Sports writer kills himself, leaves behind website describing how and why

hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Famm_sl said:
I fundamentally agree with you but....well I guess I can't expect you do state your case and move on when you are dealing with someone you actively describe as a zealot. You are the guy who has been known to argue incessantly for pages and pages withLumieFFS.
Click to expand...
Well, I think the issue that set me off here is Dumar's continued hand waving away of all modern research in favor of the one or two people he's read who fit his preconceived notions and so which he's accepted as 100% fact without even beginning to intellectually question the end results of their assertions.

If he's going to just ignore people like Boaz, Levi-Strausse, Mead and the litany of other, often marxist or socialist inspired, researchers in the field directly related to the topics he's interested in and discussing, then I'll be damned if I'm not going to demand he pony up some hard evidence to support his conclusions.

And I'm damn sure going to press the issue when his response is "Well its obvious on its face". No, its not, that's why we conductresearchinto human interactions and culture, called ethnography, but Dumar wants to pretend all those people conducting that research aren't valid at all, while dead radical socialists are the ONLY valid writings he accepts.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Well he could maybe find some research paper that shows a correlation between wealth/status and happiness levels that supports his conclusion. I'm sure it exists.

The point is that he hasn't looked. If it wasn't written by a dead radical socialist, then he doesn't care. Its not evidence. Its not facts. Because it doesn't comport to his preconceived notions.

Theres 80,000 hits for "correlation between wealth/status and happiness"

Heres the first one

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...h-relationship

And another from Stanford

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/a...ion=topstories

Here's a nice textbook style link on the subject complete with citations to...peer reviewed research on the topic of wealth and its correlation with happiness, if any such correlation exists

https://www.boundless.com/psychology...and-happiness/

The fact is that the issue is far more complex than "Commodities in" -> "Robot Zombie People out", and that the modern research has far outstripped even Fromm's capacity for explanation and understanding from 50 years ago. Findings are that its how and why you acquire material goods that influence how happy you are as a result, for instance, if you are pursuing wealth because you are greedy, or trying to prove to others you're better than them, you end up more unhappy than those without wealth. But if you pursue wealth as a means to an end, supporting your family, contributing to charitable causes, or because you love your work, then you end up more happy.

Dumar's argument, of course, is that by working hard and earning money and buying commodities, you are being stripped of your humanity because Fromm said so. But modern research shows that this is not the case, that the purpose behind your exertions leads to differing end results, even when engaging in similar activities, such as wealth acquisition.

Dumar wants to sit on Mount Socialist and decry the rest of the world is superficial robots stripped of their humanity for engaging with one another in a society which exchanges goods for profit, and that what he's saying is just "2deep4u" for everyone else to understand. But the reality is that the modern research is too deep for Dumar, hence why he avoids it, discounts it out of hand, and ignores it outright when it doesn't fit his preconceived notions.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
46,592
76,607
If you want facts study a real science instead of this intellectual masturbation.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Bone biology is about as hard a science as you can get, its pretty awesome.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
I did with Lumie for days bro. Remember?

The entire debate revolved around biology and chemistry.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
46,592
76,607
In fact everytime I see you make a biology post it's like, "Oh good it's the lithose of biology up in here, I sure hope someone picks a fight with him about whatever he just said."
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Tuco_sl said:
I said a fight, not a one-sided ass whoopin against a disabled person.
Click to expand...
Okay I lol'd at that one

Tuco_sl said:
In fact everytime I see you make a biology post it's like, "Oh good it's the lithose of biology up in here, I sure hope someone picks a fight with him about whatever he just said."
Click to expand...
So you're saying you don't like Lithose's posts?

I'm sure you guys would find an in depth argument as to the direction a force was moving when it struck a bone, thus causing the bone to break in a particular pattern, fascinating. I mean I can't think of anything more exciting than two old bone biologists ranting about long bone fractures for pages on end.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Its too early for me to brain properly. I read that sentence

"Oh good it's the lithose of biology up in here, I sure hope someone picks a fight with him about whatever he just said."
Click to expand...
as sarcasm.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
46,592
76,607
hodj_sl said:
Okay I lol'd at that one



So you're saying you don't like Lithose's posts?

I'm sure you guys would find an in depth argument as to the direction a force was moving when it struck a bone, thus causing the bone to break in a particular pattern, fascinating. I mean I can't think of anything more exciting than two old bone biologists ranting about long bone fractures for pages on end.
Click to expand...
temperance-brennan.jpg
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
CSI and Bones are so full of shit it just makes forensic scientists and bioarchaeologists and the like all angsty if you mention it to them.

I've never watched an episode of either show, but apparently they get everything wrong as a rule.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
46,592
76,607
hodj_sl said:
CSI and Bones are so full of shit it just makes forensic scientists and bioarchaeologists and the like all angsty if you mention it to them.

I've never watched an episode of either show, but apparently they get everything wrong as a rule.
Click to expand...
I don't know shit about forensics or biology but every time they remotely intersect with computers it's a total circus. I always envision biologists blowing their lid every episode. I just hope they get the name of the bones right.

That show did an episode once where a movie was produced around their lives and it was a total sham and the 'scientists' in the show were all offended until they realized it's part of life.

It's too bad there's no drama shows that even attempt to get science right. Breaking Bad had some basic chemistry in it but not enough to be interesting.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Too technical = boring. Gotta sex it up. Suspension of disbelief and the like.

But there are definitely professors who watch the shows so they can write angry letters with corrections to the producers.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
khalid_sl said:
Sigh Tanoomba, I know you hate Hodj, but come on. Not saying anything controversial? I mean, I know Araysar is trolling but I expected better from you. I mean, overriding our ability to exercise critical thinking? All he does is endlessly appeal to authority. It doesn't take any critical thinking to realize that. Well, I guess in your case it takes the ability to overlook your dislike of Hodj, which you clearly can't do.
Click to expand...
I don't think he's appealing to authority at all. He's not saying "This is true because X said it." He's saying "This is what X said and this is what it means in relation to society and our life's experiences." I don't see anything controversial about that. And my dislike of Hodj stems entirely from his eagerness to distort points presented by others in order to mock them, something on display in full effect in this conversation. (Oh, and that he's a pompous obnoxious ass.) Hell, maybe I'm giving him too much credit. Maybe he genuinely doesn't understand the points others present and is only truly comfortable when he's shooting fish in a barrel in the atheism thread. Frankly, I don't really care. It's pretty clear that Dumar is making a far stronger case than Hodj is in this thread, though.


Famm_sl said:
The sick and broken society all around us wasn't contrived in opposition to our true nature. The truly depressing aspect is that our sick and broken societies ARE our true nature, or at least a cultural reflection. The world is a cold, unfeeling, and ruthless place.
Click to expand...
See, this is where I strongly disagree. I think we've been conditioned to become cold, unfeeling and ruthless because of the powerful minority who who got where they are by being cold, unfeeling and ruthless. If those most capable of having a negative effect on our lives are also those with the least empathy, compassion or concern for others, it creates a situation where it's almost completely pointless to be anything other than an equally cold-hearted asshole. Our true nature, as far as I'm concerned, is to cooperate with each other with the realization that what's good for one of us is what's good for all of us. Unfortunately, capitalism has done a hell of a job keeping that true nature buried deep down where it can do no "harm".
 
Eomer

Eomer

Trakanon Raider
5,472
272
Dumar_sl said:
A relationship to the world via commodities is not a relationship because you are not experiencing those feelings, emotions, and thoughts based on your direct, sensuous activity, but rather, they're being created by the commodity for you. So, into existence this commodity springs forth, and through it, through the sum total of all of them you buy, eat, consume, fuck, watch, whatever - the sum total of the commodities defines your life because that's precisely how you experience the world, not directly, not through your activity as your own activity, but generated by the thing, the commodity.

And like I said, as the furthering of culture continues, so will we develop new commodities used to further service this generation, until little or no feelings you experience will be because your direct activity in and upon the world, by your relatedness to it, but more and more by what you buy and consume.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm still not following you. I believe you specifically mentioned that your Kilimanjaro hike was one of the most "real", non-manufactured experiences that you've had. But I would assume that you didn't do that hike buck naked. You probably had some reasonably decent hiking and camping gear, from boots to clothes to a tent to sleeping bags. How does that not make it a manufactured experience? You'd be pretty much completely unable to complete such a hike without those manufactured items. They enable the very experience you claim to be real.

Maybe I'm missing your point here. I will readily admit I've never read Marx and have virtually no liberal arts education. I like heli and cat skiing, collectively known as "mechanized skiing". Quite honestly it's one of the main things I look forward to every winter, and I spend a LOT of money on it. Is that more manufactured than say, ski-touring (basically you cross country ski up the mountain, lock your heels in, and ski down. I'm too lazy for that shit. Fuck "earning my turns.")? Are both manufactured experiences because you can't do either without a significant amount of expensive, manufactured equipment? Or are they not manufactured experiences because I myself am in fact experiencing the activity sensuously? Which is definitely an appropriate term, as I've had some major boners coming down the mountain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.