[ 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.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 932 KB, 356x334, 1345096844073.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5206130 No.5206130 [Reply] [Original]

Person x: [Legitimate science question here]
Person y: Are you fucking retarded? Go get a job even a slightly intelligent 8th grader would know that.

It is for this lack of humility and understanding that has given me the pavement to walk along out of here and leave for good. I'm tired of it.

Science is about learning and understanding. It doesn't matter if you know the question's answer intuitively, it has still yet to be discovered by someone who may not have reached that thought yet. I am absolutely appalled at the rather lack of understanding by a forum that discusses science and mathematics. If you truly understood what it is you were studying, you would be quick to realize that there is no stupid question or statement.

First off, don't state something as factual if you are even slightly uncertain. This triggers the anger brought about in someone who cannot control themselves and lash out because it is contrary to what they think they know. Try "I think...". Maybe it will open a good-hearted discussion as opposed to an ego battle.

Even if the question is deemed absurd to yourself, try answering it to the best of your ability, even if it is conceived silly and disconnected. Make it connected and argue appropriately with the purpose of reaching a conclusion among one another by reason, not because you want to win an argument.

I find this sort of behaviour rampant among all forums on 4chan. This sort of behaviour also leads to wars; I suspect that if the world shifts to a paradigm of science and understanding, there will continue to be wars. Look at how some of these people in here senselessly badger another with insults. It's not hard to miss

There isn't a stupid question. I hope you understand this and take your ego and cut it up into one million pieces.

>> No.5206138

>>5206130

this should be stickied.

>> No.5206175

>>5206130

>Person x: [Legitimate science question here]

I think you have the wrong board. Questions here usually consist of homework (forbidden by the rules), trolling ("QUALIA TULPA"), or philosophy/economics/shit that doesn't belong here.

>> No.5206188

>>5206130
THIS THIS THIS

>> No.5206189

>>5206175
Isn't philosophy a science also? What makes it not a science? The fact that it's purely hypothetical?

>> No.5206201

>>5206130
>It is for this lack of humility and understanding that has given me the pavement to walk along out of here and leave for good. I'm tired of it.
okay, bye. we're not going to do your fucking homework for you or google things for you that you could easily find on wikipedia.
>If you truly understood what it is you were studying, you would be quick to realize that there is no stupid question or statement.
no, but there are stupid approaches to answering questions. e.g. asking /sci/ if black people are stupid or asking what colleges offer major XYZ.
tl;dr bye

>> No.5206213

>>5206201
>Not in school. I study on my own time recreationally.

Are black people less intellectual? Propose an argument, argue accordingly.

>> No.5206223

>>5206213
>Are black people less intellectual?
This question isn't rigorous enough to be falsifiable. what do you mean by intellectual?

>> No.5206227

>>5206223
>what do you mean by intellectual?

What a great start to a discussion!

>> No.5206251

>>5206227
no, seriously. how are you going to quantify "intellectualism"? Are we counting how many books the subjects have read? are we counting the hipster stickers on their fixies? Are we measuring their responses to reasoning and memory tests?

you have to start by defining your parameters.

>> No.5206261
File: 92 KB, 685x524, arguments.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5206261

>>5206130
People who respond with anything other than the top 3 layers of this pyramid should be banned from /sci/

>> No.5206266 [DELETED] 

>>5206251
Let me set an example to the purpose of my thread:

Studies have been carried out with young children that have determined that some people pick up on patterns quicker. Patterns which are consistent to the consistent pattern of nature itself.

Someone who is intellectual is able to notice contradictions such that the only thing that is retained is the nature of nature, for nature is consistent. The easier it is to detect these contradictions, the easier it becomes to solve the less (or non-)convoluted problems the individual faces.

This is the argument that I have set forth to define intellectualism.

Argue it!

>> No.5206272

>>5206251
Let me set an example to the purpose of my thread:

Studies have been carried out with young children that have determined that some people pick up on patterns quicker. Patterns which are consistent to the consistent pattern of nature itself.

Someone who is intellectual is able to notice contradictions such that the only thing that is retained is the nature of nature, for nature is consistent. The easier it is to detect these contradictions, the easier it becomes to solve the convoluted problems the individual faces.

This is the argument that I have set forth to define intellectualism.

Argue it!

>> No.5206282

>>5206261

You are a shit stain and a plague.

>> No.5206294

>>5206272
okay. People usually use intelligence to refer to that ability, whereas intellectualism refers to cultural refinement. just sayin. brb while I check some databases for sources.

>> No.5206339

>>5206272
Fine, I'll take the bait. I'm not going to argue what you said but expand upon it. Creativity can been seen to be an expanded version of what you defined as intellectualism. I'll argue that creativity is about spotting and creating new patterns, however, it is also about representing these. Take a painting for example, if it is realistic the painter must see the patterns in nature and create mimics of those in his painting. If the painting is not realistic, the painter must still spot the patterns in nature, and break them.

Even if we now agree on what we define as intellectualism we need to find a way to accurately quantify it.

>> No.5206350

>>5206130

Well put. I share your sentiment. There is a philosophy message board that I joined not too long ago that maintains very strict rules. Consequently, it is fucking awesome and devoid of trash. As valuable as I find /sci/, it is a good example of how minimal regulation is a double edged sword.

>> No.5206361

>>5206350
The reason that I think the low-regulation on 4chan is important is that it allows discussion of non-popular ideas. However, I think the most optimal case would be a requirement of civil discussion, facts, etc. whilst still allowing discussion that would be labeled as unpopular. (Racism, etc.).

>> No.5206371

>>5206282

i think ad-homeniem is below the third level.

don;t feel bad, i make that mistake alot to

>> No.5206372

>>5206350
I'd love to know the name of that message board.

>> No.5206394

>>5206371

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=alot

I'm sure you make many more mistakes than you claim.

>> No.5206395

>>5206130
I second.

>> No.5206399

>>5206261
I wish

>> No.5206401

>>5206372

reddit/thinking_men

>> No.5206443

>>5206372

Sorry dude, no way am I posting it here lol.

>> No.5206442

>>5206401
Really? In that case thanks but no thanks.

Whatever happened to the discussion of intellectualism?

>> No.5206499

It's a symptom of autism, OP. I'm not even joking.

>> No.5206512

>>5206189

Science is a part of philosophy, not the other way around.

>> No.5206528

>>5206189
Philosophy is contemplation of the unknown, or perhaps the presently unknowable. It's a hell of a lot smaller discipline (if you can even call it that) than it once was, and has basically nothing to do with science as such.

>> No.5206578

>>5206130
>I find this sort of behaviour rampant among all forums on 4chan. This sort of behaviour also leads to wars; I suspect that if the world shifts to a paradigm of science and understanding, there will continue to be wars.
>This sort of behaviour also leads to wars
>I suspect that if the world shifts to a paradigm of science and understanding, there will continue to be wars.
You meant "there will not continue to be wars," right?

>> No.5206587
File: 294 KB, 1091x1040, Waffen SS.kursk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5206587

I strongly agree with the tone of your post. However, I think an ego is quite important in science, as invariably you are going to have people shitting on your idea, you're going to have dark times in lab where nothing works, etc., and you have to believe in yourself and have fortitude to keep going.

But I agree that the point of science is understanding, learning, and teaching as well. In real life I am often appalled at someone in lab not knowing something (partially because I have the unrealistic expectation for myself to know everything), but this is simply part of the process.

I think this xkcd sums up how factual ignorance should be treated: http://xkcd.com/1053/

Unfortunately, many times the ignorant person gets angry when their preconceived and misinformed view is challenged. Regarding this board, however, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. The few times I've been here, everyone has been a total asshole, all shouting nonsense at each other and clinging to their positions/beliefs without ANY factual justification.

I believe this stems from the fact that most people on this board are in high school.

>> No.5206620

>>5206138
Stickie please.

>> No.5207833
File: 84 KB, 459x600, 1348868906239.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5207833

WHY ISN'T THIS STICKIED

>> No.5207840

>half the OPs are obvious trolls
>"why are you so defensive, /sci/?"
Because the other half might be less obvious trolls.