User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 19 of 19

  1. #11
    The Eighth Colour Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    Aeon
    Enneagram
    10w so
    Socionics
    LOL
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I did not detect that. How is this so?
    They won't reject science as a rule, but they will reject scientific findings that conflict with their religion as a rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I know from experience however that it can be a maddening and painful way to live.
    I think it is the least maddening way to live. Being able to easily accept ones own ignorance and mistakes makes life more enjoyable, at least once such acceptance becomes a habit.

  2. #12
    Senior Member ThinkingAboutIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Socionics
    INTp
    Posts
    264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by guesswho View Post
    Do you honestly believe global warming doesn't exist at all?????

    Doesn't the CO2 emission raise heat? I mean, it's a fact, so you can't say no to that.

    And hasn't the CO2 level grown?

    Yes obviously.

    So, the planet is warmer, than it would have been without our industry, cars or whatever.

    You can't say this doesn't exist at all.
    Affirming the consequent argument = invalid argument.

    Just because there is a temperature rise does not mean that it is caused by the current definition of "global warming". The entire debate is about the nature, causes, and consequences of global warming - whether this warming trend is unprecedented or within normal climatic variations, whether humankind has contributed significantly to it, and whether the increase is wholly or partially an artifact of poor measurements. Additional disputes concern estimates of climate sensitivity, predictions of additional warming, and what the consequences of global warming will be.

    I do not agree with "global warming" as defined today.
    Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

  3. #13
    ¡MI TORTA! Amethyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 so/sx
    Socionics
    SLE Ti
    Posts
    2,182

    Default

    I don't buy it...

  4. #14
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post

    Why does the ideology make the ideologue, and why is the ideologue so problematic? I think getting closer to the root of the problem, I'd say ego is the enemy of insight. It is the way people merge themselves with their beliefs that makes it so hard for them to admit error.
    Well, it's not so much that all ideologues are problematic, it's that those who try to discredit research in the name of political correctness are out of their element.

    I agree that ego is the enemy of insight, and that self-righteousness is the enemy of righteousness.

  5. #15
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    It doesnt wonder me that people reject science; I think they are fed up, especially by the stories about what all can go wrong with our planet. Many peoplke have developed a more back to the roots, back to nature mentality and science and progress have become somewhat boring. As a scientist one should understand the signs of time and make science intrresting again. One shouldnt always complain about what people are doing wrong but rather try to find ways of getting the intrest one does wish for.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  6. #16
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThinkingAboutIt View Post
    Affirming the consequent argument = invalid argument.
    Affirming the consequent is a deductive fallacy. Science is a largely inductive process. They are not relying on deductive premises beyond the parameters of their hypotheses. They are relying on the collection of a sufficient amount of data over a comprehensive enough span of circumstances to make their argument the strongest available argument. Their argument does not merely come down to saying there is a temperature rise, therefore there is longterm man made climate change.

    My understanding is that all of the specific subjects that you considered areas of dispute receive a very lopsided amount of support among climatologists.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  7. #17
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    It doesnt wonder me that people reject science; I think they are fed up, especially by the stories about what all can go wrong with our planet. Many peoplke have developed a more back to the roots, back to nature mentality and science and progress have become somewhat boring. As a scientist one should understand the signs of time and make science intrresting again. One shouldnt always complain about what people are doing wrong but rather try to find ways of getting the intrest one does wish for.
    C'mon this site is the perfect example. Everyone is fascinated by a pseudo personality test called MBTI, and no one is interested in Psychometrics.

    Anyone can read a book on Psychometrics if they please, but no, we prefer the psuedo metrics of MBTI.

  8. #18
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    I was more thinking of natural sciences
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  9. #19
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    We don't believe science because we put our cognitive faculties to sleep and so believe whatever we are told.

    When our cognitive faculties of analysis, evaluation and integration are asleep, we are inclined to believe what we see.

    So if we see the Sun go round the Earth, naturally we believe the Sun goes round the Earth. But when we analyse the data, we find the opposite, that the Earth goes round the Sun.

    So when our cognitive faculities are asleep, we are intuitive. And when our cognitive faculties are awake, we find most of the world is counter-intuitive.

    Modern economics is counter-intuitive, modern democratic politics is counter-intuitive, modern science is almost all counter-intuitive and even modern art tends to be counter-intuitive.

    But most of us want to get through the day without too much embarrassment. So like obedient children we turn off our cognitive faculties and carry out the work assigned to us, without any fuss.

Similar Threads

  1. Why we don't like considering songs when typing an artist?
    By neuskens in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-24-2016, 10:34 AM
  2. The psychology of who we find creepy and why
    By Vasilisa in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-28-2016, 06:09 PM
  3. Why do we enjoy the suffering of others?
    By human101 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-09-2015, 12:29 PM
  4. What is the cause of peoples apparant need to believe?
    By Fluffywolf in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 08-23-2015, 11:11 AM
  5. [MBTItm] the article of "why smart people often suffer in this world"
    By niki in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-27-2008, 01:17 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO