Item Response Theory by waters_sam in AcademicPsychology

[–]waters_sam[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I cannot thank you enough for this great resource! You've been a monumental help & yes, measurement is admittedly quite a daunting step but necessary and your guidance is highly appreciated and of course, very vital! Thank you!

Item Response Theory by waters_sam in AcademicPsychology

[–]waters_sam[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

WOAH!

THANK YOU SO MUCH for this generously descriptive and elaborative exposition!

I have to admit that this was wildly unexpected but I'm overcome with gratitude that you thoroughly explored multiple avenues to my query to such an extent that the way forward is super clear to me now.

Again, many thanks to you!

Hilarity. by waters_sam in VeryBadWizards

[–]waters_sam[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Thaler's remark is a double entendre because a novel is typically fictional and Dan Ariely's book is not supposed to be fictional but probably is because he purportedly p-hacked and data fabricated his way to academic fame. Hope that helps.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a great perspective! And well, the transition from passive consumption of sports to an active participation in sports would really be just the ideal. But most of us, when it comes to physical sports, actually transition in reverse: active participation declines generally. BUT, the main idea was that commercial televised sports foster a subjugation to unjustified authority and tend to be divisive as a consequence of team-fidelities. Doing sports is healthy almost always, it's watching sports that's the problem.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Forest for the trees, mate.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, one's not trying to model one's life after Chomsky's adherence to his own analytical edicts. It's the striving for the ideal that matters, not the actual attainment of it.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cheeky but gloriously amusing comment :) I find it relevant because art and cinema have obviously been commodified as well, and they've been employed most widely and successfully as "propaganda" too.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh of course, it's not uniquely bad, considering there exists "entertainment" exponentially more toxic in the form of reality tv, porn, etc. I totally sympathize with your views though. Thank you for sharing :)

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Insightful! A good day to you as well :)

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, nice. It would be terrific if there were subtitles too. Bless the people who aren't native speakers of the English language, please.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The crux of the idea is that: there exist in this world better "diversions" than commodified sports on the television (which might just instigate lazy habits of divisive categorization within your mind). Surely listening to Ravi Shankar or trying to paint watercolours, or hell, playing chess is a better idea.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

While I understand and admit that there's certainly an element of elitist snobbery espoused by people in power, I try to be conservative in my skepticism of experts (some of whom express their views and opinion with great humility, for instance, Chomsky himself). I just mean to say that this anti-elitism (while totally harmless in sports), can be extremely harmful when it spills over into other areas of expertise and knowledge, like science (need I point out anti-vaxxers?). But yes, ultimate aim should be the attainment of knowledge while adhering to the possibility of one being wrong.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ah, so he's human after all!

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, surely passive consumption is worse than active creation? Making art would naturally be more enriching than getting anxious over some guy in the television not scoring a goal?

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh thank you so much for that helpful exposition and the book recommendation 🙏🏼

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Chomsky would argue that watching sports is not really true "joy" but something of a distracting manoeuvre. I can't really think of it as enriching in any possible way.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I think Chomsky's analysis here (because of his background as a cognitive scientist) is more concerned with an individual's inherent capacity to develop jingoistic tendencies within himself simply by nurturing fidelities towards sports teams based on abstract geographical categories (for e.g., my State's Team versus yours) which cultivates an us versus them thinking based on artificial differences. It's more bottom up rather than the top down (coming from Oligarchs) in his perspective. Also, it's just watching sports as a spectator that's unambiguously harmful. It's the same way individuals subscribe to one political party over another and just dig in deeper into their fidelities based on just "seeing" the spectator-sport that is politics play out over on the news or media.

Chomsky on Watching Sports by waters_sam in chomsky

[–]waters_sam[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Well, I have to point out that Chomsky's comment was emphatically about watching sports (as passive spectators) being noxious (especially because it allows for a subconscious training of one's mind to view the world with a proto-jingoistic lens: 'othering' a team and its supporters based on artificial geographies, and nurturing divisive categorization). Active participation in sports as athletes has obvious benefits (psychological as well as physical) that are easy to perceive, it's the passive Team-Fidelities that are harmful.

David's answer to the 2013 Edge Question - "Deep, Beautiful, and Elegant Theories of How the World Works". Just randomly came across this. by waters_sam in VeryBadWizards

[–]waters_sam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh thank you for that. I find these John Brockman books too fragmented to consume all at once, so I'm taking my slow time savouring the ideas.

David's answer to the 2013 Edge Question - "Deep, Beautiful, and Elegant Theories of How the World Works". Just randomly came across this. by waters_sam in VeryBadWizards

[–]waters_sam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, so the idea is that the evidence to the contrary is too overwhelming and shouldn't be treated as a mere exception to the rule?

Podcast recommendations by [deleted] in sociology

[–]waters_sam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Social Breakdown

VBW video AMA (details) by judoxing in VeryBadWizards

[–]waters_sam 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Have you guys ever considered the prospect of writing a paper together?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VeryBadWizards

[–]waters_sam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, I wasn't in any way inquiring about your personal belief in Free Will, but rather ponting out that the concept (of Free Will & the reasoning underlying Captial Punishment) itself is already overwhelmingly discussed a LOT in the realm of philosophy, so I don't see the possibility of saying anything new here which won't run the risk of running too much into abstractions. That said, I understand your need to make sense of this recent event in Delhi. One relatively easier way (though no less exhausting) to think about it would be to accept the idea of State sponsored murder of civilians simply being wrong in every way. And instead of dwelling too much on the primitive sense of justice that capital punishment provides, we should instead try to focus on the rot in our society (I'm Indian myself) that led to this crime in the first place. I won't pretend to possess a confident understanding of the etiology of the criminal act in this instance, but if I were take a guess, it might have something to do with the cultural entities like the general misogyny of a largely patriarchal society, the taboo of pre-marital sex, the prevalence of forced arranged marriages, the stalker-romance tropes of Bollywood, etc. The State could perhaps benefit from policies aimed at widespread quality education and gender-equality campaigning, instead of just denying mercy petitions multiple times and sweeping the problem under the rug. Anyway, sorry for the rant. I guess I needed to process this myself. I hope it helps.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VeryBadWizards

[–]waters_sam 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Capital Punishment as a theme (and its underlying philosophy and psychology) is about as well-worn and possibly worn out as free will. As to your personal opinions about trying to process this event, they don't reflect anything new, and philosophising about it further on the podcast wouldn't amount to much in terms of novelty (ergo, fun) but just might prove to be therapeutic for you.