<cringe>He really does not seem to be a clear thinker; his emotions control his logic quite a lot in what I see here, and I agree that he has some, um, twisted emotions... He jumps around, he does not have clear basic definitions. Ugh.
That being said, I'd put in a plug for not tarring all of academia with this kind of stuff; there certainly is this stuff in some departments, but there are also pockets of much better thinking. Perhaps meaning there are people I agree with much more. ;-)
But seriously, some NTs are better at self-examination than others, and at least attempt to consider how their emotions are affecting their scholarship, and will write into their research other possible explanations for their research findings etc. I bet this guy did not do that in this magazine article (which is not a peer-reviewed publication, not that that necessarily solves all the bias issues...)
One more thing... sometimes I think a PhD has to do with a being able to muster societal power behind one's manipulation attempts in particular venues, for some people... PhDs are truly afforded more power in some situations.
I think you are correct about them affording power, but the more nonsense like this is brought to the light and shown to people, the less PhDs like the one he has will be taken seriously.
I've not gotten around to watching M3GAN yet. I've noticed that "psychopath" as a descriptor for anyone who falls on the other side of some political or cultural issue is becoming even more common nowadays. I'm not sure how to put things I'm seeing together but there's an increasing number of NT's who are in "therapy" which doesn't seem to be helping at all.
So as for the author whose article Athena just analyzed I'd say that unfortunately he's typical of the product of higher education these days. I'm honestly baffled and I'm reminded of an interview with a Communist in the UK ( a actual card carrying Communist) who held that most people were being paid for producing nothing at all so we may as well go with it. If that guy is being paid for that sort of thing maybe I should explore new career opportunities past retirement
Well, that was certainly a journey. Kudos to you for wading through the deep nonsense. I have yet to see a definition of gender (as a concept apparently distinct from sex) that is not incredibly vague and that doesn’t fail to describe itself in a coherent and consistent way. It makes its way into academia like this and is negatively affecting it (mixed sex studies not being known as such, etc). This was quite a fun read.
Am I understanding this incorrectly or are you saying that you don't believe in the concept of gender identity and by extension the experience of transgender people?
I don't believe in ideology that is detrimental to the world. Trans people have nothing to do with that ideology. Ideologues do. There is no conflation in my mind.
Thank you for the clarification. I'm curious to understand your viewpoint. Can you explain further what you feel is harmful and what the ideology regarding gender you're referring to is specifically?
Not too long ago Sabine Hossenfelder posted a video on why she left academia. Like her, I've seen many people, who had made their entire online personality based on being academics (most in hard science programs like Phyisics, Maths), also announcing they were leaving and all for the same reason. Making money being a priority over actual scientific research and discovery.
I think that's why we see more people like this guy being given a platform. They have no problem putting out awful research and articles as lingering as they get paid.
I too gave up on my neuroscience PhD and now work in healthcare where I know my work is actually helping people and counting for something.
This guy is... wow. A Robert Hare fan would be more educated.
But I have to say, I'm going to join the chorus who are saying that not all PhDs are this... this... clownish. My husband has a PhD that applies equally to electrical engineering, computer science, and mathematics. His level of knowledge in those three topics is absolutely off the charts. Also, don't get him started on game theory.
His degree is definitely not bullshit. As payment, he gets to do our taxes, and all the computer tech support, building and repairs. He does not, however, get to do any household wiring chores around the house (my domain) because as it turns out, EEs are not electricians, although they sometimes have some pretty sweet tools for electricians to borrow.
This guy's type of degree? Yeah, that one's bullshit.
I agree, which is why I said *often don't mean very much", instead of, worthless as a whole. There are those that have value, but in today's climate, there are many that aren't worth the paper they're written on
I tell you what I don’t understand. I don’t understand why some highly educated people are unable to apply even a very basic list of core traits and extrapolate.
For example, It’s generally agreed upon that psychopaths do not feel fear. So why would they experience social or any other form of anxiety? I could understand debate as to WHY the psychopath doesn’t experience fear. Are they in fact so goal oriented for example that fear simply doesn’t register? A prioritisation of action over inaction? Is it solely down to brain chemistry or structure? I could understand some debate as to the why or whys, but no fear means no fear, and even that very straightforward fact is often not applied.
Love the title of the article. Too often I defer to someone more highly educated when in actual fact that doesn’t necessarily equate to ‘better informed.’
I lack that understanding as well. When I was a kid, and I am assuming this is true of pretty much everyone, "why" was the most commonly asked question that I ask. I still always want to know why. It is odd to me that for some people, that question falls quiet, as it apparently has done with him.
As someone with left leaning political views, even I find his constant references to queer people, black people, immigrants etc. to be pandering.
He’s one of those types who think loudly proclaiming his ideology will somehow make him morally superior. He’s a hypocrite who claims to follow an ideology that’s all for dismantling stereotypes and supporting the marginalized, and yet he’s spreading misinformation about a minority. A very misunderstood minority at that.
Like the guy didn’t even stop to think of psychopaths as people potentially reading his article. They’re predators lurking in the dark according to him. Yet somehow we’re suppose to take him seriously when he starts spouting about queer politics in an article about psychopaths.
M3GAN is a enjoyable film, with a sequel coming next year. It seems more of morality, of the AI deciding how to protect the aunt's niece and the limits of AI actions (none). I rooted for the AI most of the way.
No character or plot or even comment vaguely suggest pyschopathology.
"It seems to me..." Seems like a great hook for a Bob Dylan style song. Like, along the lines of "Most of the time".
You're right this article, the original that you are commenting on, is too much of a mess to comment on without feeling like I am getting "embroiled in the mud". I did wonder though, if the film he mentioned with 50 rotten tomatoes reviews was an independent film his buddies made if he has lived a lot in the University lifestyle.
Probably the least psychopathic person I have ever met was a lesbian. A truly soft and chaotic being.
<cringe>He really does not seem to be a clear thinker; his emotions control his logic quite a lot in what I see here, and I agree that he has some, um, twisted emotions... He jumps around, he does not have clear basic definitions. Ugh.
That being said, I'd put in a plug for not tarring all of academia with this kind of stuff; there certainly is this stuff in some departments, but there are also pockets of much better thinking. Perhaps meaning there are people I agree with much more. ;-)
But seriously, some NTs are better at self-examination than others, and at least attempt to consider how their emotions are affecting their scholarship, and will write into their research other possible explanations for their research findings etc. I bet this guy did not do that in this magazine article (which is not a peer-reviewed publication, not that that necessarily solves all the bias issues...)
One more thing... sometimes I think a PhD has to do with a being able to muster societal power behind one's manipulation attempts in particular venues, for some people... PhDs are truly afforded more power in some situations.
I think you are correct about them affording power, but the more nonsense like this is brought to the light and shown to people, the less PhDs like the one he has will be taken seriously.
I've not gotten around to watching M3GAN yet. I've noticed that "psychopath" as a descriptor for anyone who falls on the other side of some political or cultural issue is becoming even more common nowadays. I'm not sure how to put things I'm seeing together but there's an increasing number of NT's who are in "therapy" which doesn't seem to be helping at all.
So as for the author whose article Athena just analyzed I'd say that unfortunately he's typical of the product of higher education these days. I'm honestly baffled and I'm reminded of an interview with a Communist in the UK ( a actual card carrying Communist) who held that most people were being paid for producing nothing at all so we may as well go with it. If that guy is being paid for that sort of thing maybe I should explore new career opportunities past retirement
I agree, psychopath does seem to be the term for, person I don't like/understand
Well, that was certainly a journey. Kudos to you for wading through the deep nonsense. I have yet to see a definition of gender (as a concept apparently distinct from sex) that is not incredibly vague and that doesn’t fail to describe itself in a coherent and consistent way. It makes its way into academia like this and is negatively affecting it (mixed sex studies not being known as such, etc). This was quite a fun read.
Yup, I agree. I haven't seen one either.
Am I understanding this incorrectly or are you saying that you don't believe in the concept of gender identity and by extension the experience of transgender people?
I don't believe in ideology that is detrimental to the world. Trans people have nothing to do with that ideology. Ideologues do. There is no conflation in my mind.
Thank you for the clarification. I'm curious to understand your viewpoint. Can you explain further what you feel is harmful and what the ideology regarding gender you're referring to is specifically?
No, I will not be starting a political discussion on my Substack.
Very well, fair enough.
he made one too many meals with noodles and it replaced his brain, evidently
It truly does seem so
A suitable meme:
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/357mhh
Not too long ago Sabine Hossenfelder posted a video on why she left academia. Like her, I've seen many people, who had made their entire online personality based on being academics (most in hard science programs like Phyisics, Maths), also announcing they were leaving and all for the same reason. Making money being a priority over actual scientific research and discovery.
I think that's why we see more people like this guy being given a platform. They have no problem putting out awful research and articles as lingering as they get paid.
I too gave up on my neuroscience PhD and now work in healthcare where I know my work is actually helping people and counting for something.
It sounds to me that you found something worth doing, instead of something others deem worthy.
This guy is... wow. A Robert Hare fan would be more educated.
But I have to say, I'm going to join the chorus who are saying that not all PhDs are this... this... clownish. My husband has a PhD that applies equally to electrical engineering, computer science, and mathematics. His level of knowledge in those three topics is absolutely off the charts. Also, don't get him started on game theory.
His degree is definitely not bullshit. As payment, he gets to do our taxes, and all the computer tech support, building and repairs. He does not, however, get to do any household wiring chores around the house (my domain) because as it turns out, EEs are not electricians, although they sometimes have some pretty sweet tools for electricians to borrow.
This guy's type of degree? Yeah, that one's bullshit.
I agree, which is why I said *often don't mean very much", instead of, worthless as a whole. There are those that have value, but in today's climate, there are many that aren't worth the paper they're written on
I tell you what I don’t understand. I don’t understand why some highly educated people are unable to apply even a very basic list of core traits and extrapolate.
For example, It’s generally agreed upon that psychopaths do not feel fear. So why would they experience social or any other form of anxiety? I could understand debate as to WHY the psychopath doesn’t experience fear. Are they in fact so goal oriented for example that fear simply doesn’t register? A prioritisation of action over inaction? Is it solely down to brain chemistry or structure? I could understand some debate as to the why or whys, but no fear means no fear, and even that very straightforward fact is often not applied.
Love the title of the article. Too often I defer to someone more highly educated when in actual fact that doesn’t necessarily equate to ‘better informed.’
I lack that understanding as well. When I was a kid, and I am assuming this is true of pretty much everyone, "why" was the most commonly asked question that I ask. I still always want to know why. It is odd to me that for some people, that question falls quiet, as it apparently has done with him.
I haven't read the article yet. But I agree with the first part. I have a masters degree in computer science and it doesn't mean shit.
As someone with left leaning political views, even I find his constant references to queer people, black people, immigrants etc. to be pandering.
He’s one of those types who think loudly proclaiming his ideology will somehow make him morally superior. He’s a hypocrite who claims to follow an ideology that’s all for dismantling stereotypes and supporting the marginalized, and yet he’s spreading misinformation about a minority. A very misunderstood minority at that.
Like the guy didn’t even stop to think of psychopaths as people potentially reading his article. They’re predators lurking in the dark according to him. Yet somehow we’re suppose to take him seriously when he starts spouting about queer politics in an article about psychopaths.
It seems a bit deeper than pandering to me.
M3GAN is a enjoyable film, with a sequel coming next year. It seems more of morality, of the AI deciding how to protect the aunt's niece and the limits of AI actions (none). I rooted for the AI most of the way.
No character or plot or even comment vaguely suggest pyschopathology.
I think a sequel will be a good time
me, too!! Maybe the AI wins!?! hahahaha
Misinformed,he should learn more.
Agreed
"It seems to me..." Seems like a great hook for a Bob Dylan style song. Like, along the lines of "Most of the time".
You're right this article, the original that you are commenting on, is too much of a mess to comment on without feeling like I am getting "embroiled in the mud". I did wonder though, if the film he mentioned with 50 rotten tomatoes reviews was an independent film his buddies made if he has lived a lot in the University lifestyle.
Probably the least psychopathic person I have ever met was a lesbian. A truly soft and chaotic being.