rkapitany.bsky.social
Forever DM, eurorack hack, and neophyte game designer.
Also, academic psychologist interested in cultural evolution, ritual, religion, and reality beliefs.
1,667 posts
1,469 followers
616 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Happy JTF rejection day to those who observe.
comment in response to
post
It's also absurd that someone in the media poses this question, and in so doing, *accepts the premises of the regime*. That's an act of legitimization.
The implication is "If only the DOJ were arresting employors, it would be ok (or at least coherent)".
comment in response to
post
... epistemically valuable from an explanatory (or applied) point of view.
Anyway, here's a quick piece I found which seems to do a sensible job outlining the distinction.
besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....
comment in response to
post
First, test if observation is valid (Is X > Y?). If valid (and robustly so), then proceed, to determining what might predict it.
Maybe there's something geniunely in the observation. But there are steps we ought to take (and teach) for an observation of the real-world to be considered ...
comment in response to
post
They proposed a causal relationship (Islamic Doctrine -> better students). If their observation had been, something like, "I've noticed Islamic students outperform their non-Islamic peers on standardized tests"... such an observation, especially without an implied causality, is open for exploration.
comment in response to
post
Rather than building up from literature (say, "does frequency of reading generalize to understanding across domains", or something similar), they assumed that *Islamic practices* were core to the hypothesis, because it was core to their observation.
comment in response to
post
This lead to a project where the 'hypothesis' was: Compared to non-Muslims, adolescent Muslims have better grades in school (because their faith encourages frequent textual study). Observation. Sure. Obviously wrong though.
And wrong because the observation was biased.
comment in response to
post
That doesn't necessarily mean the observation itself is invalid, tho. It's probably just muddled.
I've had supervision students who are attracted to my research because they have personal religious convictions.
comment in response to
post
But a student who has generated an 'hypothesis' without a decade of wide and deep reading is... just testing their own biases (implicit, explicit, cognitive, social, whatever). It's epistemically less valuable and valid than more grounded hypotheses based in transparent and rigorous documentation.
comment in response to
post
Expertise and deep knowledge is something students definitionally lack. Any hypothesis on ritual, for example, is something I could give a pretty good and hopefully accurate intuition on, even in the absence of a direct literature on the topic.
comment in response to
post
Hypotheses derived from someone's observations: Group X is less intelligent than Group Y.
It's trivial to demonstrate how poor our observations are generally. (Though often, in rarefied circumstances, based on our expertise, we probably can have useful obsertations).
comment in response to
post
A review takes half a day, usually. My time is worth something, to me and my employer. I'll even accept (the inferior) position of journals paying my university, the university taking a cut, and depositing some proportion in my research funds.
comment in response to
post
Then they're doing exploratory research, and that's fine. It's not confirmatory, and perhaps not deeply theoretical. It's still 'research', tho.
(But there's always some research to draw upon, even if it's not central enough to make it confirmatory research).
comment in response to
post
This podcast is all about this. Largely they use the lens of film and narrative (as well as games) to work out *if* a game has substance as a cultural artefact. open.spotify.com/show/7q5Fsmq...
comment in response to
post
I'd be genuinely curious to see what these perceptions are. There must be research on it. People are notoriously bad at predicting proportions like this...
comment in response to
post
Anyway, not trying to re-explain something you already believe. It's just all been said before...
comment in response to
post
Thus, there are hidden dissidents everywhere and must be rooted out... and they themselves represents the 'silent majority'.
(Good lord, it's all just so boring and predictable).
comment in response to
post
Eco already said it.
Fascists want to be humiliated and threatened, and they need to believe in their struggle... while simultaneously believing they are unassailable and heroic, and righteous in their inevitable victory.
You just *gotta* believe you're outnumbered, even if the enemy is hidden.
comment in response to
post
The right don't assume this. It's a pervasive expression (which, I can only assume, is internalized as a sincerely held belief) that the right is vastly outnumbered by the left.
comment in response to
post
I still have some questions, but I'll shoot you an email. But your comment is very encouraging, I'm sure I'll make a submission (hell, I'd share them even with the financial incentive)
comment in response to
post
Examples of 'too heated'. Mostly because the ref can't ignore it. Notice that most of these don't result in penalties on the field. (They might get a fine after the game, tho).
www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2WT...
comment in response to
post
It's pretty close! Two players can have a friendly exchange of punches, so long as it's not too heated, and the ref has plausible deniability that they didn't see it...
comment in response to
post
And since the topic has come up, you'll have to forgive me for sharing this vid for others who are unitiated. It usually blows non-aussie minds.
Every one of these plays was legal. There's even awards for best mark of the season.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqhJ...
comment in response to
post
Yeah, basically. Lowest acheivers get access to the highest picks.
And yeah, ALF is a pretty unique experience when live! Doesn't translate super well to TV (since the pitch can be ~150 goal-to-goal. TV just can't capture the size and speed).
comment in response to
post
At least, that's what got my parents through several years-long losing streaks in Aussie Rules (AFL).
comment in response to
post
To add to this: Diehard fans know this, I think.
That's why recruitment picks and spending caps are implemented. So that there's a reason to hang on to a team with a [current] weak showing. Because there's the promise it'll get better in 2 - 5 seasons...
comment in response to
post
I can't really go into more detail, I'm afraid. I've said all that I'm pedagogically prepared to say.
I suppose I'm curious if other educators have experienced this issue before...
comment in response to
post
It perceived an act of evil (their term, not mine), described it, showed precedence, and even implicitly accepted that this evil was probably inevitable. Then sort of hand-waved the evil away.
It geniunely left me feeling sick in my stomache.
comment in response to
post
Which, in the marking, can be taken in good faith. The failures of logic and argument can be discussed with the students, carefully and pedagogically. This happened a few times and there was never an issue.
This case, however, seemed self-aware and motivated to avoid coming to a moral conclusion.
comment in response to
post
To be clear, this isn't some kind of ideological disagreement, or diversity issue. Revealing the shape of the argument publicly would be, principally, unfair to the student, so I can't go into more details.
In other courses, years ago, I have had students accidentally make eugenicist arguments...
comment in response to
post
Or is the grant to 'solicit' the [further] development of teaching materials for a central repository? I'm a little unclear on what making an application expects of the applicant.
Much appreciated! Y'all have my email if it's too long for a skeet.
comment in response to
post
Hi @twaring.bsky.social and @culturalevolsoc.bsky.social - is there more info on this? (I've looked at the website).
I have course material on CE (with a slight focus on religion) plus assessment that meets criteria. But it's just slides. Do you need footage as well? What's gold-standard?
comment in response to
post
Just have an AI summarize them for you, and tell your line manager it's fair play.
comment in response to
post
But tonight is going to be mash potato with chives and oregano (the latter fresh from the garden), halloumi with batter of fresh garlic and breadcrumb, and pan fried broccolini with fresh garlic and butter. + a side of garden-grown rocket.