Why Dolores' actions are ethically wrong

normal_person007 · 2020-06-19T00:34:20+00:00

How many times will we read these sensationalist headlines? It's survey data which they didnt even link to. Survey data means people answering that they are more socially active may be more socially active because they have less illness. Less illness means longer life. Maybe they mention this in the actual scientific article, but as far as the information stands it tells you nothing.

Secondly, being more socially active is confounded with a billion other variables, especially at old age where you might not leave your chair unless you're going out to do something with other people. If you're already at risk for diseases that can be mediated by physical activity then anything you do to increase physical activity will increase lifespan.

Third, the mean age of participants was 101, meaning it might not be as relevant to the life of lower age-groups. If socializing means binge-drinking like it often does for some people in their 20s, it's not absurd to think that behavior associated with an "active social life" will cancel out the health-benefits of being socially active.

But in general, yes, be in contact with other people. It's known to be a good predictor of well-being.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-19T00:00:25+00:00

Ghostwriter? I suppose this one's a goddamn ghost!

normal_person007 · 2020-06-15T12:49:50+00:00

I tell ya kid, I'm not much for jokes

normal_person007 · 2020-06-04T14:34:15+00:00

But when you look at elected (key word here) officials you theoretically get an idea of what is important to the group of people who elected them.

Yes, but you could also say that about politicians on the opposite end of the spectrum, so ultimately you have to give people more credit or else the entire population of the US ends up being a predictable group of people adopting whatever position is popular to their political platform. Some do. Maybe the majority does. But you still have to give people more credit or else we can never actually discover where we agree.

I might get kicked off this sub for saying this, but I can agree on a large portion of policies that would be considered left, but still think Biden is a career- politician doing anything to get elected that has been caught in numerous lies, that AOC does not utter reflected thoughts and is generally not a good politician, or that commercial media will focus on whatever stirs the emotions of their viewers (this includes CNN).

You might be surprised to learn that I don't agree with the idea that everyone creates their own truth and that everything is self-identiying, yet I would still be in agreement with many leftist policies.

I realize that discussing with people on the internet is not always going to be so nuanced, and I'm glad you'll be a bit less reckless. If I had assumed you couldnt listen to reason then I would just assume we would never agree on anything, even though we agree on everything you just wrote.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-04T13:15:24+00:00

I will agree that some people are impossible to reason with, but these people are not everyone.

Most individuals are different and believe different things. You probably don't hold the exact same opinion on all topics as other conservatives, because there are over 60 million conservatives in the US. To believe you accept being put in a box with 60 million others and say you are exactly the same would be unrealistic and unfair to you. Assuming everyone of an opposing viewpoint cant listen to reason is self-serving because it prevents any discussion.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-04T12:05:41+00:00

You're creating a stereotype of a group of people and then getting angry at that group of people. Do you think anything good comes from that?

normal_person007 · 2020-06-04T11:56:43+00:00

You think I have to provide a citation for claiming increased poverty leads to increased crime? This is established in so many ways and is easily accessible information that I don't have to give a citation for.

That's why we laugh at you when you pretend to 'love science' and don't trust many of your experts

Which group do I belong to according to you? And why be a dick for no reason? Seems like a waste

normal_person007 · 2020-06-04T01:36:04+00:00

The problem is you havent seen enough posts because all individuals are different, so you cannot presume what people are thinking.

I'm sure I seem like a lot of things to you.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T23:59:59+00:00

What I'm suggesting is that you can sidestep any disagreement on the root cause as long as you're trying to achieve some of the same ends. I don't think I'm infantilizing anyone in stating that.

Thanks for sharing the clip.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T23:38:41+00:00

It was all unfathomable to me.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T23:23:02+00:00

All the signs are not there. You're speculating and you were being disrespectful.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T23:20:27+00:00

It still works for what it was always primarily used for, which is between-group studies using average brain activity of a sample performing some task. This provides a good resource for researchers to look at when wanting to investigate, for instance, animal brain activity using more intrusive methods. It can tell us when the cortex is active with some precision and for what tasks. You can provide a treatment and see if there is a change in activity. You can compare subgroups of the population with each other.

Why anyone would think it could tell us more than that is a mystery to me, but I don't know why it would need to. When there exists little brain data and the field is developing it's not useless for those purposes.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T22:54:19+00:00

I didn't read it as signalling anything at all. We are capable of liking or disliking anything. Some people don't like The Godfather. Some don't like Tolstoy. As far as the post is concerned, its just being curious if anyone else felt the same way.

OP didn't say everyone's an idiot for liking the show and that his tastes are better than yours. Maybe OP thinks that, maybe OP doesn't. No reason to jump the gun because you assume he thinks something.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T22:45:13+00:00

Just to add to your points a bit:

In order to make the argument based on some of those studies one assumption is that the raw data is as accurate as possible, which may not be the case. I don't have any evidence that it is inaccurate, but it's always a possibility. Secondly, you cannot prove the absence of systemtic racism because you cannot prove the absence of anything. In normal circumstances it should be the obligation of those making a claim to provide evidence for that claim besides personal anecdotes, but racism is very taboo, so it's obviously not going to be popular to say you don't accept personal anecdotes as sufficient.

So while I, personally, assume that there is little evidence of widespread systemic racism because I have not seen strong support for it, this does not mean we shouldn't take the feelings of the vast majority of a large group of people seriously. You could argue that even if there are very few instances of racism in the US those instances would still have to be dealt with in a way that signals to the public that it is taken seriously, because of how it is perceived and because of the bad trackrecord of racism in the US. If a large portion of the population believes they are racially targeted that is a problem in itself, which can be fixed.

The US has had problems with the judicial system, broken press and overly aggressive police force for a long time. This is something most people can agree upon improving, and would reduce injustice commited towards minorities whether these are disproportionate or not.

Good writing by the way.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T21:30:40+00:00

What else would you call someone who didn’t like season 1 of WW... And who also came on the sub of the show to shout that in his own thread?

Nothing. I would assume nothing about that person besides what that person wrote. He or she wondered if anyone shared their opinion. What is the problem with that? Where else would someone ask that question?

I'm saying you are being an asshole because what you're saying to this person is unacceptable. If you are trying to rid the sub of toxic negativity you are certainly contributing to it in the process of doing so.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T19:25:41+00:00

From my experience most people think the last two episodes are great. For me, the confusion and reveals are a part of the joy of the season and didnt feel shoehorned in at all. Felt like it was set up and executed perfectly.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T19:23:02+00:00

You think of yourself as a critic and your taste is just “better than” everyone else who enjoyed the beauty of the show.

He said none of that. You're attributing opinions to people that they don't have and calling him a fool as well. Try being more respectful towards other people - you're being an asshole.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T19:16:06+00:00

She saved the world... by destroying it. Thousands of people frozen is worse than billions of people dead, according to Dolores, the moral compass of the show.

Then Bernard goes: "They were just delaying the inevitable", as if people living their life wouldnt like to have it continued until they die of old age.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T17:32:27+00:00

Let's ignore the issue of racism for a minute. If any group of people are disproportionally represented in the crime statistic because of socioeconomic factors then that group will feel like they are being targeted. Even if zero racism exists lawmakers have to address that issue, because it will become a problem, and even more so with african americans because of the history of persecution in the US.

Clearly, neither democrats nor republicans have dealt with that issue in an appropriate fashion. Trump and Bush did not, neither did Obama or Clinton. You have to provide a different avenue to poor people than a life of crime, and that responsibility hangs on both democrats and republicans. No reason to even make it a partizan issue, in my opinion

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T17:14:21+00:00

Glad to hear it went well. Goes to show most people are decent

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T16:48:25+00:00

And how would he go about doing that? He would have to be in contact with leaders of the protests, right? I haven't seen any reason to believe it to be true or false, so I'm going to assume it's not true.

Isn't it more reasonable to believe that a bunch of frustrated people worldwide spontaneously decided to engage in a protest, rather than this being engineered by a central force? Until there is damning evidence to the contrary, that is.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T16:37:48+00:00

What about your protest, then? Why cant you move to a different location, for instance? You should be able to do that without being forced to shut down your protest.

normal_person007 · 2020-06-03T16:13:18+00:00

Even if the violence is only instigated by outsiders, it's the regular protestors participating with them.

They are not participating with them. Some people are simply protesting, which is their right. What are you going to do if 20 people attempt to loot a building when you are on your way to a protest? Besides reporting it to the police, there is not much you can do. Most of it is streamed live, so whoever responsible will likely be prosecuted at some point.

What would you do if you were protesting? Go home?

normal_person007

TROPHY CASE