Lurker > COVxy

s0nicfan posted...

The vast majority of evolutionary arguments, though, also work if you use the entirety of human history as evidence. Yes, "we're just evolved apes" isn't proof that humans will act like apes in certain contexts. Luckily we have billions of people to exist as the largest dataset possible, and billions more spread out over thousands of years of known human history.

Again, just like Freudian psychoanalysis and evolutionary just-so stories, historical evidence is particularly poor evidence, as you can construct any story you want to post-hoc explain behavior without ever being able to test it empirically.

Pretty much, if you say "we do this because of this evolved mechanism", you need to point to evidence that there actually does seem to be conservation of that mechanism across species. None of these arguments do so. They just say "look, this animal does this, we probably do too because of evolution!", or even worse they are just nonspecific philosophical arguments about human nature "we are just animals rummaging through the darkness and chaos!"

Kazi1212 posted...

Im just confused about the circadian rhythm part I guess. Because even if it was proven evolution played a role in shaping our behavior, Jordan Peterson would still never talk about the circadian rhythm because its wholly unrelated to the types of behavior he is interested in having a discussion about

You don't think the circadian rhythm plays an important role in behavior? I would argue that you simply don't know enough about the circadian rhythm then.

The issue is that rhythmic cycling of signalling molecules doesn't provide "deep" insights like "we are just animals rummaging around in the chaos and darkness of our life. Order brings us out of that darkness..." etc..
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Kazi1212 posted...

COVxy posted...

Well, I'm glad that after immediately mischaracterizing my argument and being called out for it, you've resorted to your go-to insults.

And what was your argument with the post that clear quoted? Why are talking about why Jordan Peterson never talks about circadian rhythm? Why would he ever?

I mean, you can go back to the post chain and read the context of the discussion.

The point wasn't that evolution hasn't played a role in shaping our behavior and the biological basis for our behavior, just that the scope of that discussion when actually grounded in science is uninteresting to the people Jordan Peterson is trying to appeal to. The types of evolutionary arguments put forward are just-so stories that only sound scientific, but are about as scientific as Freudian psychoanalysis.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

You're right, I'm so triggered, by responding to your posts I've demonstrated how triggered I am.

Lol.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Well, I'm glad that after immediately mischaracterizing my argument and being called out for it, you've resorted to your go-to insults.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Ctrl + F: "pointless"
Keyword not found.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

s0nicfan posted...

Are you suggesting people aren't animals a few steps away from savagery? Because you say it's easy to bullshit evolutionary psychology, but it seems even easier to ignore the entirety of human history as evidence for the fact that people are, in fact, only a few steps away from savagery.

No, I'm saying all words following a statement like "we evolved from x, therefore we behave like.." are very likely bullshitty.

It's not that we don't have conserved mechanisms across species, it's just that the people bullshitting about evolutionary psychology are almost always constructing shitty just-so stories.
(for example, the circadian rhythm is probably the best example of a conserved mechanism across species, but nobody sees Jordan Peterson talking about circadian rhythms because it doesn't provide some sort of satisfying lay understanding of behavior).

Of what's pretty much the only time to try to formalize and directly test an evolutionary psychology account, survival processing (I think the researcher behind it is Nairne) can be much better explained by other psychological processes.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

GreatEvilEmpire posted...

$100k is average in the Bay Area

Mean in San Francisco, but there's a reason nobody uses the mean to describe salary or wealth.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

s0nicfan posted...

Outside of religion, there's really no reason to pretend we're not more evolved animals. Even prominent feminists have spoken out about the dangers of pretending the world isn't a dangerous place because people are only a few steps away from savagery.

It's easy to bullshit about evolutionary psychology. Very little of it is actually empirically supported or even a valid scientific theory.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Romes187 posted...

I'm not sure you're too familiar with the housing market in San Diego.

Are you trying to tell me that there is not a single house in the San Diego area that you can afford?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

s0nicfan posted...

Outside of the context leading to that question it makes him seem a bit off his rocker, but his point is that we treat too many things as axiomatic without really digging into them.

I mean, the interviewer, a couple of times I think, asks him directly if these are his opinions, and he says they are. He's not just playing devil's advocate here, clearly, so the context doesn't really matter too much.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Romes187 posted...

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you aren't responsible for a family. I'm in San Diego and we can't afford a house making $120k a year.

I mean, it's almost certainly the case that you can afford a house at that combined household salary, just not the house you want.

The issue is that as people's salaries increase, their expectations and desires increase as well. You don't feel well off because you are constantly trying to strive for a standard of living higher than your actual salary.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Burden of proof is a silly concept. In reality, everyone has the burden of proof, people just like to get out of putting effort toward and argument.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

pikachupwnage posted...

Yeah. Some areas just the cost of renting an aparatment let alone owning a house is absolutely brutal.

I'm on a 20k salary living in an area that has one of the highest costs of living in the country lol.

People just don't really have a subjective sense for this shit. Everyone is poor. Everyone else is doing better than you.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Romulox28 posted...

My wife and I make over 100k combined

---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

foreveraIone posted...

you keep ignoring cost of living in different areas

stop posting.

When you have a 100k salary, cost of living is pretty much negligible. You can live where ever you want comfortably.

No, you cannot buy a gigantic apartment in Manhattan in NYC and have your own wait staff. But that's deliberately missing the point.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Romulox28 posted...

it is a very nice, comfortable salary but it's far from rich unless you live in Montana or something. If you have two working partners (married couple or cohabitating SOs) this is even less difficult to reach, and with cost of living, mortgages, kids, etc the salary can actually get stretched pretty thin. Saying you'd have no sympathy for someone paying 40 - 60 percent taxes on 100k seems pretty out of touch with reality imo

I mean if your salary alone is almost twice the median household income, you have to admit that you are pretty high out there in the distribution.

Subjectively you might not feel rich, but you are really well off in comparison to the rest of the country.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

shockthemonkey posted...

Im not convinced Trump is capable of getting the support needed to be as bad as Bush.

Different days. Party lines are much more solid now-a-days, tbh.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Romulox28 posted...

do you really think that a 100k salary is a lot of money?

It, uh, objectively is.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Not really, not until senior year of high school, had a really awesome physics teacher. Things went uphill from there.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

shockthemonkey posted...

He was a significantly worse president than Donald Trump.

I mean, that's a really hard comparison to justify since we are only 1 year in and Bush had 8 to fuck things up.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Fam_Fam posted...

are you dumb? I'm saying that interfering in elections is commonplace and is done without repercussions when you are a powerful country. How is that whataboutism?

Do you think that is a just thing? Does it justify Russia meddling within our own election? How does this relate back to the original point? Or is it just a distraction to steer the conversation away from the obvious truth?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

MedeaLysistrata posted...

but since people are always complaining about it it's probably really high

Lol.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

So far the topic hasn't turned in the TC's intended direction. That's good.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

voldothegr8 posted...

And you ignored my point that vulnerabilities will always be there, updates or not. Keeping up to date helps sure but that's not why Windows machines are the most vulnerable.

Do you think that Windows machines would be less vulnerable with less vulnerabilities?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

P4wn4g3 posted...

The largest security threat in any given system is the end user sure, but this doesn't fix the problems you think it does.

Let's not pretend it doesn't alleviate the issue. Is it a fix all? Obviously not. Is the way other OSes deal with security much much better? Of course. But a large proportion of insecurity in the population of Windows machines are really simply due to delaying updates.

P4wn4g3 posted...

You act like Windows 10 is extraordinarily secure when in reality

No, I'm acting like general security is improved when security updates are installed.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

P4wn4g3 posted...

And don't point to hospitals not keeping their shit up to date as some sort of case for this, hospitals are a shitty conglomeration of some random corporation buying a building and not knowing anything about a business, cheap ass management that has run a business but doesn't know shit about nursing, pharmacy, patient needs, or technology, and the medical staff. IT is never factored in except for a last ditch "ah fuck" moment where some contractor comes in and fixes the printer.

I mean, for the most part, Microsoft has done a really good job rolling out security patches. So why are Windows machines notoriously vulnerable?

It's because users put off updating indefinitely. Taking that away was the best thing Microsoft could have done to increase the security of their systems. You don't like it because it inconveniences you, not because it's a bad feature. And it wouldn't inconvenience you if you didn't just keep clicking "install at a later date" and then selecting the latest option, rather then actually scheduling a time that works for you.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

P4wn4g3 posted...

Forced updates are fine when they can be scheduled

They can be scheduled, but then when you delay it enough times after the scheduled date, it forces the update.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Kazi1212 posted...

these universities are even more vile than I realized for pushing this cultural idea that you need a college degree for gainful employment.

It's not nearly that simple nor is it actually true that universities are pushing that idea lol.

None-the-less, there does need to be a cultural shift to maintain the university systems, increased access but decreased cultural pressure to attend.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Kazi1212 posted...

What? Im missing something here, can you elaborate what you mean? Are you saying its a bad idea for people to want a degree for employment opportunities because thats not what college is about?

I'm saying that people who go to college simply for the sake of employment, expecting the university to provide a direct path to employment, have misunderstood what they signed up for.

I'm saying that to the extent to which this is the expectation is the extent to which unfortunate market forces are allowing administration of universities to use their power and influence to force curriculum and funding in that direction, since people are more likely to attend if they are told they will get a job after.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Kazi1212 posted...

But whats the goal for most people trying to get a college degree? Its so they can land a good job.

And people may go to a mechanic and complain that their table service was awful, but perhaps they shouldn't have gone to the mechanic expecting to be served food.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Rika_Furude posted...

It would be if they wernt forced downloads

Naw, that's the best part.

The fact that you don't see it is concerning.

The fact that the entire medical community was recently ravaged for using out of date Windows products and that doesn't raise a blip on your radar is concerning.

Rika_Furude posted...

forced restarts when it decides to.

Also this is pretty necessary, and you should understand that too.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Rika_Furude posted...

loses marks for windows updates

This is easily its best pro from a tech perspective.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Is this HS?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

lol i hope not rly.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

mustang90 posted...

Idk if thats the right way to say it. Just basically so shed never leave me.

Jeez.

...
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

mustang90 posted...

Anteaterking posted...

(Only have seen the first two seasons)

She's socially stunted due to her experiences, but she doesn't have a learning or mental disability.

Yeah and thats what I like about her. The idea that if I dated her I could basically teach her and have her learn about life the way I want her to.

Welp, it wasn't creepy until now.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Tmaster148 posted...

I know this is unrelated to the topic, but what is it lately with these low karma old accounts popping out of nowhere?

Like I hope it's not just me and other people are noticing this too.

I mean, there's a pretty high chance that silverwing is just a proudclad alt.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

3deep5u posted...

MAJOR depression (not omg i thought about killing myself yesterday when my boss/partner yelled at me and i'm sad sometimes)

Major depression is just the name of the disorder, not a reference to the severity. If you were diagnosed with "depression", it was very likely major depression.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

You are literally blaming psychiatric medicine for your immoral acts. It's actually not even a very large leap to that clearly facetious statement.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

3deep5u posted...

It's also a fact that psychiatrists don't even know the real mechanisms behind how those drugs work, but that's irrelevant, right?

That's not abnormal in the field of medicine.

I mean, there's all sorts of criticisms of psychiatry that you can make. But "psychiatric medicine is the devil" is not one of them. They have been validated through clinical trials, they work. Not all will work for everyone, since there's such a large heterogeneity within defined disorders (really where your criticism of psychiatry should come in), but they work on average, meaning they will do good for a lot of people.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

The fact that he's allowed himself to be used as the leading image for the whole "let's just privatize science" thing that the current administration is pushing is enough to prevent me from having a positive view of him.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Your whole anti-psychiatric medicine thing is dangerous. Stop it.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

I don't even understand how it's possible to consume that much liquid in that span of time.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

CVs a regularly more than a page, but that's kinda just an academia thing I guess.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

scar the 1 posted...

I think that some combination of division and multiplication will definitely do the trick!

Lmao, you can be such a prick =P
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

HaVeNII7 posted...

Wait. Being born gay doesnt imply that its a gene?

I dont even care if I sound stupid as fuck, Im really curious now. What would it be then? If its a part of your makeup as a person, literally what part would it be?

There's a shit ton of development in the womb, many pieces of it dependent on the precise timing of signaling molecules. Lots can go awry during in utero development.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

They have to know that this is a poor marketing choice, don't they?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

The goal of university isn't to prepare you for a job, and education for its own sake isn't a bad thing.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

I'd go back to the original scores and then convert if I were you, don't wanna get angry phone calls due to rounding error.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

DarkTransient posted...

COVxy posted...

The idea of being born gay does not imply a genetic origin.

My bad. I completely forgot that a week before they pop out, a genie shows up and asks them whether they want to be born straight, gay, bi, or sexless CEman.

Lmao. It's funny when people are this snarky and wrong at the same time.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]