No, what I am saying is I go by what I see in my everyday life. And what I am seeing is the majority of people are selfish, Plain and simple. And yes, I am saying the study is inavlid; how can you say that because you scanned a few thousand people and got certain results, the same results apply to the whole world population? Really? Seriously? You really consider that a comprehensive study of human nature on a global level? Really?
And you accuse me of not thinking before I post. :[
Exactly!
This is not a faith based argument. I am not a religious person. I am simply a realist who goes by what he sees. And the FACT is, what I see everyday is contrary to what you claim. That is my concrete evidence.
You’re obviously not a realist or you’d undestand how scientific studies work.
I’ve already said, what you see everyday is an even more inaccurate representation of people than the study supposedly is.
Second person arguing with me ITT who doesn’t understand what “faith-based argument” means.
Its got nothing to do with religion, it means your argument is based on your personal belief that your opinion is true and nothing else.
Funny, I actually feel better when I was able to avoid and ignore a cry for charity than when I have to pay for something.
Science is bullshit when it comes to human emotions. Simple as that. Those brain scans prove nothing. Look at those awesome lie-detectors. Those things also “scan” the brain for certain impulses, yet it’s one of the worst methods of detecting whether someone’s actually lying or not.
Yes, you can use science to explain 99.9999999% of nature, but science will -never- understand how human emotions work. And while brain scans may show us that -something- stimulates our brain when we perform certain tasks, we can not even begin to imagine what those stimulations are.
But ye, you’ll probably write this off as “faith based argument” while you cling on to the belief that science is 100% correct at any given time.
Lie detectors don’t “scan the brain” for anything, (AFAIK) they measure heart rate and electrical conductivity of the skin.
Even if lie detectors did what you think they do, there’s an important difference between reflexive response and conscious response. Reflexive responses (like the brain’s release of dopamine when giving to charity) are consistent and automatic, which makes them easy targets for scientific study. Conscious responses involving free will(like lying) are far too complex for science to understand at this point, if they are even understandable through biochemistry (which is arguable).
I’m not claiming science can “explain” human emotions, in fact I don’t think it can. But what brain scans can do is correlate brain states with emotional states and then make determinations of causality based on this data. You can’t just arbitrarily reject decades of studies in neuroscience and then deny you’re making a faith-based argument.
My opinion? Try my OBSERVATIONS. And I misspoke, this is a faith based argument, one you base on your inexorable faith in science. So yes your right about it being faith based.
I am a realist, and I believe in all kinds of things; science, aliens, hot chocolate, family, a good book, love, money, leaving the toilet seat up. But I am also a person who knows when to look to science and when to look PAST science. But again, neither of you has posted any details of this study. How many people, what were the control groups, etc. And again, yet another example of because someone doesn’t adhere to the same faith as you, well then they must be an idiot.
But your right, I merely base my argument in rubbish observations, and we all know observation has absolutely NO place in science whatsoever. None!
Newton observing the apple fall…Bah!
Galileo observing the movements of the planets…Fool!
No good science has sprung from their ignorant observations, it’s all ludicrous…LUDICROUS I TELLS YA!
Wait!..
DOH!
Well okay.
Let’s say you’re a helpful person and you help people out. Each time you help someone out, your brain goes “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!” and you’re happy.
Then a scientist comes and does some brain scans while stimulating the subject with fun things. The subject’s brain goes “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!”. Scientist notes that “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!” = happy person.
Then that scientist scans the brain of a bunch of charitable people. Their brains go “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!”. Science concludes that Charity = happy people
But, let’s say that you’re a pissed off person and you like to beat people up. Each time you beat people up, you’re happy and your brain goes “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!”. The same kind of “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!” as the previous ones, because this person is equally happy as the helpful person.
So my point is: people have different hotspots to trigger the “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!”-effect. You might be happy when you just gave money to charity and your brain might go “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!”. But I’m happy when I can keep my money to myself while my brain goes “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!”. I’ll also be happy when I was able to help someone I care for, my brain will also go “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!” for that. But it sure as hell doesn’t go “HEY COOL, HAVE A COOKIE!” when I just got ripped off for charity.
PS: some lie detectors use transpiration, others use heartbeats, others use brainsignals. All of them are pretty wonky.
Right, and we’d call that person deranged or a sociopath because their response to stimulation varies drastically from the normal range of responses in the average test subject. PS Lie detectors which scan brain responses don’t exist, the only technology that can do this is in real-time is an fMRI.
==========================
And what do you think studies of fMRI results in representative population samples are based on? Unicorns?
This is apparently true - you look to science when it confirms your biases, and you look PAST science when its findings are ideologically inconvenient for you. Congratulations.
Actually I posted it about 50 times earlier in this thread when I was having the same argument with different people, and I was being attacked for providing a citation rather than my own arguments.
Sorry, I didn’t read through the whole thread and don’t intend to. So either re post the details of the study or drop it. And I get it, only some observations count, and only when they coincide with your argument. How convenient.
mattenmuse: “Hello pot, this is kettle.”
haha you’re accusing me of doing exactly what you’re doing! I see how that works. “I know when to look PAST science” lol. But obviously I’m the one saying “only some observations count” because I’m not accepting your opinion as a fact on equal level with scientific study. :rolleyes:
And about the study, I’m not implying you need to read it. It won’t affect your “faith” anyway. I’m just saying your claim about me not posting a link to it is false.
OMFG!
Are you kidding me?
I just read that article and it proves nothing other than morality is a function of the brain. I never argued that it wasn’t. Hell it doesn’t even give the details of the studies just the outline of those studies. It’s an article about the studies. What I argued was selfishness was a majority in this world based on my observations. They never once said in the article that selflessness was a widespread and dominant trait of the brain. Shit on a stick!
If I’d have known this was your basis for this whole asinine argument I’d have not even bothered. I call shenanigans.
I’m outta here!
[drops mic and walks off stage in silence]
Based on observations that were repeated, theorised and tested. You’ve, what, glanced at people on the street?
I’m going to repeat myself for the third time:
You’ve only seen on tiny facet of people’s lives and then applied it across the whole human race. That’s not observation. That’s a glance. It’s the equivalent of looking at an apple on a tree and concluding that all trees grow apples.[/SIZE]
God damn, why do these forums attract so many people that wouldn’t know logic if it was their identical twin?
i like this argument
carry on, mattemuse and Soup.
I will not give money to Haiti.
It seems to me ( though I admit it’s just media info I gather this from ) that the entire area is constructed on top of a major fault line, and near an area with active volcanic activity.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the main cause of deaths is that the majority buildings in the effected areas are made with concrete roofs, and no support for such top heavy design.
I realize that the country is not wealthy, but I put forth this thought. If you live in an area that can be effected by major environmental activity, would you ( as a reasonable set of people ) not decide on some sort of protection against the inevitable?
The whole situation is like moving to the Yukon Territories as a culture and not bringing cold weather provisions. You may not be rich, but not planning for the requirements for survival is just…foolish!
You’re a fucking moron.That’s one of the most offensive posts I’ve ever read.
I’m still baffled at how you can claim that anyone who doesn’t care about charity, is a deranged sociopath.
And Sassyrobot, what difference are you making? Going by previous posts, you work with stupid/lazy/annoying people and try to aid them in their studies and life and whatever, right? But do you honestly believe that what you’re doing will make a difference? Will your efforts offer them a normal life? Will your efforts make them less stupid/lazy/annoying?
I see it as wasting your time on a pointless cause. Those people will never grow up to be something useful, they’ll be scoundrels or bums in the future, so what you’re doing now is applying a mere bandaid on a gushing fleshwound.
And that’s why I don’t participate in charity. It won’t change anything at all, and you can call me a sociopath or retard or ignorant or whatever, I’ll just say that I’m one of the many that isn’t blinded this “You’re a bad person for not doing charity”.
Really? Sassy said she helps “stupid/lazy/annoying” people?
Isn’t that YOUR uneducated assumption?
EDIT: Crap, :ninja:d
Sanfrod, that was one of the most decisive owns I have ever seen on this board. Hats off to you.
And Bolteh, you said you’d help an old lady up if she fell over, correct?
And why didn’t you let them solve their own problems. You did waste your time by solving the problems of others.
Why do you care that some bum you’ve never met before doesn’t have a home or a job? Why would anyone but that bum care?
Earlier you said you were shocked at how many people said they do charity so they can feel good about themselves. Well what you’re doing is the exact same thing. You do this because it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, the idea of having helped someone else and not yourself makes you feel happy. Well, I’m perfectly happy without helping anyone or wasting my time and money on things that don’t affect me.
And don’t give me the bullcrap about selfless acts and how you do it because “it’s the right thing to do”. Mattemuse’s brain scan theory shows us that we should feel happy and smug when we help others.
We’re al selfish, I’m selfish because I only think of my own property, you’re selfish because you only care about your own satisfaction.
Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.