Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics and Society Contentions, Controversies, and Conflicts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-25-2019, 03:23 PM   #151
Poker phenom
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 97
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie View Post
Correct. They are not incompatible.
Maybe, but your behavior on this forum now makes sense to me. Your constant attempts of attacking individuals instead of using reason and evidence to make a point/claim is now evident. Your inability to use reason in these discussions is also heavenly associated with your religious belief, you lack the ability to view issues objectively.
Poker phenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2019, 03:27 PM   #152
MrWookie
Don't Call Me Meredith
 
MrWookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Treating my drinking problem.
Posts: 92,199
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poker phenom View Post
Maybe, but your behavior on this forum now makes sense to me. Your constant attempts of attacking individuals instead of using reason and evidence to make a point/claim is now evident. Your inability to use reason in these discussions is also heavenly associated with your religious belief, you lack the ability to view issues objectively.
I use reason and evidence to make points all the time. I'm sorry they don't agree with you and that smearing and mislabeling my arguments is all you have left.
MrWookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2019, 03:57 PM   #153
Poker phenom
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 97
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie View Post
I use reason and evidence to make points all the time. I'm sorry they don't agree with you and that smearing and mislabeling my arguments is all you have left.
Yes, this is the response I would expect. You are completely unaware of some of the negative behaviors you exhibit. You are unintentionally giving into intuition and misinterpreting/misc characterizing peoples views and coming to erroneous conclusions, you constantly commit straw man arguments unintentionally.

I could explain why you do this from a psychological perspective but I would rather not, I will tell you what I tell everyone one else. Try and use more critical thinking, even when you think you are using critical thinking, try some more!
Poker phenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2019, 04:02 PM   #154
juan valdez
Pooh-Bah
 
juan valdez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,344
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

You just took another L

Wookie has successfully taken another thread in to the gutter. He can't do it by himself, he needs a dance partner. itshotinvegas is absent and had no self control. don't be his sloppy seconds
juan valdez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2019, 06:06 PM   #155
Abbaddabba
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: twitch.tv/abbaddabba
Posts: 5,590
Re: Academic freedom, tenure, and the First Amendment

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
I disagree that everyone understands the term this way. The authors of the study I was discussing, for example, do not:

Nor did the sociologists whose quotes I referenced before.
Yes, if you read that quote literally, it would seem that the author is making an outrageous claim. Do you think he intended to be interpreted in that literal of a fashion though? That there're people in the field who think NOTHING we do has a biological component, including the way we experience hunger or basic emotions? I think you're choosing to be uncharitable because you want to find something to pick at.

Quote:
Now, if instead you want to level the charge that sociologists tend to prefer explanations from sociocultural/environmental factors over biological explanations, then I think that's guilty as charged, but it's a different question. I would also view this is mostly a consequence of specialization, which has its benefits and drawbacks. We're discussing some of the drawbacks.
Mostly my view is that we should recognize the limits of any particular theoretical paradigm. I said this before. A good theoretical lens tends to clarify some issues while obscuring others. Sociological approaches both benefit and suffer from this in the same way that biological approaches do. The benefit is that apart from specialization we might be far more likely to ignore social-level factors in our explanations. As far as I can tell that is the norm for people who have little exposure to the field.
They don't suffer in the same way at all.

Biologists are limited in that they can't make claims about complex behaviors because we don't perfectly understand he interplay between culture and biology. Sociology doesn't have those limitations because the studies aren't held to clinical standards, and instead it suffers from a general lack of rigor. These are different deficiencies.

A biologists work is not undermined by lack of exposure to sociological theories as long as they recognize the limitations of their research. A sociologist who's ignorant of biological processes, however, is almost completely useless in determining the causes of human behavior and is better seen as an historian of human behavior.

Quote:
Correct. They are not incompatible.
Only if you don't have genuine convictions about the divine nature of scripture, revelation or institutions. In which case what does it even mean to be a Christian? That you think it's a good set of beliefs for OTHER people to believe? That a given bureaucracy is effective at helping people manage their lives? In that sense we can be both Christians, muslims, hindus and Buddhists all at the same time.

Or does it mean you attend services who celebrate a series of beliefs and convictions that you don't actually identify with because you think you're getting some kind of tertiary benefit?
Abbaddabba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2019, 06:41 PM   #156
MrWookie
Don't Call Me Meredith
 
MrWookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Treating my drinking problem.
Posts: 92,199
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez View Post
You just took another L



Wookie has successfully taken another thread in to the gutter. He can't do it by himself, he needs a dance partner. itshotinvegas is absent and had no self control. don't be his sloppy seconds
Sorry to interrupt your circlejerk
MrWookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 12:00 PM   #157
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 77,947
Re: Academic freedom, tenure, and the First Amendment

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbaddabba View Post
Yes, if you read that quote literally, it would seem that the author is making an outrageous claim. Do you think he intended to be interpreted in that literal of a fashion though?
Yes. And as a general rule, when authors of an academic journal article define a term and provide citations for the definition, I believe they intend the definition to be taken at face value ~100% of the time. I don't believe I've ever seen a counter-example to this.

I also don't see why you think it's outrageous to define terms like cultural determinism and biological determinism, or to use "blank slate" as way of referring to cultural determinism. But it is clear that your reaction is predicated on your incredulity at the idea. In any case, the terms are well defined and fairly widely used over a long period of time. I don't think you should take your lack of familiarity with them as evidence that they can't possibly mean what the authors say they mean.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:07 PM   #158
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,798
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Evolutionary psychology has cropped up in some threads recently, including this one. When it has been brought up, it has been largely misunderstood. So I thought I'd link a decent primer on what evolutionary psychology is. It's a bit old, but holds up well enough and it is short and concise.

https://www.cep.ucsb.edu/primer.html

It's important to understand that evolutionary psychology is very rarely (if at all) about studies, rather it is a way to understand psychology. One of the opening sentences from the primer says it well:

Quote:
It is not an area of study, like vision, reasoning, or social behavior. It is a way of thinking about psychology that can be applied to any topic within it.
This is largely correct. Studies in psychology aren't really grounded in evolutionary psychology, psychology as a research field is tends to focus on proximate causes. EP is more an approach to discuss studies than to perform them.

It also brings up a point I made earlier in the thread:
Quote:
Evolutionary psychology is not behavior genetics. Behavior geneticists are interested in the extent to which differences between people in a given environment can be accounted for by differences in their genes. EPs are interested in individual differences only insofar as these are the manifestation of an underlying architecture shared by all human beings.
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:10 PM   #159
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 77,947
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Evolutionary psychology is not behavior genetics.
I was thinking about this earlier, but the distinction didn't seem too important to the overall disagreement with folks like poker phenom so I didn't sweat it too much. Plus I'm much less familiar with methods in evolutionary psychology. So thanks for the link!

P.S.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Primer
Both before and after Darwin, a common view among philosophers and scientists has been that the human mind resembles a blank slate, virtually free of content until written on by the hand of experience.
Surely they don't mean this to be taken literally
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:15 PM   #160
Poker phenom
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 97
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

For people that want to understand this topic more. Robert Sapolsky has 25 lectures on youtube. I have not watched the lectures, but I did watch the first lecture and he brought up free will so he probably understands what he is talking about. The point I am making is that nature/nurture both contribute to behaviors humans exhibit. What I am pushing back against is the people that make claims that biology/evolution has no impact contributing to complex human behaviors, or differences we see between genders male/female.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNnIGh9g6fA

Last edited by Poker phenom; 11-26-2019 at 01:21 PM.
Poker phenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:21 PM   #161
TrollyWantACracker
Pooh-Bah
 
TrollyWantACracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 4,037
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poker phenom View Post
has 25 lectures on youtube. I have not watched the lectures, but
2+2 I wish I knew how to quit you.
TrollyWantACracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:29 PM   #162
Poker phenom
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 97
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollyWantACracker View Post
2+2 I wish I knew how to quit you.
Yes, I am currently watching the lectures myself. With that said, I know where he is taking this discussion and I don't feel bad recommending it.
Poker phenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:33 PM   #163
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,798
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
Surely they don't mean this to be taken literally
That was perhaps a bit overly poetic.

But "tabula rasa" theories were popular in psychology well into the 30s, and the view was instrumental in shaping both behaviorism and positivism, the reigning field and reigning methodology of psychology at the time.

But by the 30s they started taking an interest in minds again, instead of ignoring them. And ofcourse in the 50s we got advances in science regarding DNA, and suddenly it was all about the person. Poor behaviorists.
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:48 PM   #164
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 77,947
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
Just to riff on some of my comments about specialization again, I also enjoy it when different fields come to broadly similar conclusions, but with very different approaches and intellectual histories. From the article:

Quote:
The evolutionary analysis of social exchange parallels the economist's concept of trade...
The ensuing discussion reminds me also of some classic texts in sociology and anthropology, e.g. Mauss' The Gift, or Malinowski's ethnography of Kula ring exchange. What I find satisfying is being able to combine insights that come from all these different approaches to thinking about the underlying phenomena. It goes to what I said before about different paradigms in turn clarifying different features, e.g. one approach might emphasize adaptive processes and evolutionary architecture, while another will highlight the importance of status seeking in human social behavior.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 03:58 PM   #165
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 77,947
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
Moral grandstanding in public discourse: Status-seeking motives as a potential explanatory mechanism in predicting conflict

Warning: it's a plosone paper that received Koch brothers funding so if you're the type that becomes a sanctimonious asshat over such things then stop reading now, but I thought this paper was interesting as the problem of "moral grandstanding" is one that we've all gotten to witnesses here in the politics subforum of 2p2. Certainly it is a theme that Kelhus has enjoyed in his critique of liberals but I like it too.

The key findings are that:
1. Moral grandstanding does exist
2. It is associated with status-seeking traits.
3. It occurs across the political spectrum and is associated with extremes on both the left and right (although there are issues with the framing there).
There's a Vox interview with the main author.

Some itshotinvegas bait:

Quote:
Their study, published in PLOSone in October, found some things that may not be surprising: for instance, the tendency that grandstanding is correlated with a narcissistic personality, and seems to be equally prevalent on both sides of the political aisle.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 04:13 PM   #166
itshotinvegas
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 3,899
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
Some itshotinvegas bait:
It's not really bait, I'm sure everyone recognizes most of the people who stand on moral principal for purposes other than morality. I do no think it's "status", as much as it's selfish validation to quell connotative dissonance, or insecurity. The morality these people cling to only keeps them in denial of their inadequacies.
itshotinvegas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 04:14 PM   #167
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 77,947
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

To be clear I didn't mean "bait" to be insulting. It just made me think of you and smile.

I think you might underrate the connection between insecurity and social status.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 04:35 PM   #168
itshotinvegas
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 3,899
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
To be clear I didn't mean "bait" to be insulting. It just made me think of you and smile.

I think you might underrate the connection between insecurity and social status.
I did not take it that way. With that said, I disagree, in this context. In the type of people we are talking about, in their case I find ideology to be a manifestation of dogma, and that will invariably lead to warped world views, and ultimately isolation to a sub-group that shares those warped views. Social status is not their concern (they tend to think they are popular, even when they are not). To me, this issue goes to how someone thinks. There is no amount of information or social change that will change how they think (outside some serious psychological intervention, to which has shown to be mostly futile).


There are some people who join a cause for social standing, and participate in the dogmatic crap, for sure, but those folks, at some point realize it, and adjust based on more knowledge and wisdom. Obviously, those kind of people tend to be younger.
itshotinvegas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 04:44 PM   #169
Kelhus999
veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,259
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by itshotinvegas View Post
I did not take it that way. With that said, I disagree, in this context. In the type of people we are talking about, in their case I find ideology to be a manifestation of dogma, and that will invariably lead to warped world views, and ultimately isolation to a sub-group that shares those warped views. Social status is not their concern (they tend to think they are popular, even when they are not). To me, this issue goes to how someone thinks. There is no amount of information or social change that will change how they think (outside some serious psychological intervention, to which has shown to be mostly futile).


There are some people who join a cause for social standing, and participate in the dogmatic crap, for sure, but those folks, at some point realize it, and adjust based on more knowledge and wisdom. Obviously, those kind of people tend to be younger.
Actually, I think history has shown time and time again that a critical % of people who join groups initially as a means of social seeking status, will allow themselves to become radicalized by the dogma as a means of not losing the status.

Ironically, white supremacist recruiters (among recruiters of other extremist ideologies, such as radical Islam and Nazis circa 1930s) are/were well aware of of this and very adept at manipulating young male insecurity to their ends.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2019, 12:14 AM   #170
itshotinvegas
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 3,899
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
Actually, I think history has shown time and time again that a critical % of people who join groups initially as a means of social seeking status, will allow themselves to become radicalized by the dogma as a means of not losing the status.

Ironically, white supremacist recruiters (among recruiters of other extremist ideologies, such as radical Islam and Nazis circa 1930s) are/were well aware of of this and very adept at manipulating young male insecurity to their ends.
The reality is, most of them will walk away from it. Much easier to get involved today, but also easier to walk away from it, as well. I would guesstimate about 10% of those who get involved are true radicals, and even less of them would take action, outside bigoted/dogmatic statements.
itshotinvegas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2019, 08:17 AM   #171
Kelhus999
veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,259
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by itshotinvegas View Post
The reality is, most of them will walk away from it. Much easier to get involved today, but also easier to walk away from it, as well. I would guesstimate about 10% of those who get involved are true radicals, and even less of them would take action, outside bigoted/dogmatic statements.
When it is all done anonymously over the internet I agree. I was actually listening to some podcast (I dont even reminder whose) who pointed out that public shaming of the variety that is en vogue now actually has the effect of driving people into extremism. Which is a (IMO valid) criticism of the whole white privilege narrative. By accusing someone of being morally inferior due to the orginal sin of their melanin pigmentation, and offering no road to redemption, you may be promoting the exact behavior you supposedly are trying to correct.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2019, 11:44 AM   #172
Willd
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,521
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
When it is all done anonymously over the internet I agree. I was actually listening to some podcast (I dont even reminder whose) who pointed out that public shaming of the variety that is en vogue now actually has the effect of driving people into extremism. Which is a (IMO valid) criticism of the whole white privilege narrative. By accusing someone of being morally inferior due to the orginal sin of their melanin pigmentation, and offering no road to redemption, you may be promoting the exact behavior you supposedly are trying to correct.
This is so far away from what is meant by white privilege that it's barely even close enough to be a strawman. Nobody thinks white people are "morally inferior" because of the colour of their skin. The whole concept is simply that given two people placed into identical circumstances life will almost always be easier/simpler for the white person (assuming a western/white majority country) than for the person of colour.

Literally the only point of the phrase is to try to help people understand that others in similar situations to them have a harder life simply because of the colour of their skin. There might have been better ways of phrasing the concept but as is it's no more pejorative than saying someone born into a rich family is privileged.
Willd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2019, 07:37 PM   #173
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tame_deuces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,798
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willd View Post
This is so far away from what is meant by white privilege that it's barely even close enough to be a strawman. Nobody thinks white people are "morally inferior" because of the colour of their skin. The whole concept is simply that given two people placed into identical circumstances life will almost always be easier/simpler for the white person (assuming a western/white majority country) than for the person of colour.

Literally the only point of the phrase is to try to help people understand that others in similar situations to them have a harder life simply because of the colour of their skin. There might have been better ways of phrasing the concept but as is it's no more pejorative than saying someone born into a rich family is privileged.
Perhaps, but there is a certain prevalence of popular articles in mainstream media that say stuff like. "Why white people..." followed by things like "think", "like", "don't" and whatnot. And if you inserted another skin color into headlines like that, it would look pretty damn stupid, and if it was in mainstream media it would at the very least go under a lot more editorial scrutiny. There are other grating examples too. Like how "white trash" doesn't bat eyelids, but trying phrasing that with another skin color without feeling like you're going to a Klan meet. It hints at a view along the lines "if you're white and poor, it's probably all your fault".

So there seems to be a certain sense of "because white people are privileged, we can bash on them like a group". But of course, not all white people are privileged or fit into the group characterization.

I'll grant that compared to how bad racism can be, these things are a far cry off. Still, it is an annoying and arrogant trend.
tame_deuces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2019, 08:40 PM   #174
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 38,721
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces View Post
Perhaps, but there is a certain prevalence of popular articles in mainstream media that say stuff like. "Why white people..." followed by things like "think", "like", "don't" and whatnot. And if you inserted another skin color into headlines like that, it would look pretty damn stupid, and if it was in mainstream media it would at the very least go under a lot more editorial scrutiny. There are other grating examples too. Like how "white trash" doesn't bat eyelids, but trying phrasing that with another skin color without feeling like you're going to a Klan meet. It hints at a view along the lines "if you're white and poor, it's probably all your fault".

So there seems to be a certain sense of "because white people are privileged, we can bash on them like a group". But of course, not all white people are privileged or fit into the group characterization.

I'll grant that compared to how bad racism can be, these things are a far cry off. Still, it is an annoying and arrogant trend.
Which is quite right. Being white does not make you part of a vulnerable group so there's no need to try to avoid causing offense to people on the basis of them being white. Doesn't mean it's correct but it's not causing any harm to a vulnerable group so it's not politically incorrect.
chezlaw is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2019, 09:30 PM   #175
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 77,947
Re: Citations Needed: Links to Interesting Research

Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw View Post
Being white does not make you part of a vulnerable group so there's no need to try to avoid causing offense to people on the basis of them being white. Doesn't mean it's correct but it's not causing any harm to a vulnerable group so it's not politically incorrect.
I think this attitude is somewhat shortsighted (and probably depends on some unrealistic assumptions) but I'd have to elaborate when I'm less drunk.
well named 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 11:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online