• eBaumer's Questionnaire

  • If it doesn't fit in another forum, chances are it belongs here.
If it doesn't fit in another forum, chances are it belongs here.
 #15588  by Demeter
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:29 am
PlusCaChange wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:16 am
I think it's just (what should be) common sense.
Common sense is wrong at least as often as it's right. That's why scientific thinking has advanced understanding more in the last 300 years than in the 30,000 that came before. You have to test a theory against reality before you can place any reliance on it. In this case first see if there is a real difference in aggressive/violent behavior between children from homes with less aggressive/violent parents or if it's just confirmation bias. Then eliminate other possible explanations like genetic predisposition. Studies of twins reared separately have shown the genetic component of behavior to be enormous, though the interaction between genetics and environment is more complex than a simple either/or.
If you're able to confidently say it's supposedly "more likely that's genetics", then I'm allowed to confidently use the phrase "(what should be) common sense."

And mine are based on studies too, but I'm too tired (4:22 AM) to go searching for them at the moment. I've taken child development and psychology classes. And I have personally seen dramatic results from a mere change of parental/guardian behavior. My niece for example used to get spanked, and had behavior problems. I was an idiot as a teenager and thought I should spank her. Exacerbated the problem immensely. She felt she wasn't respected (she wasn't, at that time), she feared me, she was angry. I realized that wasn't going to work, started showing her respect instead and obviously never tried spanking her again. Any issues after that were handled by firmly (but not enough to hurt) grabbing her arms if I needed to stop what she was doing immediately, then getting down at her eye level and calmly explaining why what she was doing was not okay, and how I expected more from her. After a while of that I had nothing but a great relationship with my niece and to this day even though she lives far away, she'll call me and write me letters... Also just to brag, she's also vegan for the animals, a straight A honors student, an incredible athlete, artist, and just the classiest teenager I've ever met.

I'm obviously not the sole factor in this, but I definitely could have done damage by continuing to spank her. Although honestly if I had continued I would have had to more severely physically abuse her, and even then it wouldn't have gotten her to do what I wanted except maybe a brief moment. My niece has always been strong spirited. So spanking wouldn't have been an option even if I believed it was a good method.

If I had been able to continue however, I saw very clearly the results of that: anger, fear, behavior problems.

It wasn't genetic, because my niece is an angel. It was because she was being spanked and *shocker* didn't like it.
 #15590  by seanxxx3
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:52 am
Demeter wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:29 am
PlusCaChange wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:16 am
I think it's just (what should be) common sense.
Common sense is wrong at least as often as it's right. That's why scientific thinking has advanced understanding more in the last 300 years than in the 30,000 that came before. You have to test a theory against reality before you can place any reliance on it. In this case first see if there is a real difference in aggressive/violent behavior between children from homes with less aggressive/violent parents or if it's just confirmation bias. Then eliminate other possible explanations like genetic predisposition. Studies of twins reared separately have shown the genetic component of behavior to be enormous, though the interaction between genetics and environment is more complex than a simple either/or.
If you're able to confidently say it's supposedly "more likely that's genetics", then I'm allowed to confidently use the phrase "(what should be) common sense."

And mine are based on studies too, but I'm too tired (4:22 AM) to go searching for them at the moment. I've taken child development and psychology classes. And I have personally seen dramatic results from a mere change of parental/guardian behavior. My niece for example used to get spanked, and had behavior problems. I was an idiot as a teenager and thought I should spank her. Exacerbated the problem immensely. She felt she wasn't respected (she wasn't, at that time), she feared me, she was angry. I realized that wasn't going to work, started showing her respect instead and obviously never tried spanking her again. Any issues after that were handled by firmly (but not enough to hurt) grabbing her arms if I needed to stop what she was doing immediately, then getting down at her eye level and calmly explaining why what she was doing was not okay, and how I expected more from her. After a while of that I had nothing but a great relationship with my niece and to this day even though she lives far away, she'll call me and write me letters... Also just to brag, she's also vegan for the animals, a straight A honors student, an incredible athlete, artist, and just the classiest teenager I've ever met.

I'm obviously not the sole factor in this, but I definitely could have done damage by continuing to spank her. Although honestly if I had continued I would have had to more severely physically abuse her, and even then it wouldn't have gotten her to do what I wanted except maybe a brief moment. My niece has always been strong spirited. So spanking wouldn't have been an option even if I believed it was a good method.

If I had been able to continue however, I saw very clearly the results of that: anger, fear, behavior problems.

It wasn't genetic, because my niece is an angel. It was because she was being spanked and *shocker* didn't like it.
You might be the most annoying person that I've ever seen post here.
Anthrax666 liked this
 #15591  by PlusCaChange
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:55 am
If you're able to confidently say it's supposedly "more likely that's genetics", then I'm allowed to confidently use the phrase "(what should be) common sense."
The latest research suggests you don't so much have a gene for a specific behavior as a web of genetically determined potentialities which are triggered and reinforced by environment. The model is similar to memory, where environment triggers chemical changes in the brain but the genetic potential determines how easy it is and what sort of stimuli you remember. Given that nearly everyone in the US is exposed to plenty of violence both directly and indirectly it is logical to surmise differences are mostly due to your predisposition to be imprinted by violence.

"Common sense" is just another word for prejudice.
 #15595  by Anthrax666
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:50 am
Right..... I'm no psychologist..... but are you referring to your vag as "niece"
but I definitely could have done damage by continuing to spank her
 #15597  by Tim_Kerr
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:55 am
Anthrax666 wrote:
Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:50 am
Right..... I'm no psychologist..... but are you referring to your vag as "niece"
but I definitely could have done damage by continuing to spank her
Is this how the sex starts? I think it is... Anthrax666 aka ********* moving to California 8-) 8-) 8-)
Anthrax666 liked this
 #15599  by Anthrax666
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:03 am
[quote=Tim_Kerr post_id=15597 time=1492786515 user_id=791
Anthrax666 aka ********* moving to California 8-) 8-) 8-)
[/quote]

I might contact that show 'catfished' and ask if I can meet him :lol:
 #15613  by Demeter
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:50 am
God I really hope he's not flirting with me.

And PlusCaChange, you're a crackpot unable to understand simple realities because your head is stuck so far up your ass you can't see.

No, not everyone is exposed to the violence that would require changes in the brain. And again, that wouldn't explain people like my niece who quickly recovered after she started being treated with respect instead of abusive methods. You can't just read an article about a study and then add your own commentary to it as if it's fact. Stop.
 #15622  by PlusCaChange
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:47 pm
you're a crackpot unable to understand simple realities because your head is stuck so far up your ass you can't see.
For someone who seems distressed when people are abusive towards her you certainly do seem to like to make personal remarks about people you don't know. It's particularly odd in my case because I'm one of the few people on this forum who has never been personally abusive towards you, all I've done is challenge your preconceptions and prejudices in as objective a way as possible.

I was talking about the general case, I can't answer for specific anecdotal instances. You observed people who were mild-mannered tended to have mild mannered children and drew a connection between the parents treatment and the behavior of the children. I pointed out the greater contribution to any correlation (which still needs to be established) was probably genetic, which is what the science indicates however distressing that might be to people with certain ideologies. Look at an individual human and there is a complex web of reasons and factors for what they do and think, step back and look at a population of humans and they conform to their instincts.
Anthrax666 liked this
 #15627  by DoctorZen
 Fri Apr 21, 2017 2:14 pm
1. What's your political leaning?
Left-leaning Centreist

2. What are you most passionate about in life?
a) things you care about
The advancement of science
b) things you enjoy
Pen & paper games (D&D, shadowrun etc...)
c) goals
Further my career in medicine

3. What's your highest level of education and what did you study?
M.D. Medicine at McMaster University

4. What do you do on the internet besides browse eBaum's forum?
When I have free time, I play Overwatch and Minecraft, browse Facebook and look at porn

5. What do you think about children?
They're okay I guess, don't want any yet.