I'll (briefly, for both your sake and mine) present my case and you then tell me if I'm deluded or onto something here (it can't be anything else; I like my thinking black and white, like a coffee made by a supernatural barista):
Psychology as an academic discipline deals with many things. A few of those things are pertinent to this discussion, the first of which is introspection, the art of internal investigation. A process through which we examine our own minds and come to learn about and then manage, if we so choose, our reactions, emotions, thought processes, and even, ideally, our biases and our pride. Our ego. I could spend hours talking about how terrible a role the ego plays in this world on a daily basis, but I digress so let's move on.
Psychology deals with interpersonal relations. How we deal with others and why we do so. How we relate to them- and they to us.
So basically you study psych and you learn about us, humans, and yourself, both as standalone entities and in relation to others. Well, it seems like a good time to ask what it is in life exactly that these things are made relevant by? Hmmm....emotions, biases, thought processes, pride, relations with others....oh ya, how about damn near everything? Relationships with family and friends, dealing with people at school. People at work. Dealing with loss, success, competition, grief. How we handle and react to day to day life. How we assess the, as we see them, motives and desires of others? Hell, how about diplomacy?! And I don't mean as a mediator in a divorce. I mean foreign f'n policy!
All of the above is heavily related to the psychology of humans and their understanding of both themselves and one another. Yet almost none of us receive education in the field of study that deals with this- psychology. I only got the opportunity to do so in university. Now imagine if everyone on Earth that received a primary education studied psychology as part of their curriculum? Ah.....better relations, better understanding of ourselves and one another.....better everything. A better world.
Call me crazy but I really am concluding that I think if we studied psychology throughout our formative years we would be more adjusted and in control of our emotions, our thoughts....our minds. Ourselves. And if this were the case, then it would naturally follow that things made up of people, like say corporations, or even *gasp* governments, might function at a higher level than they do now, with a net effect of more positivity in this world, and consequently, less of the opposite.
Friday, December 13, 2013
Saturday, November 30, 2013
On The Contrary - Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
Throughout my life, I have been a gaming connoisseur of every genre and platform. I've loved countless games and franchises, and hated countless more. A fact that I find rather amusing is that, more often than not, my preferences and favorites in the gaming industry are very different than most other people. I thought Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure was a rather great game, I've never liked the Final Fantasy series, I am the biggest fan of Mirror's Edge, and I think Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is a piece of garbage. Those are just a few of the things that set me apart from the general consensus
But one recent series has raised my ire for far too long, a current-gen game long heralded as the best on its console and even one of the best video games ever. I would be remiss to allow my viewpoint, no matter how objectionable it may be to others, to go unspoken. There are many people who attest to the quality of this game, and yet I find myself with an opinion contrary to the overwhelming majority, as I usually do. To put it simply...
I fucking hate Uncharted 2. I hate it so fucking much. The first Uncharted game is just run-of-the-fucking-mill, yet the sequel is the same shit but it gets accolades up the ass! Fuck this game!!!
Ok ok, I promised myself I would dispense with my usual vulgarity, and attempt to discuss this somewhat
sensitive topic in an intellectual manner.
But one recent series has raised my ire for far too long, a current-gen game long heralded as the best on its console and even one of the best video games ever. I would be remiss to allow my viewpoint, no matter how objectionable it may be to others, to go unspoken. There are many people who attest to the quality of this game, and yet I find myself with an opinion contrary to the overwhelming majority, as I usually do. To put it simply...
I fucking hate Uncharted 2. I hate it so fucking much. The first Uncharted game is just run-of-the-fucking-mill, yet the sequel is the same shit but it gets accolades up the ass! Fuck this game!!!
Ok ok, I promised myself I would dispense with my usual vulgarity, and attempt to discuss this somewhat
sensitive topic in an intellectual manner.
Monday, November 18, 2013
Honestly....How Can Anyone TRULY Believe in a Soul?
There are 2 obvious things that basically discredit the idea of a soul (and, by extension, an afterlife), and I do not see how thinking people can say they honestly believe in a soul.
1) Eyes. If souls can look down on us from heaven. that means they can see. So why do we have eyes? Isn't that rather redundant? And why is it that blind people are blind? They should still be able to see, even if their eyes do not function, since our souls can see. The existence of eyes and damage to the eyes resulting in blindness or at least some degree of vision impairment is said by most people to be because the eyes are quite simply the only mechanism through which we humans can take in visual stimuli which our brains can then process. Pit that against the idea that there is a soul and things like vision and consciousness (see the next point) are received by the brain rather than generated by it and apply Occam's Razor. I think it is pretty clear which of the two ideas is wishful thinking/nonsense.
2) The brain. Our souls are supposed to be us. Who we are. Our personality, our identity.......yet, changes in brain function alter our personality. It can change "who we are." Brain damage can make someone forever unrecognisable to even their families. How could this be? Some people, in response to this query, will posit the "transistor radio" hypothesis of consciousness, which, for those who do not know, is the idea that the brain acts as a receiver of consciousness rather than the catalyst for it. So according to this conception of consciousness, brain damage would alter behaviour not because the structures and electrochemical activity of the brain is responsible for said behaviour but rather due to the fact that the brain acts as a receiver for consciousness signals, and if a radio is damages the signal reception will be altered.
The problem with this idea, other than the fact that it is clearly just a way to rationalize away the evidence that runs contrary to the idea of a soul is that it doesn't explain things like dissociative identity disorder.
1) Eyes. If souls can look down on us from heaven. that means they can see. So why do we have eyes? Isn't that rather redundant? And why is it that blind people are blind? They should still be able to see, even if their eyes do not function, since our souls can see. The existence of eyes and damage to the eyes resulting in blindness or at least some degree of vision impairment is said by most people to be because the eyes are quite simply the only mechanism through which we humans can take in visual stimuli which our brains can then process. Pit that against the idea that there is a soul and things like vision and consciousness (see the next point) are received by the brain rather than generated by it and apply Occam's Razor. I think it is pretty clear which of the two ideas is wishful thinking/nonsense.
2) The brain. Our souls are supposed to be us. Who we are. Our personality, our identity.......yet, changes in brain function alter our personality. It can change "who we are." Brain damage can make someone forever unrecognisable to even their families. How could this be? Some people, in response to this query, will posit the "transistor radio" hypothesis of consciousness, which, for those who do not know, is the idea that the brain acts as a receiver of consciousness rather than the catalyst for it. So according to this conception of consciousness, brain damage would alter behaviour not because the structures and electrochemical activity of the brain is responsible for said behaviour but rather due to the fact that the brain acts as a receiver for consciousness signals, and if a radio is damages the signal reception will be altered.
The problem with this idea, other than the fact that it is clearly just a way to rationalize away the evidence that runs contrary to the idea of a soul is that it doesn't explain things like dissociative identity disorder.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Monday, November 4, 2013
Vegetables Killed James Gandolfini
On June 19th, 2013 Tony Soprano James Gandolfini died suddenly while on Vacation in Rome, Italy. The 51 year old actor and notoriously heavy breather had dined on a (presumably) gigantic meal earlier in the evening before retiring to his room for the night eternity. The autopsy confirmed the suspicions of basically everyone either involved in the story or aware of it; the actor/heavy breather had died of a heart attack. This conclusion has not been challenged by anyone and it has therefore never been investigated further. One could assume that this is due to the fact that there were no pieces of evidence at the scene to suggest an alternative cause of death. There were no signs of forced entry or reported disturbances (like arguing or fighting) emanating from his room that night, although four people on various floors both above and below him did call the concierge to report the sounds of laboured breathing coming from a room somewhere in the hotel (they knew which room it was but they also knew who was in there and knew better than to name names. Nobody rats on T. Nobody). The toxicology report came back negative. There was no blood, no wounds (defensive or otherwise). Open and shut case, right?
Eh, maybe.....or maybe not.
See, I have come across some rather disturbing evidence that his death, while it was in fact a heart attack, was actually the result of an absolute unwillingness, on his part, to eat vegetables, and this cause was actually known to the coroner and others involved in caring for Mr. Gandolfini but the truth of the matter has been suppressed by pasta and meatballs industry. Lobbyists from the industry descended upon Rome immediately upon the news of his death going public; the goal of this was of course to put pressure on those involved in the investigation to ensure that no mention of pasta, meatballs or vegetables (the presence of the former and regarding the latter, a lack thereof) was made in either any official reports or any press conferences or interviews.
I cannot reveal how I cam across this disturbing information but suffice it to say the fact that vegetables tasted less like pasta and meatballs and more like, well, vegetables, was the cause of death and this fact was forcibly kept from the public due to the presence of and pressure by the pasta and meatballs lobby.
Those bastards.
Eh, maybe.....or maybe not.
See, I have come across some rather disturbing evidence that his death, while it was in fact a heart attack, was actually the result of an absolute unwillingness, on his part, to eat vegetables, and this cause was actually known to the coroner and others involved in caring for Mr. Gandolfini but the truth of the matter has been suppressed by pasta and meatballs industry. Lobbyists from the industry descended upon Rome immediately upon the news of his death going public; the goal of this was of course to put pressure on those involved in the investigation to ensure that no mention of pasta, meatballs or vegetables (the presence of the former and regarding the latter, a lack thereof) was made in either any official reports or any press conferences or interviews.
I cannot reveal how I cam across this disturbing information but suffice it to say the fact that vegetables tasted less like pasta and meatballs and more like, well, vegetables, was the cause of death and this fact was forcibly kept from the public due to the presence of and pressure by the pasta and meatballs lobby.
Those bastards.
Labels:
conspiracy,
death,
diet,
heart attack,
humour,
Italy,
James Gandolfini,
joke,
lobby,
lobbyists,
magx01,
meatballs,
pasta,
satire,
the thoughtful gamers,
Tony Soprano,
toxicology,
vegetables
Sunday, October 27, 2013
MMA Weekend Roundup (Just a Few Thoughts)
UFC
Guillard vs Pearson no contest controversy: I think it was the right call as it was the second knee that opened that cut, but that fucking downed opponent rule is a) fucking stupid and b) obviously being exploited by fighters. Use your hand to block the knee, not touch the ground and try and be saved by some arbitrary bullshit rule. That rule really needs to go. You could tell Rogan was trying very hard to watch what he said while still getting the point across. On his podcast he's been much more open about it (he fuckin hates it). I don't even get what the rationale is. Kneeing someone in the head is okay when they are crouched or standing but when they are on the ground it's not okay because.......? What, it "just looks brutal?" What actual EFFECT does it have.....oh ya, the SAME as it does anywhere else. Just let them fucking fight, fuck. Guillard got robbed of a win because of this shit. I just hope this doesn't take the wind out of his sails, cause we all know he's been spotty but you could tell he was on yesterday. He wanted to win that fight and clearly trained hard. Only for a no contest? Fuck.
Machida: Looked great at 185lbs. I hope this weight class becomes his new home. Of course, we don't know if the weight cut depleted his reserves or not as the fight didn't even enter the second round, so there's always the possibility that a guy like Weidman could wear him out ("take him into deep waters and drown him" as so many fighters are fond of saying) but for now I am impressed. I was so scared he was going to lose and was ecstatic when he won. I would love to see him and Silva fight at some point. Wow that would be a dream. War Machida!
Bellator
Have you heard the news, people? I'm assuming you have but if you haven't for w/e reason, the PPV is off. 106 is now a free card on Spike. Why, you ask? Tito is injured. lol What else is new. I'm going to take what they have said as the truth but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if there was some fuckery afoot. Bellator PR fuckery from the get go or some fuckery from the Ortiz camp....I dunno. Nice message to send the rest of the guys on that card though. You ain't sellin shit, mofuckas. We need washed up ex UFC vets to sell shit. Nice....Btw, that card is absolutely fucking stacked. Bellator 106 might be the best card this year. STACKED. I cannot wait. The casual mma fan that may (and I mean may) have purchased the PPV to see Ortiz vs Jackson would have been treated some potentially insane fights before witnessing whatever shit show the two washed up UFC veterans would have put on. My only hope is they somehow tune in to the card on Spike because the guys still on that card deserve the viewership.
Add Tiger Sarnavskiy to the list of those Russian fighters who are really impressing me as of late. Both in Bellator and the UFC. I'm excited to see what they can do in 2014.
Desmond Green vs Angelo Sanchez: Um....that was hard to watch. The cut sustained by Sanchez was easily the nastiest I have ever seen and I never want to see something like that again. If you want to see, and I don't blame you for the curiosity but be forewarned.....it's horrible, here you go:
See the doctor opening it up at the end there? He did it multiple times and each time I was like NO STOP PLEASE. He just kept.fucking.doing.it. I literally had to look away and keep looking away until it was over. Even Jimmy Smith said on air "I really wish that doctor would stop opening and closing that thing."
GROSS.
Desmond Green vs Angelo Sanchez: Um....that was hard to watch. The cut sustained by Sanchez was easily the nastiest I have ever seen and I never want to see something like that again. If you want to see, and I don't blame you for the curiosity but be forewarned.....it's horrible, here you go:
GROSS.
WSOF 6
Haven't seen it (yet). I did however, have the Miguel Torres fight spoiled for me, since I never learn my lesson and still visit mma sites the day after events I have not seen. I need to stop doing that!
Labels:
angelo sanchez cut,
bellator,
desmond gree,
elbow,
gif,
guillard,
machida,
magx01,
mixed martial arts,
mma,
nasty,
no contest,
pearson,
pic,
the thoughtful gamers,
torres,
UFC,
world series of fighting,
wsof
Monday, October 21, 2013
Response to Psychology Today Article About "Fat Shaming"
In a Psychology Today article entitled The #1 Worst Thing to Say to Your Fat Friend the author, Harriet Lerner, Ph.D discusses an article written by another writer, a woman named Natalie Kusz. Ms. Kusz is an overweight woman writing about "fat shaming" and in her article she talks about instances of shaming enacted upon her by strangers and she contends that, while they are certainly hurtful, the moments during which she feels the most shamed is "the well-intentioned disapproval of a friend--the one who leans a narrow hand on your arm and murmurs, “I hope this doesn't hurt your feelings, but I love you and I'm concerned about your weight." Both authors contend that this friend is acting in a harmful, rather than beneficial manner when they make such statements to their overweight friends (I wonder if they would feel this way if it was gambling/alcohol, etc rather than obesity being discussed).
Well, I strongly disagree with the contention made by both of these authors and what follows is the comment I submitted for publication on the site.
Well, I strongly disagree with the contention made by both of these authors and what follows is the comment I submitted for publication on the site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)