71–80 of 143 posts
I find the treatment of psychology on HN to be perplexing. On one hand, there have been attacks on psychology as a field [1] due to legitimate concerns related to replication. On the other hand, blog posts such as this come up every few days that take the same results for granted and frame them in everyday terms. I wonder, are there different groups of HN readers with different attitudes towards psychology? Or does t…
I find the treatment of psychology on HN to be perplexing. On one hand, there have been attacks on psychology as a field [1] due to legitimate concerns related to replication. On the other hand, blog posts such as this come up every few days that take the same results for granted and frame them in everyday terms. I wonder, are there different groups of HN readers with different attitudes towards psychology? Or does t…
It is somewhat ironic, to me, that I am basically accusing us of having an anti-intellectual bend. However, it is not unique to psychology. There is a similar slant against "academic" computer science.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. For instance, I had a buddy that was sure Bernie would win the NY democratic primary since Bernie had such huge rallies and people were excited. I trusted the polls. We both made small bets on PredictIt - I even bet Clinton would win by at least a 15 point margin, since that's where the polls were. I won, and he now trusts poll aggregates more.
If you'd ran a similar exercise for the 2015 UK General Election, the outcome would not have been as you desired. Famously the polls were wrong and the Conservatives won by a small majority. In fact, Sir Paddy Ashdown stated on live television that he'd "Eat his hat" if the polls were wrong, an action I think he may have probably regretted.
This is cool, although the real trick is knowing when and how to employ methods that will mitigate the problems caused by cognitive bias to accurately identify and resolve conflicts and facilitate clear decision-making. This is the purpose of courts, the purpose of peer review, the purpose of debate. Generally, it is not necessary to understand every single type of cognitive bias in a nuanced way to mitigate the prob…
Can you share a link to the video?
Telos, incidentally, I consider to be a very fascinating and important concept, though only tangentially relevant to this thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't this the old meaning of "put your money where your mouth is"? What other meaning does it have?
I always interpreted it roughly as "Do what you say/preach".
People telling someone else to 'put their money where their mouth is' are essentially asking the someone else to prove the sincerity of their belief - or the person saying it has an opposing sincere belief and they would like to make some money off of a bet over who is right.
A little ah-hah moment for me. :)
I find the treatment of psychology on HN to be perplexing. On one hand, there have been attacks on psychology as a field [1] due to legitimate concerns related to replication. On the other hand, blog posts such as this come up every few days that take the same results for granted and frame them in everyday terms. I wonder, are there different groups of HN readers with different attitudes towards psychology? Or does t…
Psychology, with view to its practical (non-research) use has not helped me, but at least three people I know say they benefitted from cognitive behavioural therapy. Perhaps in the future, medicine and science will subordinate it to the same role of philosophy to better explain human behaviour and thinking as the latter did in less techical approaches for centuries. [2]
And yes, I am somewhat skeptical of said blog posts that cite some "new study" claiming to explain something only to be refuted or contradicted months later.
[1] http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-...
[2] Wittgenstein conceded that philosophy in the 20th century would only be useful in itsapproaches to linguistics and language
I find the treatment of psychology on HN to be perplexing. On one hand, there have been attacks on psychology as a field [1] due to legitimate concerns related to replication. On the other hand, blog posts such as this come up every few days that take the same results for granted and frame them in everyday terms. I wonder, are there different groups of HN readers with different attitudes towards psychology? Or does t…
I find the treatment of psychology on HN to be perplexing. On one hand, there have been attacks on psychology as a field [1] due to legitimate concerns related to replication. On the other hand, blog posts such as this come up every few days that take the same results for granted and frame them in everyday terms. I wonder, are there different groups of HN readers with different attitudes towards psychology? Or does t…
On replication, this same criticism has recently been directed at physics, chemistry and biology, among others. [1] Psychology, with view to its practical (non-research) use has not helped me, but at least three people I know say they benefitted from cognitive behavioural therapy. Perhaps in the future, medicine and science will subordinate it to the same role of philosophy to better explain human behaviour and think…
http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/09/05/if-you-cant-make-predic...