Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Religion, God, and Theology Discussion of God, religion, faith, theology, and spirituality.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-16-2017, 07:17 AM   #76
Lychon
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Crocker Land
Posts: 81
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

I want to preface this retort by saying that you could easily have made your argument with the antipathy against me. You still would have been wrong, but it would at least have opened up dialogue on this issue between us on more amicable grounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
The bystander effect is one of the social psychological phenomena most strongly backed up by experiments. It's renowned for being very replicable. To claim it only happens in "special cases" (like when there is diffusion of responsibility) shows a very basic misunderstanding of experimental method.
This is a misrepresentation of my position. I never claimed that the bystander effect occurs "only" in the circumstances discussed above. Rather, the claim is that it is most pronounced when those conditions are concentrated (e.g., diffusion of responsibility, ambiguity, etc.). The problem is that you're reading my responses to Aaron W. out of context: the reason I focused on ambiguity and diffusion of responsibility is because those specific conditions are absent or not significantly present in the circumstances I was originally referencing.

Moreover, it is unclear what you mean by the "experimental method" in this context: it is precisely the presence of these conditions in the classic bystander effect scenarios that characterizes the "experimental method" testing the effect (not all tests, of course). In an attempt to endow your opening paragraph with a veneer of learnedness, you've managed to ably demonstrate your own misunderstanding of what "experimental method" means.

Moreover, this still has little to do with my claim that in most cases involving injury, those who see the injury occur, and can reasonably provide assistance, do so. Common scenarios include helping someone rise after seeing them fall, or calling for EMS after witnessing a serious vehicular collision.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
Experimental method shows causation between a variables. Group size is the independent variable (the one that the experimenter changes) in the original experiments , the dependent variable is people helping. When you increase group size (to a certain point), the odds of people helping decrease. This finding is pretty much irrefutable and rock solid. The experiment has been replicated ad nauseum. There are some cultures where the experiments tend to show different trends, I'm not going into great detail on that - but those interested can probably find it by looking it up.
Cool story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
After this it is natural to assume that increasing group size affects some traits of the groups in question. This is because you know that since there is more people, you're not decreasing the amount of people that could help, but for some reason you tend to decrease the amount of people that would help. It is a very counter-intuitive finding, which is why it is so interesting. And research do indeed show that when you use those traits (for example group cohesion) as independent variables, they do indeed affect the outcome.
Also cool story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
But it's still a misunderstanding to claim that they are therefore the variable that matters, because we already know that group size affects them. The reason they are very interesting, is because this is the behavior that you can attempt to change without necessarily affecting group size (very relevant for large cities, for example).
Well, you've just shown that that is at least one of the variables that "matters", so...yeah. But either way, I never claimed that those were the "only" variables that matter, only that such variables (e.g., ambiguity and diffusion of responsibility relative to group size) are quite pronounced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
I have a very low interest in once again making myself a target for Lychon's dreary armchair warfare and forum trolling.
Most amusing: tame_deuces comments with a needlessly confrontational (though still erroneous) post that bastardizes my position, and then talks about not wising to make himself a "target". Tell me more about how this "target" business syncs with your behavior on the alternate cosmological argument thread, where you magically decided to respond to my first post about the cosmological argument after Original_Position nipped the 'polemic'/'argument' discussion in the bud, all of a sudden discovering that you "disagreed" with it. What a coincidence! Is that what you mean by not making yourself a "target"? Hmmm...I guess your m.o. is to turn bellicose upon losing an argument, and then play the victim to deflect. Lovely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
But I am a social psychologist and an expert in this field.
Wow. And yet you misunderstood a very simple argument regarding the bystander effect, not to mention appear to have a poor grasp on what "experimental method" means. Try not to randomly insert the word "only" in front of your interlocutor's arguments after decontextualizing them just so you can fabricate fodder for your contrarian BS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
I have zero tolerance for willfully ignorant interpretations of a very valuable understanding of human interaction to be read and potentially believed by someone stumbling on this thread by chance.
Then you should ask a moderator to delete your most recent post on this thread, because it is wilful ignorance in a nutshell. Also, playing the holier-than-thou card when you're plain wrong, not to mention being needlessly confrontational in hopes of distancing yourself from the humiliation of not knowing that 'polemic' is interchangeable with 'argument', is a rather poor move.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
Tens of thousands of hours of research wasn't made just so people like Lychon can take out singular sentences and use them to shove lies down people's throats while calling everyone who objects stupid.
What lies? Oh, you mean the lies you uttered when you "willfully misinterpreted" my argument regarding the bystander effect? I see. Please show me where I said that the bystander effect occurs "only" where ambiguity, diffusion of responsibility, etc. are present. Show me. I am waiting. When you accuse someone of lying, you sure as hell better be able to back it up. But even more importantly, never, ever, ever admit to being a social psychologist while simultaneously making it abundantly clear that you don't know how to use the phrase "experimental method".

Oh, and lastly, where did I call anyone "stupid"? Not seeing that. Maybe you're referring to Aaron W. talking about my "alma mater being so proud of me", and somehow confusing me for Aaron W.? Maybe? When someone makes unreasonable or distinctly wrong claims/conclusions in a conversation involving me, you better believe I'm going to call them out on it, just like I'm calling out your rather crooked and fallacious accusations against me here. The fact that you're engaging in this behavior under the guise of "zero tolerance for willfully ignorant interpretations" demonstrates the level of abject desperation you've sunk to over the past few weeks, not to mention brilliant irony.

Last edited by Lychon; 03-16-2017 at 07:40 AM.
Lychon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 06:39 PM   #77
Lychon
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Crocker Land
Posts: 81
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

*without the antipathy against me. Sorry- long workday. I only have two short windows during most days to post here. :-/
Lychon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 07:12 PM   #78
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,030
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Ok.
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2017, 03:52 AM   #79
Giancarlo672
newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 20
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

1st try would be to save all. If i could not, then i'll choose to save a small kid. Or to whomever i could save but i'll try my best.
Giancarlo672 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2017, 09:32 AM   #80
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,030
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giancarlo672 View Post
1st try would be to save all. If i could not, then i'll choose to save a small kid. Or to whomever i could save but i'll try my best.
Why would you save the child?

I'm not arguing with you, but the why is just as interesting as the who (if not more).
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2017, 07:10 PM   #81
BeaucoupFish
Pooh-Bah
 
BeaucoupFish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Touched by His Noodly Appendage
Posts: 4,051
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

I'll make an argument for the college-aged person.

They are the most likely to understand and appreciate what happened. The elderly person is more likely to accept not being the first choice, and in fact might be upset if they were saved over a younger person.

The child is unlikely to understand anything that happened, that they were in mortal danger, that a stranger saved their life. Their parents would certainly be very happy though.

The undergraduate has the ability to understand what happened, and might take varying lengths in changing their future outlook on life (and more importantly, their behaviours) to something more positive because their life was saved. The child might do something later in life if the importance of what happened to them is constantly reinforced by the parents, but I expect it would reduce in importance over time. While that will eventually happen to the undergrad as well, they are at a productive age where what they do now matters more than what they might do in a decade or so. I think the few children that might decide "I'll be a doctor so I can save ppl as well" will be outbalanced by the young adults that change majors to something more helpful, volunteer with MSF etc, or just be a kinder person overall.
BeaucoupFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2017, 04:40 AM   #82
JohnyCrash
veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,130
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Well I would not save the child, what if he grew up to be a lawyer? Cant risk saving the college kid, he might be studying to be a lawyer.

I would save the old guy, he might have been a lawyer in his past and maybe he will leave me something in his will.
JohnyCrash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2017, 07:22 AM   #83
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,030
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish View Post
I'll make an argument for the college-aged person.

They are the most likely to understand and appreciate what happened. The elderly person is more likely to accept not being the first choice, and in fact might be upset if they were saved over a younger person.

The child is unlikely to understand anything that happened, that they were in mortal danger, that a stranger saved their life. Their parents would certainly be very happy though.

The undergraduate has the ability to understand what happened, and might take varying lengths in changing their future outlook on life (and more importantly, their behaviours) to something more positive because their life was saved. The child might do something later in life if the importance of what happened to them is constantly reinforced by the parents, but I expect it would reduce in importance over time. While that will eventually happen to the undergrad as well, they are at a productive age where what they do now matters more than what they might do in a decade or so. I think the few children that might decide "I'll be a doctor so I can save ppl as well" will be outbalanced by the young adults that change majors to something more helpful, volunteer with MSF etc, or just be a kinder person overall.
Well, that's certainly an interesting argument and something I haven't considered. It's a lot different than more typical utilitarian arguments.

It's hard to refute, this being something we don't have any hard data on. Though, I also think people who grow up being saved as a child will tend hold a certain gratitude towards their savior, and though they might not learn the lesson fully there and then, I think it could grow on them as they get older.
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2017, 07:56 PM   #84
Toe Jam and Earl
newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 22
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
You can administer first aid to one of three people after an accident. A 5 year-old child, a college senior or a retiree who has worked and paid taxes his entire adult life. The ones not receiving first aid will die.

Disregard age when it comes to treatment, assume that all have an equal chance of being restored to good health. You know nothing more.

Who do you attempt to save and why?
I would save the child because I view him as the most innocent. It would be the most just decision.
Toe Jam and Earl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2017, 05:04 AM   #85
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,030
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe Jam and Earl View Post
I would save the child because I view him as the most innocent. It would be the most just decision.
I was hoping this argument would come a long. It's a very interesting one and perhaps the one that is most relevant to a lot of theological views (though I am not saying that this is the basis of your case).

But is there anything to indicate that a random child will grow up to be more innocent than a random adult?
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2017, 05:49 PM   #86
Toe Jam and Earl
newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 22
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
I was hoping this argument would come a long. It's a very interesting one and perhaps the one that is most relevant to a lot of theological views (though I am not saying that this is the basis of your case).

But is there anything to indicate that a random child will grow up to be more innocent than a random adult?
There is nothing to indicate that a random child will grow up to be more innocent than a random adult. But as it stands at the time, a child is more innocent than an adult. As I reflect on my initial response, I believe the child to be innocent in two different ways; both of which would sway me to save the child.

The first is a moral innocence, which you surmised, is a result of my theological views. Interestingly, my theological views would all but guarantee the child losses his moral innocence at some point on the way to adulthood. And yet, I would think it unjust to consider the child anything but innocent until ultimately he loses his innocence.

The second sense of being innocent is a worldly naivete. This is likely a stronger response for me because I am a parent. Children all require help to survive from birth forward. It is wired into me to protect my children, and in a dire situation my parenting experience would drive me to save the child before the other two people.
Toe Jam and Earl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2017, 01:26 AM   #87
Pletho
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,226
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

What a stupid dumb ass waste of time question! You must have been really lonely and bored when you came up with this assinine question....
Pletho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2017, 08:33 AM   #88
dereds
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Meath
Posts: 16,246
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Asinine.

If you find a question dumb you can ignore it or were you particularly bored and lonely when you replied?
dereds is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2017, 10:49 AM   #89
Pletho
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,226
Re: A hypothetical "who do you save?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by dereds View Post
Asinine.

If you find a question dumb you can ignore it or were you particularly bored and lonely when you replied?
Ass - inine was exactly how I meant to spell it - lol double meaning -
Pletho is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ę 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online