Tweet
Kid - thanks. Now I understand what you are doing, and can try to get you to see a structural flaw in what you are doing. You are getting into the Social Sciences, and I have been editing papers for those for 15 years now - plus I went through what would have been an Associates degree in psych myself just for jollies, I was on a scholarship at the time.
Your "gut feeling" is going to be a largely emotional reaction, and will in part become influenced as much, if not more, by presentation as by the facts. That is what modern attack ads and political campaigns rely on. Most people do what you are doing.
Your gut feeling is also going to be largely influenced by your childhood. How religious/spiritual was it? I have a gut feeling that the world is unfair, and terrible things can happen at any time to those you love. From my posting about my family, I suspect you can understand the context. Yet, in the case of my little girl, I MUST not let that lead me to overprotecting her, an admittedly strong tendency.
To use a "Gut Feeling" to make a rational decision, i.e. "Luke, use the force" is one of the worst misapplications of the cognitive processes around. You use a gut feeling when deciding who to trust, who to date, etc. I ignored my gut feeling when the FAA forced my transfer 10 years ago and rented my house to a jerk that did thousands of dollars of damage that I couldn't recover. The flaw of misapplying the cognitive function and not going with the intuiotive, gut feeling.
You are making a misapplication in the opposite direction. It would be like programming via a "gut feeling". A processor doesn't give a rats ass about your gut feeling - you write bad code, it doesn't work. The same applies to making judgements about the validity of science.
Your reaction, to pull out of the thread, is the right one if that is how you are going to approach scientific discourse. The majority of the people here understand the use of reason in the realms of science, and all that will happen is frustration on all sides. Thanks for continuing to try to explain where you were coming from. But keep this in mind, Kid.
They have been doing some studies on people and politics. Today's politicians and political operatives WANT people like you. They can use speeches, attack adds, emotional appeals, and all the other tools in their arsenal to keep you voting with whichever party you identify with, while not serviing your interests. That is why the political debates here get so acrimonious - the intuitive - do I trust this politician - and the rational - do his policies and record represent what I believe in - will inevitably cross in that area, and people will argue until they are blue, or red, in the face.
Your "gut feeling" is going to be a largely emotional reaction, and will in part become influenced as much, if not more, by presentation as by the facts. That is what modern attack ads and political campaigns rely on. Most people do what you are doing.
Your gut feeling is also going to be largely influenced by your childhood. How religious/spiritual was it? I have a gut feeling that the world is unfair, and terrible things can happen at any time to those you love. From my posting about my family, I suspect you can understand the context. Yet, in the case of my little girl, I MUST not let that lead me to overprotecting her, an admittedly strong tendency.
To use a "Gut Feeling" to make a rational decision, i.e. "Luke, use the force" is one of the worst misapplications of the cognitive processes around. You use a gut feeling when deciding who to trust, who to date, etc. I ignored my gut feeling when the FAA forced my transfer 10 years ago and rented my house to a jerk that did thousands of dollars of damage that I couldn't recover. The flaw of misapplying the cognitive function and not going with the intuiotive, gut feeling.
You are making a misapplication in the opposite direction. It would be like programming via a "gut feeling". A processor doesn't give a rats ass about your gut feeling - you write bad code, it doesn't work. The same applies to making judgements about the validity of science.
Your reaction, to pull out of the thread, is the right one if that is how you are going to approach scientific discourse. The majority of the people here understand the use of reason in the realms of science, and all that will happen is frustration on all sides. Thanks for continuing to try to explain where you were coming from. But keep this in mind, Kid.
They have been doing some studies on people and politics. Today's politicians and political operatives WANT people like you. They can use speeches, attack adds, emotional appeals, and all the other tools in their arsenal to keep you voting with whichever party you identify with, while not serviing your interests. That is why the political debates here get so acrimonious - the intuitive - do I trust this politician - and the rational - do his policies and record represent what I believe in - will inevitably cross in that area, and people will argue until they are blue, or red, in the face.
Comment