Jump to content

help science?


friendlybear

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I am looking for 20-40 year old volunteers to take part in my survey on emotions and relationships https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/XFWFZS5
The survey takes about 10-15 minutes if you go with your gut responses. We are looking for more male participants, I thought this would be a good place to find them! :) If you have the time or simply want to procrastinate, then please click the link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The premise of your study is flawed. 

You're assuming that there are things that can be known about human nature. This is incorrect.

However, you're doing very useful pseudo-scientific gatherings of data that may later become politically useful, particularly to parties who wish to justify measures taken against the free flow of information. What you think you're observing is basically just a mirage ... but what you're actually doing is giving dictators more free ammunition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to regret this. Damn my curiosity.

 

14 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

You're assuming that there are things that can be known about human nature. This is incorrect.

What makes you say that?

 

15 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

However, you're doing very useful pseudo-scientific gatherings of data that may later become politically useful, particularly to parties who wish to justify measures taken against the free flow of information. What you think you're observing is basically just a mirage ... but what you're actually doing is giving dictators more free ammunition.

Explain to me exactly how an online survey on emotions and relationships can be used to block the free flow of information and how what OP is observing is a mirage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Human nature is not a thing that human independent individuality should be measured against, in a right and wrong kind of way. Yet this is happening all the time, often for political purposes. Other than that, please go fuck yourself. Imagine Gavrilo Princip asking "please explain exactly how my personal suffering is affecting the lives of millions" ... or Adolf Hitler ever feeling a moment of doubt about his heroic mission. Who cares in the aftermath? Those who clean up only care about the nature of the mess.

There is never going to be "peace".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

Human nature is not a thing that human independent individuality should be measured against, in a right and wrong kind of way.

Before you said "things can't be known", now it's "things shouldn't be measured". And no why to either.

8 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

Yet this is happening all the time, often for political purposes.

Where? By Who?

8 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

Other than that, please go fuck yourself.

Neat.

11 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

Imagine Gavrilo Princip asking "please explain exactly how my personal suffering is affecting the lives of millions" ... or Adolf Hitler ever feeling a moment of doubt about his heroic mission.

Wouldn't these things be good?

13 minutes ago, MaxFaust said:

Who cares in the aftermath? Those who clean up only care about the nature of the mess.

There is never going to be "peace".

Dramatic. Irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay ... this isn't personal, so let's get that out of the way. Fuck this, fuck that, those are only figures of speech. But let's get right to the meat: What can be known? How can it be measured? Who gets to standardize and effectualize this infomation? Obviously, if "we" are going to have mathematical standards, we have to first get to the point of standardized mathematics. What is the meaning of this symbol? Where goes what and why? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK ... this went sideways, for which I am to blame. My apologies to the OP ... and anyone else that were feeling insulted. I shouldn't have worded myself like I did, as this most certainly doesn't help to get my point across, it only pisses people off. I know better. Really. It's just that I tend to get carried away some times ... and this "humanities vs. science" issue is a sensitive (and volatile) one. In the interest of full disclosure: I am in the hard science camp. It pisses me off whenever sociologists, psychologists, criminologists, and whatnot, claim to be practicing "science". This is patently false. "Humanities" is of course a worthy field of study, perhaps even some taxonomic gridwork, but science it ain't.

My argument? Using the scientific method is of course laudable ... but approaching a field of study from a kind of "General Theory of Relativity" angle when you ought to consider it under the auspices of "Quantum Field Theory" isn't going to cut the mustard. Obviously, this will immediately confront us with some uncertainty issues. Basically that any human individual is essentially unknowable. "Knowing yourself" is a tall order for sure. Knowing somebody else? Forget about it. You can "know" someone your entire life ... which will not stop them from saying or doing things that make you question everything, like, WTF dude, where did that come from? 

Being young means being naive to people's motives. Hell, even old people can be really blind like that ... but who benefits from all these "studies" you keep hearing about all the time? In what ways do they benefit? The main source of political nourishment for most crackpot fringe asshats who are hating on gender, race and that sort of thing, is the field of "studies" ... that they can carry with them into debates and present as scientific corroboration of their points of view. Particularly when it comes to the question of what is and what isn't "normal" (and hence "democratic" by virtue of majority consent). 

Anyway, that's my position, clarified as best I'm able to. 

Again, sorry about the left field language above. I shouldn't have done that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was baffling that as a man of science you'd be insulted by someone asking for empirical data to support your position. Also for the record there is some science involved in analysing human behaviour. Just because they aren't dealing with mathematical equations doesn't discredit them.

 

For example the common 'Broken Window' theory in criminology is supported by large amounts of research. Quite a lot of information highlighting the link between lower socio-economic areas and higher rates of violent crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2018 at 1:17 AM, MaxFaust said:

Okay ... this isn't personal, so let's get that out of the way. Fuck this, fuck that, those are only figures of speech.

This made me laugh a little. "Fuck you is a figure of speech!".

But yeah, it's not personal to me either. I was never offended or anything anyway as most places on the internet are far shittier and will call you worse for less.

 

On 9/30/2018 at 4:58 AM, Requiem said:

MaxFaust is a great hit at family barbecues. 

"Hey Aunt Beryl, how's the hip? Fuck you, by the way. Your husband couldn't make it? Give him a quick "fuck you" from me."

 

On 10/1/2018 at 1:20 AM, RelentlessOblivion said:

It was baffling that as a man of science you'd be insulted by someone asking for empirical data to support your position. Also for the record there is some science involved in analysing human behaviour. Just because they aren't dealing with mathematical equations doesn't discredit them.

 

For example the common 'Broken Window' theory in criminology is supported by large amounts of research. Quite a lot of information highlighting the link between lower socio-economic areas and higher rates of violent crime.

This.

 

On 9/30/2018 at 3:56 PM, MaxFaust said:

OK ... this went sideways, for which I am to blame. My apologies to the OP ... and anyone else that were feeling insulted. I shouldn't have worded myself like I did, as this most certainly doesn't help to get my point across, it only pisses people off. I know better. Really. It's just that I tend to get carried away some times ... and this "humanities vs. science" issue is a sensitive (and volatile) one. In the interest of full disclosure: I am in the hard science camp. It pisses me off whenever sociologists, psychologists, criminologists, and whatnot, claim to be practicing "science". This is patently false. "Humanities" is of course a worthy field of study, perhaps even some taxonomic gridwork, but science it ain't.

My argument? Using the scientific method is of course laudable ... but approaching a field of study from a kind of "General Theory of Relativity" angle when you ought to consider it under the auspices of "Quantum Field Theory" isn't going to cut the mustard. Obviously, this will immediately confront us with some uncertainty issues. Basically that any human individual is essentially unknowable. "Knowing yourself" is a tall order for sure. Knowing somebody else? Forget about it. You can "know" someone your entire life ... which will not stop them from saying or doing things that make you question everything, like, WTF dude, where did that come from? 

Being young means being naive to people's motives. Hell, even old people can be really blind like that ... but who benefits from all these "studies" you keep hearing about all the time? In what ways do they benefit? The main source of political nourishment for most crackpot fringe asshats who are hating on gender, race and that sort of thing, is the field of "studies" ... that they can carry with them into debates and present as scientific corroboration of their points of view. Particularly when it comes to the question of what is and what isn't "normal" (and hence "democratic" by virtue of majority consent). 

Anyway, that's my position, clarified as best I'm able to. 

Again, sorry about the left field language above. I shouldn't have done that.

Science simple refers to empirical information obtained from experimental procedures in order to create and test falsifiable hypothesis and theories. Although there have been examples of this not being the case for psychology in some historical instances, the majority of modern psychological research fits within these barriers.

While it is often not as hard a science as say chemistry as it is more difficult in psychology to obtain ethical controls to prove certain theories (so sometimes less definitive methods such as case studies must be used as opposed to traditional experimentation), psychology is more science than humanities.

The brain is a physical organ, behavior is what it does. It is knowable through observation in the same way digestion caused by the stomach is knowable. The brain just happens to be very complicated.

 

Edit: Still not sure on these conspirators you mention. Can I have a name to Google or something?

Also, other sciences get used poorly in politics all the time (look at some of the flimsy genetic proofs that get thrown around in the name of "Race Realism").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 10 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...