Search the Community

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business-jan-june13-makingsense_06-21/ I'm curious about this, and would love to hear thoughts and opinions on the matter. It's *one* study, but it got quite a bit of media coverage. I'm especially interested in opinions from other researchers, and I am interested if there is research that reveals counter-evidence. EDIT: Original study found here: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/11/4086.full This guy is on some kind of "crusade" : https://socialecology.uci.edu/faculty/ppiff

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2015/11/05/religion-morality/ The article also provides direct source to the paper here: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2815%2901167-7 Although this isn't something unheard of for most here, it is interesting to see research like this going out to the public, and is useful to have in case you want to share it with people who make claims to the contrary.

I am taking a class in my 3rd year of university called research methodology. the first lecture discussed nursing research, the role it has within the profession and in healthcare. A large part of the research was about types of research and the main paradigms that researchers subscribe to. There is the positivist paradigm and the naturalist paradigm. Each camp has its own views about reality. Positivists are empirical and objective, believing " . . . that there is reality out there that can be studied and known . . . objective reality exists independent of human observation." (Loiselle & Profetto-McGrath, 2011). They are called determinists as they believe that phenomena not random but have antecedent causes and they use an approach that involves realiance on orderly, rigorous procedures with tight control over situations to test predictions about the nature of phenomena and they relationships among them. (Loiselle & Profetto-McGrath, 2011). Positivisists use quantitative research methods, meaning they find ways to measure phenomena so that they can use statistics to analyze data. Naturalists are presented as a countermovement to positivism. The naturalistic researchers, reality is not a "fixed entity" but rather a construction of the individuals participating in the research ( (Loiselle & Profetto-McGrath, 2011). They are relativist thinkers who posit "if there are always multiple interpretations of the reality that exists in people's minds, then there is no process by which the ultimate truth or falsity of the contractions can be determined." They believe that knowledge is maximized when the researchers and the participants are close to one another. They listen to voices and interpretations of those under study because they think that subjective interactions are key to understanding phenomena (Loiselle & Profetto-McGrath, 2011). These researchers use QUALITATIVE methods. My professor revealed her bias toward Qualitative research methods throughout the lecture. Her tone and word choice are what lead me to believe she had a bias. When speaking about QUALitative research methods she words like: we, us, our patients. When she spoke about QUANTitative research she used words like they and them. She said something like, "they think all people are the same, they treat people like numbers and not unique individuals". Two other professors, with whom I have discussed the possibility of performing and publishing research as an undergraduate, have leaned heavily toward the naturalist worldview. They seem to discourage quantitative methods. My analysis of the situation: Qualitative research has a place in any social research area. It is often used to simply explore groups and populations of people gain insight as to what phenomena may exist. Which sets the stage for people who do actual science to produce credible information about our world. For some reason qualitative research is presented as an equal methodology. If we are seek to be intellectually honest we should simply describe it as what it is. A method in which a researcher gathers subjective information from a very small group people or even a single person, then presents a subjective interpretation of that information. I think the undue respect given to qualitative research is largely the fact that it is an easy way for a Professor to appear productive. Math takes to much effort. Why would a person (a person as Hobbes sees people) put in the effort and time to publish quantitative research when they can produce qualitative papers 4 times as fast? Publishing Quantitative research requires the use of math/statistics while qualitative research can be as easy as writing a glorified blog post. The pay is the same for either way. Nursing is also dominated by women who constantly seek to validate their profession. They want to be seen as professionally equal to physicians and even express feelings of moral superiority claiming they love and truly care for their patients. Yes, it is important that patients feel like their healthcare providers actually care about them because it fosters a belief in ones ability to overcome disease. It is also simply nice for patients to be around kind people, but flattery, warm feelings, and bad acting don't cut the cancer from their bellies or prevent micro-organisms from overwhelming their systems. To do that you need to draw from 100's of years of truth (that which is rational consistent and empirically verifiable). So now that I have had my rant. Do you think the naturalist paradigm (qualitative research) should be considered truth?

Hello, I listen to Stef talk about a research that indicated that when people are confronted about their irrationality, their beliefs gets even stronger. I want to read the source research paper for this. Does anyone know where I can get it? Thanks.

Hello FDR! I'd like to get some feedback on a project I am pursuing at the moment I am in the process of writing a book on the Mecosystem(if you have not heard of the term before, it is a word that as far as I know Stefan coined, it is basically Internal Family System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Family_Systems_Model). I want to basically introduce the concept of Mecosystems and give the basics of how one can work with ones Mecosystem, inspired by both Stef's podcasts on it, IFS theory, and how I have worked with it. My question to you guys is, if you were (or still are) new to the concept of you not having one personality, but actually several, what kind of questions would you ask of the person proposing this theory? Have a good day folks

I recently chewed through the Happiness Advantage by Shawn Achor and I've become smitten with the work. The book is research focused and contains sources that backs up claims and is well foot-noted. Despite the heavy academic emphasis, the text is easy to read and understand. Achor has developed 7 'principles' for improving work performance through positive psychology. Adopters of positive psychology can expect statistically significant increases in work output and quality of life. The Happiness Advantage starts each principle with a anecdote that is then explained by the author. Next is supporting research and then methods for taking advantage of the principle. As the FDR community loves self-improvement, I recommend this book to anyone who is struggling to bring positivity to their work place and personal relationships. This book may be especially helpful for people just breaking out of the matrix and going through the "there's no hope, everything is not awesome" stage of philosophical development. Here are some videos by the author, I don't think they're a substitute for the book, but they'll help get you started. Shawn Achor's Ted Talk (20 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLJsdqxnZb0 Shawn Achor's Talk at Google (1 hour): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Muce2TxDlMw I'm interested to hear what the rest of the FDR community has to say on this book, so please leave your opinions. If you haven't read it, I'd suggest you buy it, right after you donate some more to FDR! Thanks, and happy pondering!

Terence Kealey destroys the myths of government funded science. A good antidote to the excitement over robots on comets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzvr2Co-S5s

Hi everyone. I'm a newcomer here. This is more of a rant than anything. I found Stefan and this movement through his Truth About Elliot Rodger video (it sounds like that brought a lot of people here) and he has really struck a chord with me. I had already held a lot of the same philosophical views on life that he espouses, but especially on peaceful parenting. I started out using the Baby Book attachment parenting with my now 2 year old, but I think that term applies more to the first year. "Peaceful parenting" is a more appropriate term for what my husband and I do now. Fortunately, both of us came from parents who were against spanking, so it comes pretty natural to us. I've been listening to a lot of his call-in shows and I find myself in tears and in rage over what so many people have gone through as children. So many people think, "I'm going to raise my child the way my parents raised me." Why would you not even think to question or research the optimal way to raise a child? Why do so many people just stick to what they've experienced? Even though I feel I had a great childhood (there were a few bumps), even I want to be a better parent than my parents were to me. We've all got so much information at our fingertips and so many just fumble their way through parenting. I'm constantly analyzing everything I do. Just a couple days ago, my daughter was hitting me while playing and I tried to give her a time-out. Right away, I realized she didn't understand what I was doing and my husband agreed. We decided to try a different approach. We've switched to modeling good behavior for her. "Please don't hit mommy, sweety. Be gentle. Like this." I then take her hand and show her how to gently touch my face. It has worked wonderfully in just a couple days! I don't think that my most of my friends routinely hit their kids. Just one slaps her 3 year-old daughter's hand when she doesn't want her to touch something, and she's threaten to spank her in my presence, too. I'm wondering what others here would say to their friend if they heard them threaten their child with a spanking. She and I aren't very close, so I want to be pretty tactful, but I don't think I can just keep my mouth shut next time. Anyway, I'm really enjoying the forum and hearing different peoples' ideas. Stefan's shows are great. I'm coming around on the libertarian ideals, but I still have a lot to learn.

Hey ya'll. Below is a whole lot of research condensed into twenty minutes with reasons why milk is detrimental to health and is cruel. Highly recommend it. Below is an even further condensed edit by myself.

Hello folks, Help me broaden individual understanding to resolve conflict as well as increase happiness and individual effectiveness. My name is Nick Wolff. I have been following FDR for several months now. I just joined the community and would like to ask the community for some help. For nearly a year, I have been developing a conceptual construct and assessment tool that is designed to measure an individual's worldview though human values. Originally formed as a conflict resolution tool to understand why so often people end up in an impasse, I have begun to see many potential uses for it, spanning conflict resolution, ethics education, pre-marital counseling, career counseling, etc. For many reasons, I believe it has real advantages over similar "personality assessments" because it tries to identify primary motivators. I have been working to have individuals take the assessment and have over 100 responders so far. The vast majority of participants have told me that the tool is accurate and insightful. I recently applied to a doctoral program at a local state university to provide me a platform from which to launch a major research endeavor, but my application was not accepted. So now, I am struggling with how to launch it myself. I have several needs and I hope the collective knowledge of the FDR community can provide me some guidance and/or assistance. 1. I am trying to convert the tool from a pen & paper, facilitated version to a web-based version, but I do not have the necessary expertise to get it done. My colleagues have met with some difficulty in doing the task for me. PhP/MySQL assistance would be appreciated. 2. I am obtaining some significant data, but have not been provided the necessary tools on how to effectively analyze the data. Individuals who might be willing to give me guidance on this would be appreciated. 3. I am also seeking new participants who would be willing to participate in the tool to broaden my data set. Before discussing the information in detail in this forum, I wanted to gauge interest/curiosity on the subject. If there is interest, I'd be happy to share the model and idea with the FDR community. I have started a YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/WolffConsultingCo) with videos describing the model and a website (http://ValuesAndInfluence.com) to provide a quick overview of the model for those who are curious about it. I think this model would be of benefit to the FDR community as we all seem to care about promoting interpersonal understanding and increasing self-knowledge. I think my tool can help with both aims. Thank you very much for your consideration. I look forward to your responses.

Hey guys, I'm new to the group. An instant Stef fan. The dude can talk. What I really love about his style is that he's always got a fact to kind of combo punch his way through a debate. I'm a horrible researcher. When I google things, I just get advertisements and all sorts of useless crap. And I'd like to improve my debating skills, and specifically my research skills and just general knowledge base I suppose. I was wondering if anybody was in the charitable mood to lend me some research tips, search engines you find usefull, online libraries, whatever.... I'm not asking about any specific subject. I'm just looking for general pointers for improving my skills at finding new information. I'm living in China right now so learning my way around this gypsy magic we call the internet has become pretty important. Thanks for your time.

Here's an interesting article on the not-so-perfect, current state of scientific research. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self-correcting-alarming-degree-it-not-trouble This links to a brief video touching on the same issues. http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2013/10/science-wrong

I am currently devising my master's thesis study, in which I'll look at whether people's attitudes towards public schooling and unschooling are correlated with their level of general empathy and their level of empathy towards children. To look at this last piece (level of empathy towards children) I am thinking about presenting people with one or more short vignettes describing a conflict betweena child and an adult (probably, their parent) and asking people to briefly describe how they, if they were the adult in the vignette, would go about resolving that conflict. Afterwards, I will look in the replies for things that suggest that the person is mindful of the child's internal experience (e.g., that they asked about the child's feelings, thoughts, or preferences; or that they attempted to respectfully negotiate with the child). So - I'm trying to create those vignettes, and I'm wondering - what, from your perspective, would be some good parent (or adult) - child conflicts that I could include? Anything goes, I just need help brainstorming Thanks!

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/lies-damned-lies-and-medical-science/308269/ Very intersting article that some nice gentleman in the chat introduced me to. Found it very much worth my time reading. Core of the matter being that a meta analysis of the medicinal research and studies shows that most of it them are wrong/flawed, but have a read for yourself for the details.