It makes me wonder if the alcohol is to distract you. Lol

Since we aren’t capable of gaining absolute knowledge, we’re cursed with having to each set our personal threshold for skepticism/credulity. Setting it too low like your quiet uncle seems like it would be a confusing nightmare.

I tend to be skeptical, but I still went down a rabbit hole the other day re: aliens after indirectly reading about “sightings” in Europe in the 1600s. This one was fascinating:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1665_celestial_phenomenon_over_Stralsund

In the 70s, it’s probably just a given.

Ohhh, now I get the top comment.

Omg, I had no idea…

That is such a pet peeve of mine. Charts without labeled axes might as well just be art projects.

Np, just learned it myself right before posting this.

All of their “yes” responses together sound like “Yes, we see ya.”

The Japanese pronunciation is why they wanted to call him Puck-Man! It’s apparently from a Japanese onomatopoeia for a mouth opening and closing, “Paku Paku”

You’re the 2nd person to mention this game, and I haven’t heard of it. Time to look it up.

Is he the one with the video of the farmer guy who says “my wife told me I should come in” and they all go into high alert? Lol

Those little guys are so familiar!

<3

deleted by creator

There was a Saint Elmo at least.

These posts are great. I wish I had some idea what this game was…

it looks like the N64/PSX/Dreamcast era. Hmm.

Very true. I’ve never worked with kids, but after having kids myself and seeing this “chromosomal slot machine” pull in action, it’s so apparent that a lot of personality is baked in. I used to be quite the behaviorist/blank-slatist too.

On the note of research selection bias, how about the realization that most research is done on college students who are trying to get class credit, and that most of the research work is also being done by students? And that it’s almost never going to be replicated? I think the general public has this idea that most science is being done by a bunch of specialized men/women in labcoats with decades of experience, not hungover 20-somethings talking to hungover 20-somethings. In reality, that’s probably 99% of it.

I think neither the nature or nurture hardliners would be satisfied with the answer to most of these types of questions in psych, because it likely lands somewhere in between.

I also share the frustration with the field being so susceptible to trends of ideology: proposed topics of research, what gets approved, what gets replicated, what gets published (not to mention sloppy methodology that always seems to err on the side of the desired results). In the past, research was rigidly flavored by genetics/evolution/immutable traits because it was built on the model of biology/medicine. In recent history, it’s been influenced by the idea that we’re largely blank slates, because the questions that would come up if we’re not are socially uncomfortable.

As I’ve gotten older too, I’ve also had to get more comfortable with the answer being “it depends” or reframing it to a purely objective-oriented perspective (i.e. “Ok, can we actually do with this information?”).

Yes, studies show that delayed gratification correlates with parental wealth, achievement, home stability, etc. However, as always, it’s quite hard in psychology to conclusively separate environment from heritability, because some portion of our temperament, impulse control, and intelligence is passed down from parents to child and would also influence things like achievement and delayed gratification. All we can say for certain is that the correlation is there, and that it’s probably a combination of both nature and nurture.

Hmm, must be a display issue for me in Voyager then. Good to know!