/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3975873
What if it's Godel's incompleteness theorm?

>>3589703
...my asshole.

>>3274879
because it counterbalances the butthurt futurists who live in their parents basement which everyone knows is indistinguishable from a cave.

>>3186887
>These are not the faggots you are looking for

>>3132813
immorally yes.

>>3102773
dude, you need to learn some modesty when you speak to /sci/.

>>3061893
But you're just exchanging one value for another.

I'll pay an extra dollar for a shitty product if it helps me land a better paying job/wife/blow job/insert non fungible commodity.

People don't rationalize from an early age why they want nikes, but they do become accustomed to the societal feedback of buying nikes.

And if it's easy to prove that the majority of humans make superficial decisions about the individuals they meet, then all a consumer is doing is exchanging the intrinsic value of a product for an extrinstic value.

You can argue it's irrational for someone to do that as an external observer, but if you knew the difference between landing a promotion was the brand of your sox, you'd make the rational choice.

All I gots to say, is that society forms a construct of a maze, and whether you want to admit it or not, you're running through an arbitrary set of obstacles to determine your merit.

So if I told you that I would hire you if you had brand name sox, would you go out and buy those sox?

Should I ignore the physical reality of superficial/highly efficient aggregate classification of human psychology, for an ideological stance that has no perfect outcome?

>>3021780