Loris Tjeknavorian
"Othello" Ballet . Scene 5
London Symphony Orchestra
Conductor: L. Tjeknavorian
لوریس چکناوریان
باله "اتللو" . صحنه ۵
ارکستر سمفونیک لندن
به رهبری لوریس چکناوریان

Loris Tjeknavorian
"Othello" Ballet . Scene 3
London Symphony Orchestra
Conductor: L. Tjeknavorian
لوریس چکناوریان
باله "اتللو" . صحنه ۳
ارکستر سمفونیک لندن
به رهبری لوریس چکناوریان

باورم نمیشه دو ساعت سرکلاس یه احمق نشستم

هر روز من تو این دانشگاه

The.Father.2020.1080p.BluRay.YIFY

تهوع‌آور، منزجرکننده، احمقانه.
چه‌طور تولید چنین چیزی ممکن است؟

این مثلاً قسمتی از بازجویی ساواک است! حالا ساواک هم نه، یک دستگاه امنیتی در گینه بیسائو را فرض کنید. نویسنده موقع نوشتن چنین صحنه‌ای چه‌طور خنده‌اش نگرفته؟ این اداهای صورت بازیگران چیست؟

The results of the studies cast further doubt on the efficacy of these pay-for-performance practices, however. Of course, these practices can motivate people, but in the process, they will likely encourage shortcuts and undermine intrinsic motivation. They will draw people’s attention away from the job itself, toward the rewards it can yield, and that without doubt will result in less effective, less creative problem solving. In a time of major problems facing the business world, in a time when thoughtful, visionary problem solving is what’s needed, too many companies have taken the easy road by falling into a pattern of relying on glamorous incentives rather than promoting involvement with the job and commitment to the company.

📚 why do we do what we do
✍ Edward L. Deci and Richard Flaste

capitalism breeds innovation.

meanwhile capitalism:

منم همینطور عاشوب قشنگم. بازم به اوج باز خواهیم گشت

پلن جدید

For extrinsic motivation to work as a motivator, there must be clarity about what behaviors are expected, and what outcomes will result from those instrumental behaviors.

📚 why do we do what we do
✍ Edward L. Deci and Richard Flaste

In most totalitarian systems, and for some people in our system, the same is true; there are not clear linkages between understandable behaviors and desired outcomes, so there is a profound lack of motivation to be a productive member of society.

📚 why do we do what we do
✍ Edward L. Deci and Richard Flaste

White’s theorizing suggests that there is a second important psychological need—beyond autonomy—that underlies intrinsically motivated behavior. People, impelled by the need to feel competent, might engage in various activities simply to expand their own sense of accomplishment. When you think about it, the curiosity of children—their intrinsic motivation to learn—might, to a large extent, be attributed to their need to feel effective or competent in dealing with their world.

📚 why do we do what we do
✍ Edward L. Deci and Richard Flaste

The feeling of competence results when a person takes on and, in his or her own view, meets optimal challenges. Optimal challenge is a key concept here. Being able to do something that is trivially easy does not lead to perceived competence, for the feeling of being effective occurs spontaneously only when one has worked toward accomplishment. Like the children at Cobblestone School, with their spontaneous, inner desire to test themselves and the environment, all of us are striving for mastery, for affirmations of our own competence. One does not have to be best or first, or to get an “‘A,” to feel competent; one need only take on a meaningful peranal challenge and give it one’s best.

📚 why do we do what we do
✍ Edward L. Deci and Richard Flaste

Wayne Cascio (now an industrial psychologist at the University of Colorado), Judith Krusell (now a clinical psychologist in New Jersey), and I did another simple experiment. We gave positive feed back—statements like, ““Good, you solved that one faster than most people”—to half the subjects, but we gave no performance feedback to the other half. Because the task was one where people could not really tell how well they were doing, it was possible to give positive feedback that was believable no matter how well they actually did. Half the subjects in each experimental group were male and half female, and the results were quite startling indeed, so unexpected that, in a kind of scientific double take, we felt obliged to give the experiment another try. In both of these cases, the results indicated that praising males increased their intrinsic motivation, but praising females decreased their intrinsic motivation. It was apparently the case that females got “hooked” by the praise, whereas males, for whom it simply affirmed their success—it signified that they were competent—were propelled onward by it. But why might that be so?

📚 why do we do what we do
✍ Edward L. Deci and Richard Flaste

it was because how men and women were raised during the 70s. the boys would be raised as more adventurous, girls less so; boys were expected to be focused on success but girls were expected to be interpersonally sensitive. This hypersensitivity apparently led the women in the study to experience the praise as a control, and they quickly learned to see the puzzle solving as a way of obtaining praise rather than something that provides its own intrinsic gratification.