Hard disagree with the idea that our justice system sucks because it’s “too soft”. The US has one of the most punitive systems in the developed world, with literally the most people imprisoned per capita of any country in the world.
But agree that policing is shockingly incompetent.
We can condemn anti-semitism and still support Palestinian independence. Many left leaning Jews also support Palestinian causes and want an end to apartheid.
It is racist and anti-Semitic to think that Jews worldwide “deserve” violence and hate because of the horrible actions of the state of Israel.
The entire field of evolutionary psychology debunked? Do you mean the idea that our brains are subject to evolutionary forces like every other part of our anatomy? No, not debunked.
This is conflating specific methodological problems with theoretical claims. Yes, many have criticized the game theoretical methodology typical of evolutionary psychology. There are a lot of highly speculative junk claims out there. It’s also true that some (not all or even most!) cognitive scientists think that we cannot take the perspective that psychology evolved at all. But it is certainly untrue that there is some consensus that evolutionary psychology has been “debunked”.
This criticism is also a bit ironic given the highly speculative nature of the claims you put forward. Your guess sounds plausible I suppose, but I see no reason to think it’s any more methodologically rigorous.
That’s ridiculous. Of course Biden benefited from being Obama’s VP.
I am advocating for uncertainty. You are confidently saying that Pence was never going to win. Yours is over-confident speculation and mine isn’t.
Biden was likewise not popular but being vice president allowed him to leverage Obama’s reputation to the presidency. We will never know what happens in the counterfactual where Pence enters the primaries without having “betrayed” Trump. But frankly, I find these super confident post-facto predictions irksome.
You have way too much faith in the military. The lack of an “exit strategy” was the main criticism against the US led Iraq war. The situation in Israel in particular has not screamed “we have a plan” for the last half century.
I wouldn’t be celebrating this. The reason why he’s not getting traction is because he didn’t help overthrow the US government. That’s a terrifying reason for him to lose.
It feels like we’re finally waking up from insane free market dogmatism. I’m liking the active regulatory posture of the Biden administration.
Good. I wish more people knew what a negative externality was. This isn’t government interference. It’s making the market work more efficiently by accounting for the true costs of big vehicles.
Sure, fuck Smith and Moe, my politics are the same as yours, but that’s not what you said. You told a random person to go fuck themselves. Then you said that of the province of Saskatchewan, a province with two NDP leaning cities with tons of progressives.
I’m disappointed in Lemmy for rewarding such mindless “own the cons” behaviour. I expect that nonsense from the far right.
How is a comment as unproductive as yours being upvoted so much?
That’s not how science works. I understand that you’re trying to criticize the field, but lack of predictions, even reliable ones, is not itself a problem it has. For one thing, even false theories can make reliable predictions, like Levoisier’s defunct theory of caloric in the 18th century which has now been replaced by modern thermodynamics. The caloric theory can be used to make mathematically accurate predictions, but the underlying theory is still wrong.
Similarly, evo psych can make a lot of reliable predictions without saying anything true. On the contrary, one criticism of the field is that it’s unfalsifiable because an evolutionary theory can always (allegedly) be proposed to fit the data. Which is to say, you’re barking up the wrong tree.
One example: it is proposed that the fusiform face area of the brain is a domain specific module evolved for face detection. It’s present in other animals that recognize conspecifics by their face. In humans, damage to the area leads to face specific agnosia. The theory makes accurate predictions, but is it true? It’s still being debated.