I try to contribute to things getting better, sometimes through polite rational skepticism.
Disagreeing with your comment ≠ supporting the opposite side, I support rationality.
Let’s discuss to refine the arguments that make things better sustainably.
Always happy to question our beliefs.
For sure this explains a lot of religious rules but I think agent illusion is also a big contributor.
I’ve read a nice book from a French skepticism popularizer trying to explain the evolutionary origin of cognitive bias, basically the bias that fucks with our logic today probably helped us survive in the past. For example, the agent detection bias makes us interpret the sound of a twig snapping in the woods as if some dangerous animal or person was tracking us. It’s doesn’t cost much to be wrong about it and it sucks to be eaten if it was true but you ignored it. So it’s efficient to put an intention or an agent behind a random natural occurence. This could also be what religions grew from.
“I’m paying with exposure.” argument is not that great. Agreed with easy access to culture for those who can’t spare the money though.
Fair point, I should specify “modern science”. There’s quite a gap of scientific quality between traditional medicine and modern science based medicine for example.
Does it require independent peer review though? How do you achieve that with without publication? The predatory publication system is a different point.
Edit: fix without
He probably means the idealized scientific method you learn at school is not what really happens in reality, in particular “soft” science fields may not be able to follow it strictly and still do good science.
That just what being a member of society is, lots of overhead.
I think it’s mostly that you can’t expect people foreign to your field to understand how valuable your work is, you need to communicate it to them. Then there’s a fine line between popularization and bullshiting that your sense of ethics will make you cross or not depending on the situation.
I would guess it’s just related to teenagers getting body odors and not knowing yet that they have to deal with them.
Maybe because people get into this kind of very abstract field to escape reality and that would mean reality is catching up on them and reducing their freedom to not have to care about consequences.
Git is a tool that makes it convenient and lightweight to keep past snapshots of a directory of text files (called a repository) and compare them. It also makes it easy to have multiple people work in parallel on the content of the directory, see the differences and merge everything into a common version. It is essential in programming, it’s called versioning or version control.
Although it is not easy to access for non programmers because it’s based on slightly obscure command lines. So it’s a bit of an over-engineering to use it for a single file edited by a single person. Especially because you can now put those on the cloud and have some form of version control that allows to easily compare and go back to previous versions graphically.
It may be worth it if it’s a long document that you work upon for a long time, such as a PhD thesis.
How comes it’s possible for a bird or a fish, but not a human? If this article explains why, it is a bit obscure for non specialists.
I’m glad that there’s no micro transactions nor loot boxes.
Good old *pteryx operating systems.
Need a new survival craft game where you can tame isopods to collect precious metals.