“To know the future absolutely is to be trapped into that future absolutely.”

- Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune

IRB training for grad research. It’s just so long and tedious. Also why the hell would I need to know the names of specific cases and not just the regulations/reasons?

“What journal article spurred on the 1974 act?”

Idk, but I highly doubt the name of a random article will be at all relevant to me conducting ethical research

Reasons to not worry about death specifically because you worry about death:

1. Every moment you spend worrying about death is a moment you aren’t spending truly alive. If you’re worried about running out of time, then why would you want to keep wasting time worrying?
2. Stress—like that from constant worry—quite literally kills you both physically and psychologically. The more stressed you are the more wear and tear both your body and brain experience. So not only is worry wasting your life, it is also shortening it; in other words, worrying about death is actually bringing you closer to it.

If a person is going to continue being threat to the lives/wellbeing of others, they should be kept away from others.

If you lack the resources to keep them in an institution indefinitely, then killing them is the way you keep them away from others.

For example, a person who isnt in their right mind committing homicide because the voices in their head tell them to should be institutionalized by the government.

Whereas a billionaire pedophile should probably just be killed because they can bribe their way out of any institution/law so murder is unfortunately more likely to prevent future harm than attempting to institutionalize them

I read it as smørrebrød at first and was very confused at why there was sunscreen and not rye bread and fish

The Stress Energy Tensor is what you’re looking for. It is directly related to curvature, but beware, the explanations of both curvature and the stress-energy tensor are going to be difficult to parse if you aren’t familiar with tensors and their notation yet

My response is more an accumulation of frustration with OPs frequent posts which are almost always negative and often against constructed straw-man “anarchists”

Thats the division i was talking about.

As for blatant racism, Im sure there are people on lemmy who are racist but i haven’t run into any that i could remember. (There were no racist comments on this post when i initially commented)

Now just because I can’t remember seeing any doesn’t mean its not a problem; since im not Russian, its likely i dont notice it as much as someone who is russian would.

On that note, I can say that ive seen plenty of posts that are “racist” towards “amerikkkans” calling US citizens less than human or monsters or that “nothing of value would be lost” if a state or city in America was destroyed etc. especially from .ml and hexbear users.

My point of course is not that this equality makes it all justified or that racism or any sort of discrimination based on nationality/race/etc. is okay, but rather that i dont think the racism is due to being liberals. Tribalism is just a widespread human condition and you’re on a platform with humans.

Anyway the main point of my comment was to state my frustration with constant negative posts like this which stereotype or exaggerate the actions of others.

These posts don’t help with building unity. They dont help educate anyone. And so they dont solve any problem or serve any productive purpose. Instead they actually further drive tribalistic urges by pushing an us-vs-them situation, and most of the people engaging with posts like this wont be doing so for friendly or productive reasons. So the entire point of these kinds of posts is to further disharmony

Theres enough bad shit going on all around us constantly already, we don’t need any more drama stirred up internally. (Again most of my frustrations are with the frequency of OPs negative/agitation-focused memes not specifically this one in particular)

If you are dealing with racism or harassment of any kind or notice someone else facing the same, you should report it to the moderators

Hey mate jsyk i think you replied to the wrong comment

From the context im guessing you meant to reply to kryptonianCodeMonkey since he’s the only comment mentioning “constructive criticism”

Why do you constantly make memes about fake scenarios that make you mad?

You’re like one of those MAGA raving lunatics making up stories about “liberals.” The only difference is that instead of also coming up with fake ragebait scenarios about trans and gay people you make up bullshit about other leftists like anarchists. Are you a fed? Are you purposefully trying to stir up division?

Step outside, take a breath, stop focusing on hatred and start focusing on building community with good people. It’ll make you happier and it’s much more effective praxis than whatever the hell this kind of posting is

Oh fuck i forgot about the spinach in my fridge too… thanks for the reminder lol

If you follow the comment chain you’ll see me and cowbee talk about how subjective the term “democracy” is.

However, we can illustrate my point using proof by counter example. It is entirely possible to imagine two countries with the same government structure (and hence “democracy”) but with different answers to this kind of survey.

Imagine two nearly identical countries each with corrupt governments having the exact same structure and culture etc. The only major difference between them is that in one of the countries, a recent scandal has occurred which was able to bring to light deep seated corruption and criminal activity of many public figures, whereas similar acts are being committed by the govt. of the other country, but none of it has been brought so fully to light yet.

The citizens of the former country are likely to rank their “democracy” lower than the citizens of the latter would rate their own, despite the fact both governments have equal amounts of corruption. Hence, surveys of popular opinion of democracy are not directly indicative of the “level of democracy” or level of corruption or fidelity etc. etc… QED.

Haha funnily enough that’s the graph I first had this argument with cowbee about lol

that’s why I put quotes around “level of democracy.” If everyone in a country had to vote directly for any and all government action, that is kind of the purest democracy possible, but it would not be a very effective method of government especially for large countries.

In order to rank democracy in a meaningful way, one would need to decide on what the desired outcomes of a “good” democracy are and which outcomes are most important etc. which would make the scale subjective.

Direct comparison of perception of democracy by people who have lived in both countries would be much clearer evidence of differences in democracy itself.

However, the raw perception of democracy without any other reference to other democracies does not allow for comparison/measurement of democracy itself but rather indicates how happy individuals feel within their current democracy.

The data is a good story and it does encode information, but that information is more significantly influenced by culture, current events, and overall happiness of the populace than it is by “level of democracy”

As always, I would like to point out that these kinds of surveys of public opinion are not really evidence of anything besides public opinion itself.

You cannot assert that a certain country has more or less of some quality simply because more people in that country said they think they do more frequently than people in a different country did.

For example if you asked Americans (particularly those in the south or rural areas) if they thought their country was more “free” than the rest of the world, you would probably get higher numbers than you would from most other regions of the world despite the fact that America is not that free relative to much of the world.

100% of people in America own their houses because if they couldn’t afford it, it wouldn’t be their house. Checkmate commies

/s

“young females”

I’m sure this is a credible and unbiased article. Definitely not written by an author who lacks social awareness or is incredibly sexist against women in general regardless of political leaning. Certainly not one that objectifies or dehumanizes women. No sir.

/s

I’m reasonably certain the two are not mutually exclusive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violence_against_Palestinians_during_the_Gaza_war

There’s a wiki page for the documented systemic sexual abuse committed and encouraged by the Israeli government with citations from the UN and even Israeli court and govt references.

As for the talk, considering that the first 20min were nothing but straw man and other fallacious rhetoric; and that he does not have a research or educational background in the topics he claims are wrong without evidence; and the fact he’s giving this talk mostly to promote himself and his merchandise; I decided it wasn’t worth my time because there would likely be no actual reasoning or evidence, only “sales tactics” so to speak.

Talking with you makes me think i was exactly right since you’ve yet to give any evidence to back up any argument, except, oddly, mine by proving you fell for the feminism straw man and the queers for Palestine one as well.

If there is any actual valid argument in the entirety of the talk, please write it here. Clearly you feel like he made a persuasive case so why don’t you list what the main arguments and rationale for your opinion are? Surely you aren’t just asserting your beliefs are true without evidence? Especially since you seem to care about being “contrarian” which is exactly the definition of disregarding well established consensus

I think you misunderstood my example. Also you seem to have mistaken that quote you posted as well. Wishing for a society in which genital differences are not used as a basis for cultural stereotypes is not equivalent to saying “biology/physiology doesn’t matter at all” which was Saad’s straw man.

As for “queers for Palestine” I’m not going to watch the full video, but my guess is he says something along the lines of “you support people who kill queer people!” which again is a straw man since advocacy groups against the genocide of innocent individuals are very much not advocating for the slaughter of queer individuals, in fact I’d imagine most are against it.

Imagine there was a prison on fire. And people are saying “oh my god we need to evacuate those people!” Then imagine someone else says “oh so you support thieves and murderers and rapists? I’m an empath but not a ‘suicidal empath.’”

Obviously the latter person doesn’t actually feel empathy at all and is making a straw man argument against saving people from horrible deaths.

That’s roughly equivalent to this scenario. Except instead of prisoners it’s just a country of civilians including children, and they’re not just burning but also starving and getting hunted/raped for sport etc.