[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.6993815 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, reagan communism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6993815

>>6993794

>> No.6872760 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, 1436550759548.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6872760

Thoughts on this comment? It was on a guardian article about genes influencing intelligence but I want to hear the official /lit/ approved view on the below text.

Modern reductionism and determinism based official natural science (following the lead of classical mechanics and physics) has its own priorities. Any specific study or research must have a precise definition, have a narrow or limited boundary for the sake of empirical “completeness”, and must have some causality-defined and quantitably related parameters that allows for facile prediction and/or conclusion (acceptable by the established order); no matter how complex and dynamic the system under consideration is! Only these criteria would make a research paper suitable for publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Any nuanced or less defined or less definitive outcome of a study is not science, but mere verbiage.

Enormously complex systems like society, economics, biology, genetics, neuroscience etc. can attain the honour of being “scientific” only when the above criteria are fulfilled. And of course, in a vastly complex system it is always possible to find a niche area of order where some parameters will have some temporary casual and quantitative relation. The approach of modern official science is to first conceive of some possible (but desired) “a priory” idea based on good old common-sense; develop a model (preferably mathematical) for the system and then try to find some empirical evidence to fit that model - no matter how spurious it is! The following link is another example of this kind:
http://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2015/jun/26/building-bigger-brains#comments

Reductionism and determinism are inseparable twins. In this specific study, once the possible role of genes in (conveniently) determining the development of intelligence is thought of, then the genes forever must determine or seal the academic potential of a person; independent of his/her actual historical development or circumstances!

>> No.6860491 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, filthyreds.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6860491

>>6860447

>> No.6823649 [DELETED]  [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, 1436550759548.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6823649

>philosopher follows fuck all of their philosophy irl
>lit: "Hahahoohooheehee, le kooky [philosopher name]! le so based!"
>Ayn Rand doesn't follow her philosophy because she takes welfare before she dies
>lit: "xD, take that u fukin whoar!"

Can someone explain this shit? I haven't read any of Rand's books, though I think I read that she's considered a misogynist, which, if true, would have the lollable effect of making her actions consistent again (women are shit so they naturally seek help / welfare).

Also what is it with the armchair economists on /lit/ who discuss the merits of Marxism / Communism in practice while having zero (or very little) knowledge of economics and convulsing in anger as soon as you try to talk about human nature or real life events from the past 100 years? I'm not passing judgement on their viewpoints, I just don't get this way of looking at problems.

>> No.6807048 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, filthyreds.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6807048

She helped Reagan put the communist scourge out of it's misery, for that we can be truly thankful. May it never return to darken this earth with it's presence again.

God bless that wonderful woman.

>> No.6738255 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, how-do-you-tell-a-communist-well-it-s-someone-who-reads-marx-and-lenin-and-how-do-you-tell-an-ronald-reagan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6738255

>> No.6630797 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, how-do-you-tell-a-communist-well-it-s-someone-who-reads-marx-and-lenin-and-how-do-you-tell-an-ronald-reagan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6630797

daily reminder

>> No.6583342 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, how-do-you-tell-a-communist-well-it-s-someone-who-reads-marx-and-lenin-and-how-do-you-tell-an-ronald-reagan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6583342

>>6583335
I agree

>> No.6506038 [DELETED]  [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, 151742.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6506038

>> No.6492757 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, 151742.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6492757

>>6492752

>> No.6404742 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, filthyreds.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6404742

>>6404488
>>6404490
sorry wrong pic

>> No.6235138 [View]
File: 66 KB, 850x400, 151742.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6235138

>>6235131

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]