blarghly @ blarghly @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

478

Joined

4 mo. ago

Agreed.

Imo, the movie's popularity among mainstream critics derives primarily from virtue signaling.

I'm not the kind of person who watches superhero movies. They started feeling boring and formulaic around the time I graduated high school. But when Black Panther came out, I heard some chatter, and then later a friend invited me to watch it on the front lawn of New Belgium Brewing as part of an event they were hosting. So we rode our bikes to the brewery to join one or two hundred other middle class, college educated, socially conscious white people to watch a movie. And I proceeded to be bored and somewhat annoyed when it turned out to be a formulaic, slightly worse than average superhero movie.

The way I picture it is that a room full of movie studio execs were brainstorming how to appeal to kids these days, and their wokeness, and said to themselves "what if black people!" So they greenlit "What If Black People: The Movie", found a superhero from the comics to shove in the spotlight, nabbed a bunch of idealistic people who wanted to make a great movie that would change the world, let them shoot their dream movie, then chopped it up in post to make it appeal to the braindead average moviegoer.

Call me a godless heathen again, sir! I neeeeeed it!!!

No one uses the scientific method in their day to day lives. This includes all scientists, and atheists. The rationalists tried this, and their conclusion was

(1) Psychological research shows that using heuristics is what we do 90% of the time. This is an evolutionary preference that is more or less baked in, as rational though requires much more time and energy.

(2) Using rational thought for day to day tasks or important life decisions is indistinguishable from the control - ie, giving a shit and trying.

(3) Even people dedicated to seeking truth as fully as possible are highly susceptible to cognitive biases. Eg, the placebo effect still works even when you know about the placebo effect and know you are taking a placebo.

(4) When people don't take a moral stance to seek truth at the expense of their deepest beliefs, they tend to use rationality to reinforce their existing beliefs.

(5) Research shows that you change people's minds by being friendly and supportive and showing that your worldview and lifestyle lead to good outcomes. Logical refutation of people's beliefs tends to just make them dig their heels in more. This is why missionaries dig wells in impoverished nations.

(6) Communal/tribal ties are far stronger than logic. If everyone you know and identify with believes something, you will almost certainly also believe that thing, even if presented with clear evidence to the contrary.

(7) Religious people are perfectly capable of being intelligent and rational. There are many highly successful religious people, including in engineering and hard sciences. In fact, being religious seems to have numerous practical benefits in multiple aspects of life, from having a community to being more successful in your career to having a general sense of well being.

(8) Trying to form an identity around feelings of persecution for your not-religion was pretty cringy and we all regret it.

I mean, scientific materialism also denies a large part of reality. Or at least I knew that really, really well the last time I did mushrooms

Idk, I haven't been denigrated in a hot second.

I mean, did they say they consumed a whole box of boxed wine? Or just that they bought one? Could have also been on of those cartons that is the equivalent of about 2 glasses.

I'm so confused anytime someone blames "greed" for price increases.

First of all, corporations aren't people. And therefore, they cannot since, and cannot be greedy. They are inhuman profit maximizing machines. They always have been. Blaming "greed" doesn't make sense because (a) it anthropomorphizes corporations, (b) "greed" has been constant across this time frame.

If greed were to blame for these price increases, then why were prices not rising like this for every other year in living memory? Blaming greed for price increases is like saying a building burned down in a fire because of all the oxygen in the atmosphere. Like... sure? I guess that's true? But what is the takeaway? Being opposed to oxygen?

Back on topic - if you say the problem is greed, what policy proposals do you have to solve this problem? Greed is literally a biblical sin - what is your proposal to ban what is essentially one of the key components of human nature?

This isn't surprising. It is basic economics.

I personally don't think it is very likely that they are trying to poison Palestinians.

I find it completely unsurprising that someone is smuggling oxy in to make a quick buck.

“We have so far documented four testimonies from citizens who found these pills inside the flour bags,”

Best case - someone is smuggling oxy in to make a buck off of opioid addiction. But some think there might be oxy ground up in the flour so that Gazans gain a dependency, and might die from OD or withdrawal symptoms.

My guess - somebody at coca-cola figured out the cap attachment system and they patented it, but had no real plan. Then someone had the idea to lobby the EU to make it a requirement. They can sell it because it will reduce litter to some extent and improve the beverage industry's reputation. But more importantly, coca-cola not already has their manufacturing systems in place to produce these bottle caps. Other bottle manufacturers must now play catch up, constraining the supply of bottles available for EU beverage sales. Now their competitors are scrambling to update their own bottles, which will increase their costs and might delay shipments, lending coca-cola market share. And smaller competitors who outsource their bottling might be forced out of the market entirely if the company they contract with to manufacture their bottles can't or won't comply with this regulation.

I'm honestly confused how the algorithm works. "So you've been watching folk punk videos for the last hour and a half? I think you'd also be interested in watching JORDAN PETERSON dunk on THE ATHEISTS."

Def thought you meant, like, eaten like breakfast cereal

All I can say to that is - can't do attitudes can't do anything. You created a list of problems, and are acting like they are unsolveable, instead of seeing them as a checklist of things to get done to obtain a better life.

Okay so you don’t understand that youre talking to anither human and just think disagreement is a kind of attack.

No. I think that moving is an underutilized option. If you live in Alaska but hate the cold, move. If you live in Alabama but hate gun nuts, move. If you live in Briton and hate... being miserable as a lifestyle, then move!

Like, there are all sorts of ways to mitigate unhappiness. But at the end of the day, if something intrinsic to the place you live is really making you unhappy, then there is an obvious answer.

And your hand

1. You can adapt to high temps. Drink water and consume enough electrolytes, and your body will learn to be more adept at keeping itself cool. Meanwhile, your brain will get used to high temps. The problem is that you are avoiding the heat, which means your body never adapts.
2. For heavy exercise, simply do it earlier or later in the day when temps are cooler. Warmer regions developed the siesta for a reason.
3. If you really hate it so much, move.

Good explanation. Also on brand for a therapist to compare themselves to God.

Otoh, I feel like therapy would be a lot more helpful for many people if the therapist just said "I'm not going to answer those questions for you because I know you'll never affect meaningful change in your life from an answer that someone else gives you. I'm just here to prod you into figuring out your own solution, whatever that happens to be."

Why do you think that's what you're paying for?

*you're