Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Society produces bad people because they don't suffer
  1. Results 121 to 150 of 211
  2. Page 5 of 8
  3. First
  5. 3
  6. 4
  7. 5
  8. 6
  9. 7
  11. Last

Thread: Society produces bad people because they don't suffer

post 1563747541 10-15-2018, 09:44 AM
-
#121
  1. SwimToTheMoon
  2. Registered User
  1. SwimToTheMoon
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2011
  4. Location: Kwekwe, in a tent, Zimbabwe
  5. Age: 33
  6. Posts: 16,376
  7. Rep Power: 85971
Originally Posted By DirtyDon123⏩
Or not all bad childhoods or abuse are identical, some are less severe, some have positive influences, respite etc. So many variables that are impossible to record and to default to "oh it must be nature that's the difference" is just bad science, it's a lot of assumption in the face of variables that can't be tracked by scientific methods.
Ye, tell that to the guy saying Jeffrey Dahmer had a bad childhood because his mother didn't give him enough attention.. Not saying it was good, or average but that is very common.. So basically we can agree that science hasn't figured this one out yet and there isn't solid proof of anything?
post 1563747841 10-15-2018, 09:48 AM
-
#122
  1. DirtyDon123
  2. Banned
  1. DirtyDon123
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Sep 2008
  4. Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
  5. Posts: 16,261
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By SwimToTheMoon⏩
Ye, tell that to the guy saying Jeffrey Dahmer had a bad childhood because his mother didn't give him enough attention.. Not saying it was good, or average but that is very common..So basically we can agree that science hasn't figured this one out yet and there isn't solid proof of anything?
Agree big time. Science will never figure this out, the brain is way beyond the scope of our understanding currently.

Everything ITT is conjecture and pseudoscience from bro-scientists (no offence to anyone ITT) as hopefully we are all admitting that nothing can be proven and no one knows what really counts for what.
post 1563747891 10-15-2018, 09:49 AM
-
#123
  1. Vrykul
  2. Registered User
  1. Vrykul
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2015
  4. Age: 34
  5. Posts: 7,037
  6. Rep Power: 35650
Originally Posted By SwimToTheMoon⏩
Ye, tell that to the guy saying Jeffrey Dahmer had a bad childhoodbecause his mother didn't give him enough attention.. Not saying it was good, or average but that is very common.. So basically we can agree that science hasn't figured this one out yet and there isn't solid proof of anything?
You're saying that's a small thing? Please provide me with studies that say neglecting children causes no emotional/developmental harm to them

That is a bad childhood, just because he wasn't raped (we don't know that) doesn't mean his childhood was good

Science hasn't figured it out yet but there is more reason to believe it's nurture over nature. We can even domesticate tigers for fuk's sake
post 1563747981 10-15-2018, 09:51 AM
-
#124
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
Im curious how a determinist would explain this.

Lets say youre a baby. Or an adolescent or whatever.

Many touch the stove and burn their finger and learn its hot.

Are you stating there was some code that lead them to touch the stove? What happened after?

If it were written in code wouldnt they continually keep touching it since the code said so?
Yes that code is the genetic predisposition toward curiosity and exploration as personality traits.

No, the code clearly allows for learning. They learn the stove is hot and stop touching it. You need to understand the whole system responds and changes, but how it responds and how it changes were predetermined.
post 1563748241 10-15-2018, 09:54 AM
-
#125
  1. ANumber1
  2. Duke of New York
  1. ANumber1
  2. Duke of New York
  3. Join Date: Jul 2013
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 18,570
  6. Rep Power: 128694
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
Yes that code is the genetic predisposition toward curiosity and exploration as personality traits.

No, the code clearly allows for learning. They learn the stove is hot and stop touching it. You need to understand the whole system responds and changes, but how it responds and how it changes were predetermined.
Nah, fukk that. I’m not doing that.
post 1563748371 10-15-2018, 09:55 AM
-
#126
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DirtyDon123⏩
Agree big time. Science will never figure this out, the brain is way beyond the scope of our understanding currently.

Everything ITT is conjecture and pseudoscience from bro-scientists (no offence to anyone ITT) as hopefully we are all admitting that nothing can be proven and no one knows what really counts for what.
No. Science actually does have a lot to say about this, but it seems people don't want to hear it. I made the case very clear to you. Please read it and refute it or explain how it could be any other way. The way I see it, you'd need to posit the existence of a soul or spirit that offloads the mechanism of choice from that of a physical system like the brain. And THAT is pseudoscience. Otherwise you ought to be able to demonstrate the existence of a soul somehow. Since no experiment to date has shown this, it is more reasonable to take the alternate view.
post 1563748401 10-15-2018, 09:56 AM
-
#127
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
So, you wouldnt classify ER - dude from misc - as lonely?
Yes, but I don't think that was what triggered his psychology to become violent.

Also, reading through his memoir/manifesto, dude seemed to see him not having a GF/sex and his sister having having a BF, as an insult. He called it an injustice, and unfair.
if he had a social circle of friends and good family hed do the same? I dont.

Im quite positive a good motivating factor for that dude was a) hed show people the pain hes in b) hed receive attention for the suffering he endured

And hed let everybody know. So, yes, id very much say that loneliness contributed to his violence.
Nothing I've read suggests that loneliness is a predictor of violence.

Are you basing your thoughts on contributing factors of violence on research, or just personal contemplation?
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1563748411 10-15-2018, 09:56 AM
-
#128
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By ANumber1⏩
Another ad hominem without ever addressing my argument.
post 1563748711 10-15-2018, 10:00 AM
-
#129
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Posts: 36,839
  5. Rep Power: 86393
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
We definitely learn. But what learning actually is requires cells in your brain to function a specific way. Again, I'll remind you that the cells involved in memory were originally once some very simple cells. Certain genes were switched on for them during development in a predetermined response to signals received. I'm saying on a massive scale, all your response to signals was always a genetically predetermined thing. Of course the responses are complex for an organ as big and complicated as the brain, and we label that as thinking, choice, etc.

I realize this offends people because it removes some measure of illusory control they thought they had over the universe. It should come as no shock to you that your behavior is constrained and ultimately determined by the laws of physics since you are a physical system of particles.

Philosophers hate this, but think about it for 5 s and you will see it can't really be any other way unless you posit the existence of a metaphysical soul that somehow can act on aggregate physical systems and violate the laws of physics. That's pretty contrived if you ask me, but if it makes you feel better, feel free to believe that.
So.. How does someone get fat and skinny?

Once again, if it were determined. How come one doesnt go one for perpetuity?

Now, you can say genes turn on or off but that still implies a dichotomy; on or off; or choice
post 1563748821 10-15-2018, 10:02 AM
-
#130
  1. SwimToTheMoon
  2. Registered User
  1. SwimToTheMoon
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2011
  4. Location: Kwekwe, in a tent, Zimbabwe
  5. Age: 33
  6. Posts: 16,376
  7. Rep Power: 85971
Originally Posted By Vrykul⏩
You're saying that's a small thing? Please provide me with studies that say neglecting children causes no emotional/developmental harm to them

That is a bad childhood, just because he wasn't raped (we don't know that) doesn't mean his childhood was good

Science hasn't figured it out yet but there is more reason to believe it's nurture over nature. We can even domesticate tigers for fuk's sake
If you're gonna nitpick every negative aspect of an upbringing than only a very few minority of people have what you would consider a good childhood.. Look at MMA fighters for example, a lot of them had a rough upbringing, they were bullied or dirt poor, what conclusions can you draw from that? Are they just fighters because they didn't take up killing people first?

Also wtf is that tiger example?? We're talking about a minority of people that end up being psychopaths, therefore your example should be for a minority of tigers that do abnormal tiger stuff lol (which doesn't make sense because your comparison doesn't make sense).. Also to what extent can they be domesticated really? Can you trust a really hungry domesticated tiger? I bet you'd chit your pants if you were anywhere close of one, no matter how trained it was, but that is irrelevant to the point..
Still gonna read the studies you posted when I have time, might be wrong but I think Don is right, we're gonna argue all day over something that legit scientists can barely figure out.
post 1563748851 10-15-2018, 10:02 AM
-
#131
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
No. Science actually does have a lot to say about this, but it seems people son't want to hear it.
Your view is a philosophical one, not scientific one. (For example: Your argument seem to unfalsifiable, which is a clear violation of the philosophy of science.)

Sam Harris for example wrote a book arguing the same case you have, he doesn't pretend that it's anything other than a philosophical argument though. Though he does use neuroscience research to help his case (though even he says that neuroscience, is in it's infancy).

The Free Will Vs Determinism debate is an old one, in regards to philosophy.

To be honest, when I was a philosophical naturalist myself, I used to make the same arguments you did (especially after reading Sam Harris' book on the subject). I'm not a philosophical naturalist anymore though.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1563748961 10-15-2018, 10:03 AM
-
#132
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Posts: 36,839
  5. Rep Power: 86393
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
Yes, but I don't think that was what triggered his psychology to become violent.

Also, reading through his memoir/manifesto, dude seemed to see him not having a GF/sex and his sister having having a BF, as an insult. He called it an injustice, and unfair.



Nothing I've read suggests that loneliness is a predictor of violence.

Are you basing your thoughts on contributing factors of violence on research, or just personal contemplation?
Believe what you want to believe. Id agree its not in and of itself, but i believe all factors encompass some form of isolation

I also wouldnt single out humiliation either as the only predicator of violence. Who was protection

This argument can go on forever and i dont necessarily disagree with you

Was just enveloping humilation in the larger overarching "isolation" which is inherent in human nature. E.e. anxiety from isolation
post 1563749181 10-15-2018, 10:06 AM
-
#133
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
So.. How does someone get fat and skinny?

Once again, if it were determined. How come one doesnt go one for perpetuity.

Now, you can say genes turn on or of but that still implies a dichotomy; on or off; or choice
What are you asking? I think you guys are missing my point. You have a set of predetermined responses for each cell. Each cell receives a different set of stimuli, and collectively, this will determine the responses of each cell. On a massive scale,we see collections of these responses as traits. Clearly, the sequence of stimuli was important to eliciting that response. But how your cells responded to those stimuli was predisposed.
post 1563749331 10-15-2018, 10:08 AM
-
#134
  1. Vrykul
  2. Registered User
  1. Vrykul
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2015
  4. Age: 34
  5. Posts: 7,037
  6. Rep Power: 35650
Originally Posted By SwimToTheMoon⏩
If you're gonna nitpick every negative aspect of an upbringing than only a very few minority of people have what you would consider a good childhood.. Look at MMA fighters for example, a lot of them had a rough upbringing, they were bullied or dirt poor, what conclusions can you draw from that? Are they just fighters because they didn't take up killing people first?

Also wtf is that tiger example?? We're talking about a minority of people that end up being psychopaths, therefore your example should be for a minority of tigers that do abnormal tiger stuff lol (which doesn't make sense because your comparison doesn't make sense).. Also to what extent can they be domesticated really? Can you trust a really hungry domesticated tiger? I bet you'd chit your pants if you were anywhere close of one, no matter how trained it was, but that is irrelevant to the point..
Still gonna read the studies you posted when I have time, might be wrong but I think Don is right, we're gonna argue all day over something that legit scientists can barely figure out.
A lot of mma fighters have gone through having an attention whore unstable mother that tries to kill herself for attention? That’s a pretty far fetch. They could have been poor but still loved by their family, which is the argument I’m making.

The tiger example makes a lot of sense, here we have a wild animal that is biologically programmed to pretty much eat any other animal on sight (nature) but we manage to somewhat domesticate it so it almost completely ignores it’s natural instincts (nurture)
post 1563749501 10-15-2018, 10:10 AM
-
#135
  1. lolXlol
  2. Registered User
  1. lolXlol
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Oct 2015
  4. Posts: 2,837
  5. Rep Power: 0
yes because rappers and athletes who grew up poor totally aren't degenerates once they became successful
post 1563749511 10-15-2018, 10:10 AM
-
#136
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
Your view is a philosophical one, not scientific one. (For example: Your argument seem to unfalsifiable, which is a clear violation of the philosophy of science.)

Sam Harris for example wrote a book arguing the same case you have, he doesn't pretend that it's anything other than a philosophical argument though. Though he does use neuroscience research to help his case (though even he says that neuroscience, is in it's infancy).

The Free Will Vs Determinism debate is an old one, in regards to philosophy.

To be honest, when I was a philosophical naturalist myself, I used to make the same arguments you did (especially after reading Sam Harris' book on the subject). I'm not a philosophical naturalist anymore though.
It's really not. It is actually a very falsifiable claim. My claim is a specific case of the more general claim that the behavior of physical systems are governed by the laws of physics. This claim is experimentally very falsifiable. While our understanding of physics is not perfect, the understanding of the particles that compose the brain is pretty good. The reason we can't predict the brain's response to stimuli is that it is just really complex. That doesn't mean the underlying rules don't matter. Cells interact with each other, etc, sure. But all of that is governed by the same basic rules. You just really can't escape that idea.
post 1563749551 10-15-2018, 10:10 AM
-
#137
  1. DatFeelGuy
  2. Registered User
  1. DatFeelGuy
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2012
  4. Posts: 4,146
  5. Rep Power: 7238
The problem with OP is he does all this speculating from his mom's basement from the perspective of an unambitious loser.
Work hard
Enjoy yourself
Do the right thing
Compound your interest
post 1563749561 10-15-2018, 10:10 AM
-
#138
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
Believe what you want to believe. Id agree its not in and of itself,but i believe all factors encompass some form of isolation
Honestly, they don't.

Income inequality doesn't.

The desire for power or dominance over others doesn't (ie. research into the psychology of rapists, and James Gilligan's research into how models of masculinity contribute to a violence).

Violence for economic gain doesn't.

Etc.
I also wouldnt single out humiliation either as the only predicator of violence.
Nor have I, I listed about 5 ITT. There are even more than I can list.

I'm guessing you haven't done much research into the causes of violence, I would strongly advise you to do so if you haven't.

I left 2 links in this post, which IMO are brilliant introductions to the psychology of habitually violent people...

https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showt...post1563688361
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1563749671 10-15-2018, 10:11 AM
-
#139
  1. DirtyDon123
  2. Banned
  1. DirtyDon123
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Sep 2008
  4. Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
  5. Posts: 16,261
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
No. Science actually does have a lot to say about this, but it seems people don't want to hear it. I made the case very clear to you. Please read it and refute it or explain how it could be any other way. The way I see it, you'd need to posit the existence of a soul or spirit that offloads the mechanism of choice from that of a physical system like the brain. And THAT is pseudoscience. Otherwise you ought to be able to demonstrate the existence of a soul somehow. Since no experiment to date has shown this, it is more reasonable to take the alternate view.
Where are the studies then brah? You've linked nothing ITT and have given no scientific literature to disagree with. Your argument is philosophical.
post 1563749711 10-15-2018, 10:11 AM
-
#140
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
It's really not. It is actually a very falsifiable claim. My claim is a specific case of the more general claim that the behavior of physical systems are governed by the laws of physics. This claim is experimentally very falsifiable.
How could we falsify the claim that genetics determine every response we have, via reproducible experiment?
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1563749721 10-15-2018, 10:12 AM
-
#141
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Posts: 36,839
  5. Rep Power: 86393
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
What are you asking? I think you guys are missing my point. You have a set of predetermined responses for each cell. Each cell receives a different set of stimuli, and collectively, this will determine the responses of each cell. On a massive scale,we see collections of these responses as traits. Clearly, the sequence of stimuli was important to eliciting that response. But how your cells responded to those stimuli was predisposed.
Youre annoying me.

What are "predetermined responses by cells"? Cause i dont know what they are.

Im sure i can conjure up what youre implying, but what do you specifically mean. Whats an explicit of example of a predetermined response?
post 1563749821 10-15-2018, 10:13 AM
-
#142
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
You guys don't seem to be looking at the neurological basis of behavior. Your behavior, choices, etc all require cells to function a specific way and build proteins, etc. These responses are occuring due to specific chemical pathways that respond to specific signals. To reject this idea is to reject that you think with your brain, a physical system.
post 1563749911 10-15-2018, 10:15 AM
-
#143
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Posts: 36,839
  5. Rep Power: 86393
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
Honestly, they don't.

Income inequality doesn't.

The desire for power or dominance over others doesn't (ie. research into the psychology of rapists, and James Gilligan's research into how model's of masculinity contribute to a violence).

Violence for economic gain doesn't.

Etc.



Nor have I, I listed about 5 ITT. There are even more than I can list.

I'm guessing you haven't done much research into the causes of violence, I would strongly advise you to do so if you haven't.

I left 2 links in this post, which IMO are brilliant introductions to the psychology of habitually violent people...

https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showt...post1563688361
So, humilation is not a form of isolation?

Humiliation is shortsighted imo. Theres a meaning to it. When i see you using humilation i go on and on and think.. What does humiliation mean?

But, no, i havent studied violence. And i never finished neuroscience, but i studied quite a bit as it was what i wanted to get into in medicine. Then i learned i didnt want to be in the hospital or hearing peoples problems all day. So i stopped

Im also curious what you think of humiliation being the catalyst for sexual pleasure among cuckolds
post 1563749941 10-15-2018, 10:15 AM
-
#144
  1. ANumber1
  2. Duke of New York
  1. ANumber1
  2. Duke of New York
  3. Join Date: Jul 2013
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 18,570
  6. Rep Power: 128694
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
Another ad hominem without ever addressing my argument.
Maybe because your argument is just a bunch of autismoduck bullchit that you've constructed in the inordinate amount of free time you have since you nevergo outside.
Nah, fukk that. I’m not doing that.
post 1563750271 10-15-2018, 10:19 AM
-
#145
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
Youre annoying me.

What are "predetermined responses by cells"? Cause i dont know what they are.

Im sure i can conjure up what youre implying, but what do you specifically mean. Whats an explicit of example of a predetermined response?
The genetic information.

Here is an example.

Consider the genes involved in axial development for an embryo. Essentially, all the cells in that embryo are genetically identical. The embryo receives a signal in the form of a protein released with a concentration gradient throughout the embryo. The cell is predetermined to respond to specific concentratons. This ultimately determines which part of the embryo is the front or the back for example. Similar combinations of external signals and responses resulted in you being the ******* you are today rather than a lump of cells. The responses were always predetermined but the sequence to stimuli was the key to making you what you are rather than a lump.
post 1563750371 10-15-2018, 10:20 AM
-
#146
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By ANumber1⏩
Maybe because your argument is just a bunch of autismoduck bullchit that you've constructed in the inordinate amount of free time you have since you nevergo outside.
Again, zero argument. "It' BS!!" Why? Why is it BS, nerd?
post 1563750551 10-15-2018, 10:23 AM
-
#147
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
How could we falsify the claim that genetics determine every response we have, via reproducible experiment?
It's a specific case of the fact that the laws of physics govern the behavior of physical systems.

But if you want to address the specific claim:
The claim is that there is genetic information.
Cells respond to stimuli via their biochemical pathways.
In response to stimuli, the genetic information is used to make proteins which alter the activities of the cell.
You are made of cells.
Therefore, your collective response is governed by the individual responses of each cell along with their interactions with each other.
Trace it back far enough, and you can see that it all began with predetermined instructions on how the initial zygote responded to external stimuli.

And all of this has been experimentally verified thoroughly or is a direct logical conclusion of this.
post 1563750571 10-15-2018, 10:23 AM
-
#148
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
So, humilation is not a form of isolation?
We've already gone over this.

Yes it is, however to say that isolation causes violence, is to say that loneliness is a predictor of a violent person, and it isn't. Unless you want to produce something that argues otherwise?

So reframing humiliation or shame as isolation, oversimplifies and confuses the issues, because loneliness is not a predictor of violence.
Humiliation is shortsighted imo. Theres a meaning to it. When i see you using humilation i go on and on and think.. What does humiliation mean?
http://www.humiliationstudies.org/do...Y07meeting.pdf
But, no, i havent studied violence.
I would strongly advise you doing so.

Seeing as you've studied medicine, you'll know that many conclusions can be counter-intuitive.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1563750641 10-15-2018, 10:24 AM
-
#149
  1. DirtyDon123
  2. Banned
  1. DirtyDon123
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Sep 2008
  4. Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
  5. Posts: 16,261
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By ANumber1⏩
Maybe because your argument is just a bunch of autismoduck bullchit that you've constructed in the inordinate amount of free time you have since you nevergo outside.


post 1563750701 10-15-2018, 10:25 AM
-
#150
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  1. propreffered7
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Posts: 36,839
  5. Rep Power: 86393
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
The genetic information.

Here is an example.

Consider the genes involved in axial development for an embryo. Essentially, all the cells in that embryo are genetically identical. The embryo receives a signal in the form of a protein released with a concentration gradient throughout the embryo. The cell is predetermined to respond to specific concentratons. This ultimately determines which part of the embryo is the front or the back for example. Similar combinations of external signals and responses resulted in you being the ******* you are today rather than a lump of cells. The responses were always predetermined but the sequence to stimuli was the key to making you what you are rather than a lump.
Im not even sure what youre arguing.

Are you saying theres choice? Is choice free will?

Youre using solid words and then vague information. Ok. So you say dna but what are you saying the dna does? Are you using dna as the structure and when you say response are talking about a physical response?

So, if youre going down to that micro level what are you saying for the macro? What is the signal at the macro level that you keep referencing?

What determines how something responds?
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts