RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Apr 25, 2017 13:50:08 GMT
... Immunotherapies for cancer treatment, next generation antibiotics, stem cell technology, 3D organ printing - all in development. ... Perhaps you've failed to notice how much what you already have is overpriced. Where Prog lives seems like a nice place. We have universal healthcare so that's not an issue here. Cardiff is very nice and it has an excellent university.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Apr 25, 2017 15:45:20 GMT
Perhaps you've failed to notice how much what you already have is overpriced. Where Prog lives seems like a nice place. We have universal healthcare so that's not an issue here. Cardiff is very nice and it has an excellent university. I am purely envious. I have friends that live in the UK and are always trying to get me to visit; maybe it's time for an extended one. At least until our 'alternate facts' pushing president is out of office.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 25, 2017 16:15:54 GMT
It would be an ad hominem if you were suggesting that physical types have no impact on personality because Kretschmer was politically flawed. Whether he really is polit ically flawed makes no difference. Even if true the political flaw is not relevant to the issue of physical traits impacting personality. You missed the whole point. Yours is a logical flaw even if Kretschmer had a political one. Opinions vary, as you yourself have noted. Although the influence of physical traits on personality is far more discounted today, and although they are certainly not the only factors influencing personality, I suspect they can be at least some small influence on personality, but no they do not ultimately determine it. I'm merely noting the several factors. Tectonic plates will continue to raise the land whether the ocean continues to rise or not. I might also mention that warmth and CO 2 have a feedback effect. They help vegetation grow which takes the CO 2 out of the atmosphere.
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Apr 25, 2017 16:21:09 GMT
Perhaps you've failed to notice how much what you already have is overpriced. Where Prog lives seems like a nice place. We have universal healthcare so that's not an issue here. Cardiff is very nice and it has an excellent university. I don't actually live in Cardiff, I was born there. I live nearby, but definitely not walking distance. 💃
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Apr 25, 2017 19:58:28 GMT
I'm not really sure what I think about it, there were some fantastic placards but I'm still not sure what the point was, at least not here (UK). I think it had more to do with Brexit than anything else, everyone I know at work voted remain and I think that was replicated across the country, the UK does well out of EU science grants and collaborations and a large percentage of our colleagues are EU citizens so we are natural Remain voters (I'm the only Eurosceptic in the lab and even I voted Remain). I don't think there are many AGW deniers here, at least not enough to affect government policy though I do worry that the Tories might decide it's politically expedient to become deniers if we leave the EU and need to attract investment. The only pseudoscience that really has a grip here is anti vax and anti GMO. This isn't great but it's not in the same league as AGW deniers. I do worry about free schools and academies, they tend to be targets for takeover by religious organisations who like to put their spin on science, particularly Biology. The US is a different story though, you have an alternative fact pushing president who has some distinctly odd ideas about science. The rest of us are constantly amazed that the country that produces the best science and universities, funds science really well and even has some respect for scientists also has a significant minority of creationists (by that I mean believe that Humans were specially created and don't share common ancestry with all other life) and some who actually believe the universe is less than 10,000 years old. And you now have a president who was voted in by this section of your society and presumably he has to keep them happy, along with the anti vaxxers and AGW deniers. My worry is that science will become politicised here but it already seems to be in the world super power of science (that's the US if you were wondering) and so the March for Science may be necessary, it's a sorry state of affairs though. Jeez, Arlon's comments on this thread...
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Apr 25, 2017 20:18:08 GMT
Jeez, Arlon's comments on this thread... Bless him, I don't really mind Arlon. He's nuts but in a kind of quaint, eccentric way.
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Apr 25, 2017 20:21:31 GMT
I strongly agree on this. The fossil fuel resources will finish. Even if they finish after 150 years from now we still need to start looking for alternatives sources. But the capitalist cronies are not letting us do that. The tacit collusion of Australia's 3 energy giants for example finished wind turbine industry. Idiot Tony Abbot had done his best to kill renewable energy industry of Australia and it is still reeling. The inefficient oligopoly market structure is destroying us. Time to think. What's really incomprehensible is that even if AGW isn't real (it is but for the sake of argument) then renewable energy technology still makes sense. Fossil fuels are polluting and finite, investing in renewable energy is a win win.
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Apr 25, 2017 20:21:53 GMT
Jeez, Arlon's comments on this thread... Bless him, I don't really mind Arlon. He's nuts but in a kind of quaint, eccentric way. Sure I had a professor or two like him, but not quite so insane.
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Apr 25, 2017 20:41:18 GMT
We have universal healthcare so that's not an issue here. Cardiff is very nice and it has an excellent university. I am purely envious. I have friends that live in the UK and are always trying to get me to visit; maybe it's time for an extended one. At least until our 'alternate facts' pushing president is out of office. You should visit, I've noticed more and more Americans coming to live here recently. A colleague and her husband moved back to the States last year and settled in Kentucky (I think) they're now moving back to work here again, it's costing them a fortune to move as they have two dogs that have to move with them. She did say they were going to come back over by sea this time!
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Apr 25, 2017 21:26:35 GMT
I am purely envious. I have friends that live in the UK and are always trying to get me to visit; maybe it's time for an extended one. At least until our 'alternate facts' pushing president is out of office. You should visit, I've noticed more and more Americans coming to live here recently. A colleague and her husband moved back to the States last year and settled in Kentucky (I think) they're now moving back to work here again, it's costing them a fortune to move as they have two dogs that have to move with them. She did say they were going to come back over by sea this time! Awww, poor doggies... don't they have to stay in quarantine or something? Will the trip by sea improve things for them, I hope?
I made the flight from the US to Frankfurt, gosh, forever-ago, and it was rough even back then. I don't think I could fly again. I wish the scientists would hurry up and invent the Star Trek transporter! I still have a flip phone rather than a smart phone, just cause it makes me feel like I'm in an episode of Star Trek ;-)
Are your friends returning because of the presidential election results?
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Apr 25, 2017 22:05:39 GMT
the very fact that there has to be a 'march for science' is mind boggling to me.
has television literally melted the human brain into a state of numbness?
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Apr 26, 2017 0:51:50 GMT
the very fact that there has to be a 'march for science' is mind boggling to me. has television literally melted the human brain into a state of numbness? Yeah, pretty much. All those 'reality' shows...
I only watch PBS... well, sometimes Saturday Night Live...
|
|
|
Post by THawk on Apr 26, 2017 1:23:12 GMT
I just hope that people (liberals) that participated in them weren't seriously thinking they were "standing up for the Earth" or such nonsense?
The only way this Earth will be saved is through unity and cooperation. Different people to work together. And the worst strategy is to make it a political issue and call people you don't like politically stupid and crazy and dangerous. In fact, that is the best way to contribute to the destruction of the planet, and then sit on a high horse and try to argue that you were on the "right side."
While liberals may be closer to the truth than conservatives, they are just as guilty of ruining this planet, by choosing spitefulness and opposition rather than working together. And cooperation in anything in this world has never been achieved by telling others they are too "stupid/evil" to face facts.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 26, 2017 5:44:13 GMT
I strongly agree on this. The fossil fuel resources will finish. Even if they finish after 150 years from now we still need to start looking for alternatives sources. But the capitalist cronies are not letting us do that. The tacit collusion of Australia's 3 energy giants for example finished wind turbine industry. Idiot Tony Abbot had done his best to kill renewable energy industry of Australia and it is still reeling. The inefficient oligopoly market structure is destroying us. Time to think. What's really incomprehensible is that even if AGW isn't real (it is but for the sake of argument) then renewable energy technology still makes sense. Fossil fuels are polluting and finite, investing in renewable energy is a win win. Exactly. I see no basis for opposition to development of renewable sources of energy. But the conservatives do it all the time and they have developed a sort of hatred for anybody else speaking about it.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 26, 2017 8:11:21 GMT
Perhaps you've failed to notice how much what you already have is overpriced. Where Prog lives seems like a nice place. We have universal healthcare so that's not an issue here. Cardiff is very nice and it has an excellent university. One reason universal health care works over there, however well it does, and not over here is that you have a different relationship with government and authority. You are comfortable turning quite many more decisions over to your government. In our relationship with government people prefer more individual responsibility. Perhaps it's a "revolutionary" spirit. They did prefer personal responsibility anyway. Lately it appears more of a fiction that they do. Support for Obama's health care reform was probably because people like having government control and apparently doctor control too. Much of the current opposition is just another attempt at government control, that is, to use the force of government to provide less health care. I suspect that will continue to fail as people finally realize that government control is not the answer up or down on health care. Only then will there be progress in the legislation. Preparing them to take more personal responsibility will likely require breaking their blind faith in government by showing them how blind that faith was. Religion is often accused of fostering a "herd" mentality, but blind faith in government and "science" is much worse at that. It is not so much that people need to accept some god or other, it is more that they need to see that they are not a god, no Earthly king is god, and even the majority is not god. If religion is used properly that is what they will see and put reasonable checks on the power of government. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely as the saying goes. The power of the military even here in the United States where we take so much pride in our checks on power has led to outrageous prices for military hardware, several hundred dollars for hammers and such things. Part of the support for Obama's health care reform was that if people can be forced to buy military hardware (through taxes) then they can be forced to buy health care, but without remembering how wrong the force can be. When Russia first gave up communism and began to exercise free market principles it did not work well at first. Free market principles do take some practice and their people were out of practice. My long time favorite answer to the question, "Which form of government is best?," is still, "Best for which country?" I suspect that free market principles are essential everywhere there are responsible adults, but there will always and everywhere be necessary laws because many adults are like children in their understanding of the world and dependence on government.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 26, 2017 10:41:51 GMT
I was not Opinions vary, as you yourself have noted. Indeed. But facts do not, and for something to be insulting it has to be untrue. The historical details about Kretschmer are well known. Did you even read my reply last time? And, for my words to be a fallacy, I would have to argue something is untrue, due to the terms of the insult. I did not. See how this works? Whether or whether not this is the case I still have to see why you are dragging this in at all. So it is moot then -and really makes this point of yours also irrelevant then, does it not? Indeed. Taking Co2 out of the atmosphere would work towards reducing the temperature. No one, as far as I know, is arguing that temperatures are in long term decline. Are you really up to speed here?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 26, 2017 12:47:39 GMT
Although psychology is not a science in the same sense physics and chemistry are, it often appears in these debates about religion and science. It is more often my opponents who consider it science or have much hope it will accomplish much. In my discussion of the television show Star Trek and its connection with people who have an interest in and high regard of science without necessarily being very good at science themselves I merely noticed that the personalities of the characters in the television show match their physical traits in the way described by the science Kretschmer dabbled in. Kirk was muscular, Spock was thin, and McCoy and Scotty were not as thin yet not as muscular ("fatter"). Kirk was a leader in the sense of taking physical control of things, Spock was more introspective and led by thinking (and speaking) when Kirk needed him. McCoy and Scotty were not as much "leaders" as experts in their their respective fields and more "sociable." This has very little to do with Kretschmer. The relationship between those physical traits and those personality types was noticed long before any science at all addressed the relationship. Kretschmer was merely the first "scientist" and doctor (psychiatrist) to write on the subject. The psychologist William Sheldon is known for his larger collection of data on the topic and the use of the terms mesomorph, ectomorph and endomorph. I merely mentioned Kretschmer lest I be blamed for stealing the work. I knew nothing of his politics before you mentioned them (and still don't know, it being from you and not yet corroborated). Your concept of the "ad hominem fallacy" appears to be saying "something not nice" or "not true" about a speaker. While those are indeed meanings the term can have, it has several others. The most significant meaning it has and the only meaning that is actually a "fallacy" in argument is "relevant to the speaker, but not the issue the speaker address." See how that works? That happens especially when people from various walks of life address public issues. I say your concept "appears" because you are not good at making yourself clear. I'm not certain why your accusations against Kretschmer are even topical. They certainly appear to be intended to discredit something or someone or other that is topical, which would of course be your "ad hominem" I mentioned. In closing here I need to add that the relationship between physical traits and personality types is not currently officially recognized. The reason is that although there might be some influence there are enough other influences that physical traits can pale in significance. It is important for fledgling "scientists" such as abound on these boards to understand that their "science" is not developed and not something they should much bother others with. I usually do not.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 26, 2017 13:19:00 GMT
In my discussion of the television show Star Trek and its connection with people who have an interest in and high regard of science without necessarily being very good at science themselves Which, true or not, exactly parallels my own observation: that people who profess to be religious are not very good at keeping to its precepts and ideals themselves. QED. I don't think anyone really cares, Arlon. It is not an academic journal here at ImdbV2.0 Treat yourself to a copy of Ideology and ethics. The perversion of German psychiatrists’ ethics by the ideology of National Socialism. by L. Singer, Eur. Psychiatry 1998. No, as I have patiently explained, the ad hominem is where insult is used by way of running an argument, of rebutting by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. I would suggest you look it up, but know you don't like definitions. In this instance, for one thing, you were making no specific argument in favour of Kretschmer; neither was I arguing against him, but just noted (something with which you agreed) that his reputation has fallen in recent years and failed to see the relevance to what was in dispute. And once again, as patiently explained, it is still not an insult to say something about a person which is true. Methinks you just protest too much. Is this from a dictionary you have argued with, or one you haven't? And, well, haven't you warned people off 'definitions'? Not being up on what is 'topical' in psychiatry, especially in regards to Kretschmer, I leave you to your own hints of a wider conspiracy here. Yes, phrenology has had a real bum deal lately, hasn't it? I have certainly never noticed this reticence to share one's personal "science" from you so I do not know why you would say this lol.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 27, 2017 0:44:41 GMT
There you go again counting too many "Christians" as "religious." Few of them are. This is my point. QED Why? No, thief, I explained that to you. The most significant meaning it has and the only meaning that is actually a "fallacy" in argument is "relevant to the speaker, but not the issue the speaker addresses." See how that works?Remember now? Insult or not, true or not, either of those is about the man Kretschmer, not the science, such as it is, in Star Trek. When I say you committed an ad hominem it means you spoke of the man rather than the issue. You don't get off by saying is was your totally separate issue with no intention of discredit especially seeing how you think it matters whether it's true.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 27, 2017 9:46:03 GMT
There you go again counting too many "Christians" as "religious." Few of them are. This is my point. I see. So many Christians are not truly religious? Thank you for agreeing with me. Because you said you had not seen claims made about Kretschmer substantiated. Remember? I do. I forgive you. Good, then we are in agreement. And calling someone a 'thief', it may be observed. will fall into this category of ad hominem since, well, you do not own the definition of same, hence strictly it is inaccurate - and of course here you are unfortunately attacking me rather than the argument. See how that works? Insult or not, true or not, either of those is about the man Kretschmer, not the science, such as it is, in Star Trek. When I say you committed an ad hominem it means you spoke of the man rather than the issue. You don't get off by saying is was your totally separate issue with no intention of discredit especially seeing how you think it matters whether it's true.I did indeed speak of Kretschmer. But I was not attacking the man, or insulting; I was relaying historical information which is widely known. (Even if not, it would seem, to you.) Neither did I say that his Nazi views affected the value of his research, although it is reasonable to suggest that scientists who thrive under totalitarian regimes tend to be accommodating to the state doctrines. In fact, rather than disputing his place in science, both of us agree that it is noteworthy, even if today much less so! So then, it is really time to move along on this one lol.
|
|