Read on Twitter
[thread] On Headstates. What they are and how they're used.
Simply put, a headstate can be thought of as a persona so long as you drop out a good deal of the nuance.
Simply put, a headstate can be thought of as a persona so long as you drop out a good deal of the nuance.
Just as a actor plays their role in a movie, [ *1 ], someone who uses headstate's hosts multiple headstates which they can access freely and which are all internally consistent. Whenever someone is under a headstate, they are ALMOST entirely detached from 'base'.
This goes very deep, much deeper than so-called social chameleon behaviour. To put it in perspective, we'll go through the ringer:
Headstates > Social Chameleon ≥ Masking.
Headstates > Social Chameleon ≥ Masking.
Masking is the most basic form of social adaptation with almost all people at least occasionally utilizing it with the exception of the most socially inept. Masking mostly amounts to dishonesty.
Think about how you would discuss certain topics to certain degrees with some people, while you wouldn't do the same with others. Answering differently depending on the person asking the question? Even more so, this is masking behavior.
Useful certainly, but very flimsy. Someone who is only able to mask is very likely to get caught in lies and inconsistency under the scrutiny of anyone who cares to look too hard.
On to social chameleon's, this is very different to masking thus the use of ≥. You don't ' Social chameleon ' as you would mask, it's a type of person rather than a tactic, but still useful in exploring to properly explain headstates.
Social chameleon's are a leap forward over just
masking, they adapt body language, affect, and sometimes even speech patterns depending on who they are talking to or in what situation they
are talking in.
masking, they adapt body language, affect, and sometimes even speech patterns depending on who they are talking to or in what situation they
are talking in.
Along with this, they also use masks of course. The benefits here are obvious, but it's still lacking as compared to the use of headstates.
Finally, headstates. If you can use headstates, you're a social chameleon by default, a social chameleon among social chameleons. Under my own understanding, EVERYONE who uses headstates has low emotional response AND low emotional empathy BUT very
high cognitive empathy.
high cognitive empathy.
I believe the reason for this is that it's necessitated, otherwise the disconnect required would be impeded by emotional response, similar case with emotional empathy, and finally it'd be entirely impossible without having VERY high cognitive empathy.
The reason for this helps explain the entire case. Headstates, more in depth, are fabricated personalities for the express purpose of social benefit / adaptation. They are purpose built, and not intentional endeavors.
You don't think about 'making' one and then head into a chat and be a entirely different person. Headstates are generated over time, the speed of which depends entirely on the situation in my experience, and for specific groups of people / situations.
For example, someone who uses headstates would have a separate headstate for their family, their school / job, their significant other, etc. You can't ' erase ' a headstate, you can consciously act differently, but it doesn't just disappear.
As should be clear, someone who uses headstates
may act ENTIRELY different from how they would in a room by themselves / ESPECIALLY online.
may act ENTIRELY different from how they would in a room by themselves / ESPECIALLY online.
For effect, the low emotional response is entirely irrelevant. You could have one headstate that's mostly unaffected and another that's more or less a emotional train wreck. Even if they don't have actual experience
with feelings of such variety or intensity 1/2
with feelings of such variety or intensity 1/2
their cognitive empathy allows them to emulate it perfectly. When I say perfectly, I mean it. You have
absolutely no chance at picking out someone who uses headstates unless they allowed you to see two different headstates, [ VERY unlikely ], or they tell you. 2/2
absolutely no chance at picking out someone who uses headstates unless they allowed you to see two different headstates, [ VERY unlikely ], or they tell you. 2/2
There are other tells but they aren't connected to the actual use of them, unless they don't really care whether you know or not, you'd have a tough time of it.
Touching on what I said earlier, them being entirely internally consistent, a person who uses headstates would NEVER slip up. It's not that it's unlikely, it's that it'd be equivalent to if they were telling the truth and accidentally misspoke.
Though this is a VERY strong tool, there are some things that accompany it that are at minimum difficult to deal with. NOTE: NOT EXHAUSTIVE
For one, it appears that many people who use headstates aren't entirely aware of the fact that they use them. You might make a insane 1/2
For one, it appears that many people who use headstates aren't entirely aware of the fact that they use them. You might make a insane 1/2
180 between everyone you talk to separately
and still lay down to sleep, never questioning much of anything about your behavior. Generally this is limited to adolescence but it can extended farther. 2/2
and still lay down to sleep, never questioning much of anything about your behavior. Generally this is limited to adolescence but it can extended farther. 2/2
Secondly, after noticing such behavior they may become very distressed over which headstate is them, or if there really is a them behind the headstates. That's a very deep rabbit hole that some will find themselves trapped in.
Perhaps even being diagnosed with mental illness / making a conscious effort universally to act a certain way which helps no one and fixes nothing but in the end seems to be a common coping mechanism.
Lastly, the use of headstates can be rather exhausting mentally, especially when maintaining many at once. Manageable, but especially online where you can be in tens of communities at once, you could see how it would be a lot to process through such a system.
1*: Actors are more or less all users of headstates, any good actor at least. Though, from my own perspective I believe it's a incomplete model of a headstate in many cases. Cognitive empathy not being quite high enough, or emotional response / emotional empathy being too high.
2*: A less physical / grounded understanding of headstates.
enough for its own thread.
enough for its own thread.
