we have to make it explicitly clear this theory of mental symmetry and also establish it as a guideline, because we have seen what goes when there is no guideline in the past, for the scientific though existed for a long time, but it was of no major implication until scientific thought was established explicitly as a common way to process things through our community. And to fill both of those two requirements, I have finished reading the chapters of introduction, mental symmetry, mental networks through the book of Natural Cognitive Theology by Lorin Friesen and will only focus on those chapters for now to create a draft design of how within those chapters only we can design our next social network that will fit the template of mental symmetry which will fulfill our personal needs. Then I will try to ask other people to give their opinions of those topics. Then I will try others to contribute as well to contribute on those other chapters and other chapters as well. Then we will try to do iterations of existing chapters with existing drafts done to see if we missed something and do that over and over again. That is my plan. I guess the most challenging part will be finding people who are passionate about mental symmetry to contribute in this project, and as long anybody can express themselves something within the language of mental symmetry, then you are definitely invited to express your own ideas and contributions. That is the end of the prologue of my design of my next social network.