Reddit mentions: The best psychology books on human behaviour

We found 749 Reddit comments discussing the best psychology books on human behaviour. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 139 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

1. The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
Specs:
ColorWhite
Height9.01 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateSeptember 2012
Weight1.6 pounds
Width1.74 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

2. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature

The Blank Slate The Modern Denial of Human Nature
The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
Specs:
ColorPurple
Height1.16 Inches
Length9.3 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateAugust 2003
Weight1.27 Pounds
Width6.06 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

3. Why Everyone (Else) Is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular Mind

    Features:
  • Princeton University Press
Why Everyone (Else) Is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular Mind
Specs:
Height9.1 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMay 2012
Weight0.87523518014 Pounds
Width0.7 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

4. Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why

DEEP SURVIVAL
Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why
Specs:
Height8.2999834 Inches
Length5.499989 Inches
Number of items4
Weight0.57099725858 Pounds
Width0.8999982 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

5. Setting Limits with Your Strong-Willed Child, Revised and Expanded 2nd Edition: Eliminating Conflict by Establishing CLEAR, Firm, and Respectful Boundaries

Three Rivers Press CA
Setting Limits with Your Strong-Willed Child, Revised and Expanded 2nd Edition: Eliminating Conflict by Establishing CLEAR, Firm, and Respectful Boundaries
Specs:
ColorMulticolor
Height8.25 Inches
Length5.5 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateJune 2013
Weight0.62390820146 Pounds
Width0.73 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

7. Holistic Tarot: An Integrative Approach to Using Tarot for Personal Growth

    Features:
  • North Atlantic Books
Holistic Tarot: An Integrative Approach to Using Tarot for Personal Growth
Specs:
ColorMulticolor
Height9.03 Inches
Length6.07 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateJanuary 2015
Weight3.00049138582 Pounds
Width1.88 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

8. The World Beyond Your Head: On Becoming an Individual in an Age of Distraction

    Features:
  • Farrar Straus Giroux
The World Beyond Your Head: On Becoming an Individual in an Age of Distraction
Specs:
Height8.1999836 Inches
Length5.4499891 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2016
Weight0.6 Pounds
Width1.0499979 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

10. The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature

    Features:
  • Penguin Books
The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature
Specs:
ColorBlack
Height8.4 Inches
Length5.49 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateAugust 2008
Weight0.94 Pounds
Width1.17 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

11. Writer's Guide to Character Traits

Frame Material: PlasticLens Material: PlasticLens Width: 55mmBridge: 16mmArm: 130mm
Writer's Guide to Character Traits
Specs:
Height9 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateAugust 2006
Weight1.11994829096 Pounds
Width0.92 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

12. The Comprehensive INFP Survival Guide

The Comprehensive INFP Survival Guide
Specs:
Height8.5 Inches
Length5.5 Inches
Weight0.81 Pounds
Width0.62 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

14. The Better Angels of Our Nature

    Features:
  • PENGUIN GROUP
The Better Angels of Our Nature
Specs:
Height7.79526 inches
Length5.07873 inches
Number of items1
Weight1.5763051733 Pounds
Width1.69291 inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

15. Measuring the Mind: Conceptual Issues in Contemporary Psychometrics

Measuring the Mind: Conceptual Issues in Contemporary Psychometrics
Specs:
Height9 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Weight0.6393405598 Pounds
Width0.49 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

18. Out of Character: Surprising Truths About the Liar, Cheat, Sinner (and Saint) Lurking in All of Us

Three Rivers Press CA
Out of Character: Surprising Truths About the Liar, Cheat, Sinner (and Saint) Lurking in All of Us
Specs:
ColorWhite
Height8.1 Inches
Length5.3 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMay 2013
Width0.7 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

19. Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why

Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why
Specs:
Height9.6 Inches
Length6.4 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateOctober 2003
Weight1.25222564816 Pounds
Width1 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

🎓 Reddit experts on psychology books on human behaviour

The comments and opinions expressed on this page are written exclusively by redditors. To provide you with the most relevant data, we sourced opinions from the most knowledgeable Reddit users based the total number of upvotes and downvotes received across comments on subreddits where psychology books on human behaviour are discussed. For your reference and for the sake of transparency, here are the specialists whose opinions mattered the most in our ranking.
Total score: 120
Number of comments: 25
Relevant subreddits: 6
Total score: 96
Number of comments: 27
Relevant subreddits: 4
Total score: 82
Number of comments: 10
Relevant subreddits: 1
Total score: 71
Number of comments: 6
Relevant subreddits: 5
Total score: 26
Number of comments: 6
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 24
Number of comments: 9
Relevant subreddits: 3
Total score: 18
Number of comments: 5
Relevant subreddits: 4
Total score: 13
Number of comments: 8
Relevant subreddits: 5
Total score: 12
Number of comments: 5
Relevant subreddits: 4
Total score: 7
Number of comments: 5
Relevant subreddits: 4

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Top Reddit comments about Popular Psychology Personality Study:

u/maximiliankm · 1 pointr/JordanPeterson

Before I begin, let me say this: in asking this question at your age, you are several spots away from the bottom of the totem pole.

This is not to say "oh don't worry about out, you're still young." You need to be serious about becoming competent, but very few people are competent at anything meaningful at your age, and very, very few fields require that you be already competent by age 19 (most of the fields that do require this are things like sports or music, which are so competitive that you basically have to grow up with it). So you're not behind. I think the above comments have been useful, but incomplete. Yes, your mentality is of the upmost importance here, but you do need things to do. Especially if you have interest in trades.

I'll tell you a little bit about myself. When I was 19, I was finishing a degree in automotive technology. I was working as an entry level technician and a cook, and I had plans to attend the University of Northwestern Ohio for a Bachelors in High-Performance Motorsports, which would have put me among the most elite technicians in the country, where I would have been able to get into just about any kind of motorsports I wanted.

Now I'm 23. I have a Bachelors, but not from UNOH. I completely switched fields. When I was 20, I found myself drawn toward Philosophy and Literature, and so I completely dropped motorsports as a career path. I'd spent 2 years getting my associates, I'd spent tons of money on tools, I'd studied to pass ASE certifications test, but I dropped it all, went back to school and got my Bachelors with a double major in English and Philosophy. I'm now working for a while, and I'll be going back to graduate school next year to get my PhD. I'll probably be 27-28 years old before I have real, meaningful competency. This time frame has been a real challenge, since I'm impatient, and don't want to waste my 20's. Here's how I handle it: I love what I'm doing in the academic world (I'm starting a podcast soon just because I can't get enough of philosophy), and so hypothetically, I would be okay with doing it even if it never paid off financially (and it's a humanities PhD, so that's not unlikely).

Your goal, at least for the next couple of years, should be to figure out what you either already love, or what you are likely to come to love if you tried it. Very, very, very few people do this, and so they end up being moderately competent in something that they don't hate, and require all kinds of other things to make their life meaningful. Let me emphasize that this is absolutely, not a bad thing, and if you really think that creative pursuits are your thing, you may want to find an additional career to pay for your creative work.

In any case, you can almost certainly find things that you love without college (though you may need it once you get started). In fact, college often gives a distorted view of what the field is really like. Take psychology, for example. The world of acutally practicing psychologists is radically different than psych-academia, and if you used college classes with postmodern profs to gauge whether you'd like psychology, you might falsely assume that your practice will consist of talking to transgendered sexually abused black handicapped gay attack helicopters rather than the real client base. If you find you want to be an academic, then...sorry fo ya.

What I would do is expose yourself to as much as possible. Try something as simple as youtube. If, for example, you find that you like watching youtube videos of motorcycles, maybe you should try going to a race or a bike show, or reading a book about it. Keep in mind though, that it takes real engagement (more than just youtube) to see if it's something you could learn to love.

Notice I said "learn to love." The reason for this is that its perfectly likely that you won't absolutely love anything. Most people are like that. It's maybe 1/1000 people that naturally know instantly that they love something that they end up doing for the rest of their lives. Let's go back to motorcycles. Maybe you know nothing about them, but you know that you're analytical, so you might like diagnosing them, and you have an adrenaline-junkie streak, so you might like riding them, but right now you know so little about them that you don't really feel any particular way toward them. You need to have the self-awareness to know what kinds of things you might like. If you're analytical but don't have the adrenaline junkie in you, then maybe you need to try being a boat mechanic, because of how much you've enjoyed time on the river, and the people you've met who are also into boats.

One last thing. You may have noticed that I have a soft spot for mechanical things. I noticed that you said you may be interested in the trades. If what I've been saying resonates with you, I highly, highly, HIGHLY recommend reading at least one of the following books by Matthew Crawford: either Shop Class as Soulcraft or The World Beyond Your Head. They're truly unconventional ways of thinking, and unlike what your high school counselor or typical self-help are likely to teach you.

u/[deleted] · 15 pointsr/exjw

It's a bunch of gobbledygook about the generations and the kingdom and all of that. It's all nonsense. In my humble opinion, you need to de-indoctrinate yourself to fully remove these types of fears. Not sure if I've shared this post with you before, but here's what I did personally:

Take some time to learn about the history of the bible. For example, you can take the Open Yale Courses on Religious Studies for free.

Read Who Wrote the Bible by Richard Elliott Friedman

Also read A History of God by Karen Armstrong

Next, learn some actual science. For example - spoiler alert: evolution is true. Visit Berkeley's excellent Understanding Evolution Website.. Or, if you're pressed for time, watch this cartoon.

Read Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne

Read The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins

Learn about the origin of the universe. For example, you could read works by Stephen Hawking

Read A Briefer History of Time by Stephen Hawking

Learn about critical thinking from people like Michael Shermer, and how to spot logical fallacies.


For good measure, use actual data and facts to learn the we are NOT living in some biblical "last days". Things have gotten remarkably better as man has progressed in knowledge. For example, watch this cartoon explaining how war is on the decline..

Read The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker

Another great source is the youtube series debunking 1914 being the start of the last days.

Another way to clear out the cobwebs is to read and listen to exiting stories. Here are some resources:

https://leavingjw.org

Here is a post with links to a bunch of podcasts interviewing JWs who've left

Here's another bunch of podcasts about JWs

Here is a great book from Psychotherapist and former JW Bonnie Zieman - Exiting the JW Cult: A Helping Handbook

I wish you the best. There is a whole world of legitimate information out there based on actual evidence that you can use to become a more knowledgeable person.

You may still wonder how you can be a good human without "the truth." Here is a good discussion on how one can be good without god. --Replace where he talks about hell with armageddon, and heaven with paradise--

To go further down the rabbit hole, watch this series.

Here's a nice series debunking most creationist "logic".

Start to help yourself begin to live a life where, as Matt Dillahunty puts it, you'll "believe as many true things, and as few false things as possible."

u/porscheguy19 · 4 pointsr/atheism

On science and evolution:

Genetics is where it's at. There is a ton of good fossil evidence, but genetics actually proves it on paper. Most books you can get through your local library (even by interlibrary loan) so you don't have to shell out for them just to read them.

Books:

The Making of the Fittest outlines many new forensic proofs of evolution. Fossil genes are an important aspect... they prove common ancestry. Did you know that humans have the gene for Vitamin C synthesis? (which would allow us to synthesize Vitamin C from our food instead of having to ingest it directly from fruit?) Many mammals have the same gene, but through a mutation, we lost the functionality, but it still hangs around.

Deep Ancestry proves the "out of Africa" hypothesis of human origins. It's no longer even a debate. MtDNA and Y-Chromosome DNA can be traced back directly to where our species began.

To give more rounded arguments, Hitchens can't be beat: God Is Not Great and The Portable Atheist (which is an overview of the best atheist writings in history, and one which I cannot recommend highly enough). Also, Dawkin's book The Greatest Show on Earth is a good overview of evolution.

General science: Stephen Hawking's books The Grand Design and A Briefer History of Time are excellent for laying the groundwork from Newtonian physics to Einstein's relativity through to the modern discovery of Quantum Mechanics.

Bertrand Russell and Thomas Paine are also excellent sources for philosophical, humanist, atheist thought; but they are included in the aforementioned Portable Atheist... but I have read much of their writings otherwise, and they are very good.

Also a subscription to a good peer-reviewed journal such as Nature is awesome, but can be expensive and very in depth.

Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate is also an excellent look at the human mind and genetics. To understand how the mind works, is almost your most important tool. If you know why people say the horrible things they do, you can see their words for what they are... you can see past what they say and see the mechanisms behind the words.

I've also been studying Zen for about a year. It's non-theistic and classed as "eastern philosophy". The Way of Zen kept me from losing my mind after deconverting and then struggling with the thought of a purposeless life and no future. I found it absolutely necessary to root out the remainder of the harmful indoctrination that still existed in my mind; and finally allowed me to see reality as it is instead of overlaying an ideology or worldview on everything.

Also, learn about the universe. Astronomy has been a useful tool for me. I can point my telescope at a galaxy that is more than 20 million light years away and say to someone, "See that galaxy? It took over 20 million years for the light from that galaxy to reach your eye." Creationists scoff at millions of years and say that it's a fantasy; but the universe provides real proof of "deep time" you can see with your own eyes.

Videos:

I recommend books first, because they are the best way to learn, but there are also very good video series out there.

BestofScience has an amazing series on evolution.

AronRa's Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism is awesome.

Thunderfoot's Why do people laugh at creationists is good.

Atheistcoffee's Why I am no longer a creationist is also good.

Also check out TheraminTrees for more on the psychology of religion; Potholer54 on The Big Bang to Us Made Easy; and Evid3nc3's series on deconversion.

Also check out the Evolution Documentary Youtube Channel for some of the world's best documentary series on evolution and science.

I'm sure I've overlooked something here... but that's some stuff off the top of my head. If you have any questions about anything, or just need to talk, send me a message!

u/tazemanian-devil · 4 pointsr/exjw

Here's another side of the coin. Not necessarily to drag you out of the cult, but just some very awesome, beautiful truths. If you've seen me post this before, i apologize. I don't like to assume everyone reads every thread.

Take some time to learn about the history of the bible. For example, you can take the Open Yale Courses on Religious Studies for free.

Read Who Wrote the Bible by Richard Elliott Friedman

Also read A History of God by Karen Armstrong

Next, learn some actual science. For example - spoiler alert: evolution is true. Visit Berkeley's excellent Understanding Evolution Website.. Or, if you're pressed for time, watch this cartoon.

Read Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne

Read The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins

Learn about the origin of the universe. For example, you could read works by Stephen Hawking

Read A Briefer History of Time by Stephen Hawking

Learn about critical thinking from people like Michael Shermer, and how to spot logical fallacies.


For good measure, use actual data and facts to learn the we are NOT living in some biblical "last days". Things have gotten remarkably better as man has progressed in knowledge. For example, watch this cartoon explaining how war is on the decline..

Read The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker

Another great source is the youtube series debunking 1914 being the start of the last days.

I wish you the best. There is a whole world of legitimate information out there based on actual evidence that you can use to become a more knowledgeable person.

You may still wonder how you can be a good human without "the truth." Here is a good discussion on how one can be good without god. --Replace where he talks about hell with armageddon, and heaven with paradise--

Start to help yourself begin to live a life where, as Matt Dillahunty puts it, you'll "believe as many true things, and as few false things as possible."

u/matthewdreeves · 2 pointsr/exjw

Hello and welcome! Indoctrination in most cults can leave a person bitter about the world around them. Learning the actual facts about reality, the universe, and humanity is a good way to counter those negative feelings in my experience. Not sure how much of this applies to you, but here are my recommendations for de-indoctrinating yourself:

Take some time to learn about the history of the bible. For example, you can take the Open Yale Courses on Religious Studies for free.

Read Who Wrote the Bible by Richard Elliott Friedman

Also read A History of God by Karen Armstrong

Watch this talk from Sam Harris where he explains why "free will" is likely an illusion, which debunks the entire premise of "the fall of man" as presented by most Christian religions.

Watch this video on the Cordial Curiosity channel that teaches how the "Socratic Method" works, which essentially is a way to question why we believe what we believe. Do we have good reasons to believe them? If not, should we believe them?

Watch this video by Theramin Trees that explains why we fall for the beliefs of manipulative groups in the first place.

This video explains why and how childhood indoctrination works, for those of us born-in to a high-control group.

Another great source is this youtube series debunking 1914 being the start of the last days.

Next, learn some science. For example - spoiler alert: evolution is true. Visit Berkeley's excellent Understanding Evolution Website. Or, if you're pressed for time, watch this cartoon.

Read Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne.

Read The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins.

Watch this series where Aron Ra explains in great detail how all life is connected in a giant family tree.

Learn about the origin of the universe. For example, you could read A Briefer History of Time by Stephen Hawking.

Learn about critical thinking from people like [Michael Shermer] (http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shermer_on_believing_strange_things?language=en), and how to spot logical fallacies.

For good measure, use actual data and facts to learn the we are NOT living in some biblical "last days". Things have gotten remarkably better as man has progressed in knowledge. For example, watch this cartoon explaining how war is on the decline.

Read The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Steven Pinker.

Watch this Ted Talk by Hans Rosling, the late Swedish Statistician, where he shows more evidence that the world is indeed becoming a better place, and why we tend to wrongly convince ourselves otherwise.

I wish you the best. There is a whole world of legitimate information out there based on actual evidence that you can use to become a more knowledgeable person.

You may still wonder how you can be a good human without "the truth." Here is a good discussion on how one can be good without god. --Replace where he talks about hell with armageddon, and heaven with paradise--

Start to help yourself begin to live a life where, as Matt Dillahunty puts it, you'll "believe as many true things, and as few false things as possible."

u/IFartWhenICry · 0 pointsr/DebateReligion

>A predicted a couple of things when I posted my previous reply. One was that you would only respond to my last point. And the other was that that point would trigger you to no end.
>
>Look, you're just one of those people who thinks their views are universal. The things your pointing out as evidence of a morally degrading society aren't anything new. There is evidence that we're living in the best time ever in the history of mankind.
>
>Let's look at you points:

You probably thought Hillary would win the election too, because of all the scientific polls done to prove she would win..

There is no arguing that we live in the best time to be alive, the entire point of my post, was that as we lose sight of religion we lose the actions that provided all of the prosperity you are pointing to. What is the source?

You are tearing down the building, then trying to use the bricks of that building to make a house..on sand....

>Has that happened? Has Miley Cyrus been nude on TV? But that's not important. Almost 70 years ago, people were saying "Marilyn Monroe is showing her cooter!" (who talks like that anyway?).

Have you seen any of her live performances at award shows? She might as well be fully naked...I mean come on could you be any more pedantic?

>Horrible, or course. But not new. Remember when people used to drag people behind their truck until they were dead?

I won't need to remember, because I will be seeing it again in this lifetime the way things are going...

>Not true, but poverty isn't new.
>
>You can't be older than me, and I'm not even close to "kids these days" as you are. Here's a relevant quote:
>
>“The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.”
>
>Who know who said that? Socrates. 2500 years ago.

You know the funny thing about Socrates right? He didn't have Jesus either! So funny the problems he was encountering then in a rational advanced society without Jesus, is the same things happening to us as we lose Jesus! Super cool point thanks for making that.

Great thing all those Greek people converted to....Christianity!!! here is a wonderful excerpt from the Urantia book. The Greek Scholar Rodan of Alexandria. I suggest you read the entire chapter on him in the book, and then the next chapter titled "Further discussions with Rodan"

But the greatest of all methods of problem solving I have learned from Jesus, your Master. I refer to that which he so consistently practices, and which he has so faithfully taught you, the isolation of worshipful meditation. In this habit of Jesus’ going off so frequently by himself to commune with the Father in heaven is to be found the technique, not only of gathering strength and wisdom for the ordinary conflicts of living, but also of appropriating the energy for the solution of the higher problems of a moral and spiritual nature. But even correct methods of solving problems will not compensate for inherent defects of personality or atone for the absence of the hunger and thirst for true righteousness.

160:1.11 (1774.3) I am deeply impressed with the custom of Jesus in going apart by himself to engage in these seasons of solitary survey of the problems of living; to seek for new stores of wisdom and energy for meeting the manifold demands of social service; to quicken and deepen the supreme purpose of living by actually subjecting the total personality to the consciousness of contacting with divinity; to grasp for possession of new and better methods of adjusting oneself to the ever-changing situations of living existence; to effect those vital reconstructions and readjustments of one’s personal attitudes which are so essential to enhanced insight into everything worth while and real; and to do all of this with an eye single to the glory of God—to breathe in sincerity your Master’s favorite prayer, “Not my will, but yours, be done.”

You know I predicted a few things too.

  1. You wouldn't be able to see any sense in anything I say because your reality is crooked.
  2. You would argue even the most basic simple obvious worldly truths, or try and conflate them to meet your narrative.

    Edited to reference who was talking in the quote.
u/vgSelph · 9 pointsr/exchristian

Please don't take this post from me as aggressive, I just wanted to point out a few things about your post.

You make a few mistakes early in your post. One is you're making the No True Scotsman argument. Essentially you're arguing that the bad Christians you assume we've met or are the cause for us leaving the church, aren't real Christians anyway. I think we need to trust people. If they say they're a Christian, I believe them.

Also, things aren't that bad here on the Earth. We've got some issues, but the things you mention are actually better now than at any point in history. Allow me to point you toward a great, great book about this, Steven Pinker's Better Angels of Our Nature. It's a great book about this exact topic, I think it may allay some of your fears.

Also, why is this life not enough? Why do you deserve more than this life? You're saying that unless you have the potential at eternity, this life isn't worth living. Why not? I've got an amazing wife, and I choose to spend some of my limited time with her. She's so great, that makes it worthwhile. I've got two great kids, my daughter is going to turn 5 in a few weeks and she's super fun to be around. I've got a 1.5 year-old son. He's crazy, no fear, always wants me to pick him up and throw him around through the air. I like to do woodworking and make really, really nice pieces for my family and friends that I just give away. I love looking at the beauty in the world. There's no intent behind it, but that doesn't make it any less beautiful and awesome. Why is that not enough? Why do you need more?

You also forget that your third option also includes a place of eternal torment for people like me. You sincerely believe that I am going to burn in Hell forever. I try to be a good person, I put a TON of effort into thinking about ethics and philosophy. I like to help people, give away my time, and just generally do what I can. But as I'm sure you know, the Bible says that we aren't saved by works. So in spite of all my efforts, because I am unable to have faith, I have eternal torment to look forward to.

It isn't Christians that made me an ex-Christian. They were largely just people where I grew up. It's the religion that I reject and everything about it. Just food for thought.

u/johntara · 3 pointsr/ranprieur

Very Ivan Illichy, and perhaps someone can tell us/remind us what Illich saw as a way forward.

Kevin Kelly, cited in the Amish technology article, also had a chapter called 'The Unabomber was Right.' Cal Newport, whose article I posted, was more optimistic...he thought we could each take the Amish approach, but with our own values instead if those wacky Amish ones ( I think that's a little too individualistic).

I want to look at what is right about the Kelly/Unabomber perspective, then, what's missing.

What's right: if you frame things in terms of technological determinism v. Individual free will, then free will is dead in the water.

What's missing? First, there are specific actors at work here. Facebook is a huge culprit here. God how they lie and manipulate to insinuate themselves, capitalise on the network effects the above article talks about.

I recently read a great book The World Beyond Your Head by Matthew Crawford. One chapter describes how Casino operators justify their existence in terms of patrons' 'free choice' - yet systematically set out to erode said freedom of choice. The vision of punters sitting slack-jawed, pissed-pants, toothpick in the machine so it plays automatically, watching their balance until it runs to zero....it 's dystopian, but it's by design. Executives sit around and think about how to get people to 'play to extinction' this way. And Facebook are the same. The arseholes.

Crawford advocates taking 'free will' out of the debate, and I'd agree. Newport's 'personal values' won't save us, but I think such thing as a community of resistance is possible - you need to have others to connect with to create a kind of reverse network effect. That's why I read Newport, to hear about those people and businesses who are breaking out of the cycle.

There's a neat chapter in WBYH about a business involved in refurbishing and making authentic church organs....and their whole ethic is geared towards, 'what's this going to be like for the folks who come to refurbish this again in 400 years' time'. That's h a great community with an interesting hi-tech/lo-tech combo in the service of collective values...perhaps a better example than Amish. https://www.amazon.com/World-Beyond-Your-Head-Distraction/dp/0374535914

u/raxical · 2 pointsr/videos

ACTUALLY! This is something that I have recently becoming intrigued about as well.

So, basically, everyone that is born will fall somewhere on the bell curve. Obviously someone like this will fall somewhere on the far right, so, high IQ.

Ok, but that's a really incomplete answer, of course he's got a high IQ. What causes this high IQ is what you're asking.
IQ is driven in large part by genes and is highly heritable (something on the order of 0.4 or 0.5). So, odds are his parents are above average intelligence as well.

read this book, it will blow your mind http://www.amazon.com/The-Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial/dp/1501264338

Because IQ is driven in large part by genes, his race plays an important factor as well. This book goes over that http://www.amazon.com/Bell-Curve-Intelligence-Structure-Paperbacks/dp/0684824299

Then, there's a good chance that he has some level of Asperger's. They don't call it "the engineer's disease" for nothing. People make jokes about this but it really does have an effect on how an individual spends their waking hours. Google about aspergers and engineering and you'll find articles like this

http://www.wired.com/2001/12/aspergers/

There's a pbs documentary and some really good articles out there, but I don't care to track them down right now.

Basically, people with some level of Asperger's become obsessed or display a high level of interest to some thing that they latch on to https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=aspergers+obsession. This is important because it allows the individual to put abnormal and significant amounts of time toward a particular interest. This usually tends to come at a cost to other brain functions necessary for social functioning.

So, when you combine all those factors, you get an individual that is highly intelligent and able to spend abnormal amounts of time and energy on a particular interest.

Surprisingly, the "push from the parents" and the environment don't really matter that much. Obviously the individual will be able to achieve more with a good environment and resources, but, this won't really change how intelligent the individual is. Basically... they're born that way and there's really not much you can do to change them.

u/TehGinjaNinja · 3 pointsr/confession

There are two books I recommend to everyone who is frustrated and/or saddened by the state of the world and has lost hope for a better future.

The first is The Better Angels of Our Nature by Stephen Pinker. It lays out how violence in human societies has been decreasing for centuries and is still declining.

Despite the prevalence of war and crime in our media, human beings are less likely to suffer violence today than at any point in our prior history. The west suffered an upswing in social violence from the 1970s -1990s, which has since been linked to lead levels, but violence in the west has been declining since the early 90s.

Put simply the world is a better place than most media coverage would have you believe and it's getting better year by year.

The second book I recomend is The Singularity is Near by Ray Kurzweil. It explains how technology has been improving at an accelerating rate.

Technological advances have already had major positive impacts on society, and those effects will become increasingly powerful over the next few decades. Artificial intelligence is already revolutionizing our economy. The average human life span is increasing every year. Advances in medicine are offering hope for previously untreatable diseases.

Basically, there is a lot of good tech coming which will significantly improve our quality of life, if we can just hang on long enough.

Between those two forces, decreasing violence and rapidly advancing technology, the future looks pretty bright for humanity. We just don't hear that message often, because doom-saying gets better ratings.

I don't know what disability you're struggling with but most people have some marketable skills, i.e. they aren't "worthless". Based on your post, you clearly have good writing/communicating skills. That's a rare and valuable trait. You could look into a career leveraging those skills (e.g. as a technical writer or transcriptionist) which your disability wouldn't interfere with to badly (or which an employer would be willing to accommodate).

As for being powerless to change the world, many people feel that way because most of us are fairly powerless on an individual level. We are all in the grip of powerful forces (social, political, historical, environmental, etc.) which exert far more influence over our lives than our own desires and dreams.

The books I recommended post convincing arguments that those forces have us on a positive trend line, so a little optimism is not unreasonable. We may just be dust on the wind, but the wind is blowing in the right direction. That means the best move may simply be to relax and enjoy the ride as best we can.

u/puppy_and_puppy · 7 pointsr/MensLib

I'm not sure if this would work or not, but I would try redirecting people who have conservative or right-wing leaning views at least toward better thinkers than Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson and toward optimistic views of the future of society, to cull some of the us-vs-them and zero-sum thinking that plagues these discussions.

Sometimes it feels like men, especially, feel existentially threatened by other modes of thought, so being at least sympathetic to the good bits of their ideas and offering something similar but that promotes openness and liberal ideas may help.

Hans Rosling's Factfulness presents a pretty optimistic view of the world. It's all getting better! Seriously!

Jonathan Haidt (and Greg Lukianoff for the first book)

u/Gazzellebeats · 5 pointsr/LetsGetLaid

>I don’t regret having one, just extremely ashamed of being sexual and communicating it to girls and also showing it to the world. Attracting girls’ attention and whatnot isn’t very hard but progressing things to dating, holding hands and eventually sex is impossible. I can’t even call them or message them on Facebook or Whatsapp because I just feel like an idiot for doing so. Making a move in clubs and bars is also difficult although I once got close to leaving with a girl but she didn't want to. I got made fun of a lot growing up for not having a girlfriend and this made me feel like i do not deserve one. It doesn't matter if I've got the green light to go ahead I just feel really ashamed do it. Even something like looking at a fit girl wearing a short skirt makes me feel bad for checking her out and that I shouldn’t be doing it.


I know what you mean. I've been there myself, but even when I was there I was entirely self-aware of my shame and I was skeptical of the validity of my emotional reactions; I realized they were ingrained. Being aware of your emotional reactions allows you to be emotionally proactive. Your sex-negative problem is mostly an emotional issue, and not much else, right? I've been there. I wouldn't doubt that you are also decent looking and have both latent and actualized social skills. Most intelligent introverts have a lot of potential to be who they want to be because they know themselves more deeply than others. You must use your introverted nature to your advantage and recognize the differences in others and yourself. In all honesty, there are an infinite number of unwritten rules; everyone's abstract/emotional logic is different. Many of them are foundational and predictable, however; including yours and mine. Like anything else, being emotionally predictable is not a black/white issue. It is a grey area, and you have to balance your reliability with creativity.


Being made fun of for not having a girlfriend is just as sexist as being made fun of for not having a boyfriend; gender equal too. Were you ever shamed for not having a boyfriend? It's clearly a matter of groupthink and extroverted style; not for everyone. Dating relationships, for extroverts especially, are often attention-getting and showy. They wear their relationships like trophies won. Usually introverts prefer a more private relationship because they have less social desire and are often shamed because of it. Introverts are “themselves” more often in private. Extroverts are “themselves” more often in public. There is no shame deserved either way, regardless of popular opinion. Both styles have their strengths and weaknesses, and you should try to introject some of the traits that you enjoy in others; regardless of type. That is how you become balanced.


>I’m receiving counselling from a pastor who advocates the whole “no sex before marriage” thing and believes that people should only date to get married and sex is only for making kids which is stupid IMO because I do not plan on getting married anytime soon.


Counseling from a Catholic pastor? Watch out, that is one of the most notorious sex-negative societies out there. They own the abstinence-only charade while they parade horribles. Marriage is not the answer to anything; it is an institution of the state. Anything else attached is sentimental.


If you haven't already, I recommend doing an in-depth study of animal sexual behaviors; especially the most intelligent animals. All animals have sex for pleasure, but some animals are only driven to have sex at certain times of the year; humans are on a 24/7 system.


>I’ve tried the no fap route and gotten very high days counts but that hasn’t really helped me at all.


Sexual frustration doesn't help anyone. If you are mindful, then you can use your libido to further your goals, but it is not an all-cure.


>Got any sources to help overcome sex-negative perspectives? I’m interested in recreational sex not baby making sex.


Absolutely. I recommend starting with actual sex science and learning about male and female psychology and neurology. Then work your way into reading about sex culture. You should also study developmental psychology as you will probably need the clinical context in order to objectively self-evaluate your childhood influences; it is necessary for self-therapy. The best therapy will always be self-therapy; no one will ever know you better than yourself.


Evolutionary Science and Morals Philosophy:

The Selfish Gene

The Moral Landscape

The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do?


Sex Psychology, Science, and Neurology:

Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex

The Female Brain

The Male Brain

Why Men Want Sex and Women Need Love

What Do Women Want

Why Women Have Sex: Understanding Sexual Motivations from Adventure to Revenge (and Everything in Between)

Sex: The world's favorite pastime fully revealed


Behavioral Psychology and Abstract Economics:

How Pleasure Works

Freakonomics

Quiet: The Power of Introverts In A World That Can't Stop Talking

Thinking Fast And Slow

We Are All Weird


Developmental Psychology:

Nurture Shock

Hauntings: Dispelling The Ghosts That Run Our Lives


Empathy Building:


Half The Sky

The House On Mango Street

Me Before You

The Fault In Our Stars

Also check out James Hollis' Understanding The Psychology of Men lecture if you can find it.



Movies: XXY, Tom Boy, Dogtooth, Shame, Secretary, Nymphomaniac, Juno, Beautiful Creatures, and The Man From Earth.



All of these things are related, but it is up to you to make the connections; pick and choose which material suits your interests best. These are the things that came to mind first, and they have all influenced my perspectives.

u/Lightfiend · 18 pointsr/psychology

The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature - evolutionary psychology, behavioral genetics. (probably most interesting from a Freudian perspective, deals with many of our unconscious instincts)

Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces The Shape Our Decisions - Unconscious decision-making, behavioral economics, consumer psychology. Fun read.

Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion - Most popular book on the psychology of persuasion, covers all the main principles. Very popular among business crowds.

Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships - Social neuroscience, mirror neurons, empathy, practical stuff mixed with easy to understand brain science.

Authentic Happiness - Positive Psychology, happiness, increasing life satisfaction.

Feeling Good - A good primer on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Also widely considered one of the best self-help books by mental health practitioners.

The Brain That Changes Itself - Neuroplasticity, how experience shapes our brains. Some really remarkable case studies that get you wondering how powerful our brains really are.

The Buddhist Brain - The practical neuroscience of happiness, love, and wisdom from a Buddhist perspective.

That should give you more than enough to chew on.



u/CheekyJack · 2 pointsr/london

I agree that I'm not going to understand gangs because I'm not in the right age range, but no matter what newspapers tell you we are living in a safer, better London than in the past - there are spikes in some years and we should continue to put money towards stopping gang culture.

This is a great article from Steven Pinker

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/11/news-isis-syria-headlines-violence-steven-pinker

who's book the better angels of our time is a great read about how we live in an incredibly safer world - its hard work but worth it:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0141034645/ref=la_B000AQ3GGO_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496274248&sr=1-1

Specifically he uses the graph half way down this page to show that we do live in a safer city and country than ever before by every possible metric

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/ng-interactive/2015/sep/11/graphic-evidence-steven-pinkers-optimism-on-trial

Anyway stay safe and away from idiots!

Peace & love!

u/carrboneous · 1 pointr/Judaism

> The premise that G-d communicated with the Jews and that we are following his word. I believe in a first cause that is above the rules of nature.

I truly hope it doesn't bother you, but that's definitely not Atheism. Sounds like textbook Deism to me.

For what it's worth, I consider Deism a reasonable conclusion. I think it's the only (best?) conclusion I could draw sans Torah.

And if you're interested, Halachically, it's apikorsus as opposed to minus.

> I had my ups and downs. ... The results astounded me (and made me sick and depressed)

It sounds like you've always been a bit of a square peg in a round hole. I really feel for you. It's really unfortunate. And, if you don't mind me saying so, it sounds like ... "mistakes were made" along the way by all parties. I don't know who Rabbi Nissim Kaplan is, but that's neither here nor there.

> after that I was trapped. Couldnt work because then i wouldnt find a shidduch. Couldnt go to college, because then I wouldnt find a shidduch. ...

I am very grateful that I can't relate to this shidduch culture at all, it's so unhealthy, and I don't think Torah-based at all (it allows no room for Teshuva, for example).

> It dawned on me that we are all products of our up bringing, not just our idiosyncrasies or tastes but our very thought patterns too.

Actually, there's a lot of evidence that the our basic nature -- the things you mentioned, for example -- comes pretty much built-in. I think Steven Pinker wrote a book about it (which I haven't read). When you say it dawned on you... Was this just an epiphany, or do you have some reasoning behind it? (I'm just curious about this, I don't think it's really relevant one way or the other).

> That scared me shitless (i dont use that term lightly). I began questioning every thing.

Sounds, honestly, like a fairly run of the mill existential crisis. It's a bit of a late bloom, but I think many or most thoughtful, intelligent people go through them in adolescence (which extends into your mid-20s, apparently). Nothing wrong with that, I'm just making an observation; and I do think it's relevant to your situation, insofar as I would caution you not to make rash decisions while in the midst of an existential crisis (also, you might enjoy some existential literature. I haven't read very much of it myself, but I could point towards some of the big names if you are unaware and interested; I know very little about what culture you grew up with or what you know now, so excuse me if I'm condescending).

> I took a kiruv course where an Aish rabbi

From my little experience, I'd say this is the wrong response to an intelligent person's existential crisis :)

> The results astounded me (and made me sick and depressed)

I'm just curious: care to elaborate? And, as LazerA said, this is probably a sign that the process was inappropriate for your intellectual level and/or was otherwise not run very well. That said, I don't really support the whole "kiruv" thing to begin with.

> Im not sure how to put it, a feeling of "we are different, there is a divide between us".

Alienation? Otherness?

> I only feel anger toward people in a position of leadership who continue to perpetuate great acts of social negligence (at best).

Can you elaborate on this? What social negligence? Also, am I right in saying that your anger is not at their belief or their beings, but at their actions? In other words, you feel pity for, frustrated by, and alienated from religious people, but are angry at people who perform acts of social negligence (that you happen to witness because these "leaders" are in "your" society).

> Like I said before, I am lonely. But I've always been a loner so not much difference there.

Although you do mention it, so there is something different, even though you are accustomed to loneliness and maybe even feeling like an outsider.

Now, please don't take this the wrong way, but have you considered speaking to a therapist? I'm definitely not saying "you're crazy", I've already said that I think your position is rational and reasonable. But some of the things you are experiencing can be symptomatic of something more troubling, or can at least be alleviated with therapy. I'm always nervous to recommend this (same goes for speaking to a Rabbi), because I know a really top-class therapist who says that most others do more harm than good. Still, I think it might be in your interests. And I'm not saying I think you can or should look to be cured of Apikorsus, I'm just concerned, and I think you might be able to have a better life, with whatever beliefs. As LazerA mentioned, it's possible that religion isn't the problem, and if it isn't, then abandoning it will only be a temporary relief, and maybe it is the right thing, but it's only partial.

While I wouldn't discount this advice without at least giving it some thought, it's obviously also entirely possible that I've misread or misunderstood, and I apologise profusely if I have.

Alternatively, maybe you just feel isolated and alone, but when you develop new friendships in the new and wider world, you will feel better and more connected.

> There is no way to accurately describe the feeling other than to say I feel "Bigger".

Well that is certainly a good thing. I'm glad you feel better about life. Although obviously I do wish you didn't feel that being frum was so constraining.

u/johnslegers · 9 pointsr/mbti

My late best friend was an INFP male.

In my experience (and also that of A.J. Drenth), INFP males are pretty similar to INTP males, because their Te is pretty more developed / mature than that of an INFP female. However, compared to INTPs, they do tend to be a lot more prone to what I call "manic episodes", which is when they have some feeling that is so strong they need to follow it and they pretty much lose all capacity for reason.

Compared with INTPs, INFPs also have very little impulse control and tend to be more prone to psychotic behavior. My best friend had been to prison on charges of "terrorism", he'd been to a mental institution once or twice because of psychotic episodes and he'd been in rehab for amphetamine addiction. Eventually, he died in a car crash because he's taken too many pain killers to alleviate his back pain, which he got from excessive weightlifting.

I'm not sure if I know any INFP females (maybe one of my INFP friend's ex-wives?), but my current best friend is an INTJ, and the love of his life was an INFP female. He told me this is a good example of an INFP female. He also told me that the love of his live had to go to a mental institution multiple times and had problems with drug addition, just like my male INFP friend.

So when I think of INFP people of either gender, I tend to think of people who are constantly flirting with the border between sanity and insanity, and who are very prone to addiction and impulsive behavior. However, I also think of people who live life to the fullest and who are 100% their own eccentric selves. I think of people who are both very intense and very pure, which IMO makes them very likable in spite (or maybe because?) of all the craziness and impulsivity. As an INTP, I most definitely love to get dragged along by an INFP when he/she is exploring the world.

If I'm to consider Björk as a good example of INFP females, they do come off as a lot more "floaty" / "dreamy" than male INFPs, which makes sense, I suppose, considering they have a less developed Te than male INFPs, and - like male INFPs - they have Fi as their primary function. Eric Thor refers to INFPs as the "fairy empath" type, and, based on the references that I've got, that description definitely fits, especially for females.

u/Keeping_itreal · 14 pointsr/TheRedPill

> The way I see it, people who have children with surrogate mothers are just as naive -using very light terms here- as intentional single mothers.

Interesting analysis. The data does not support it however: children raised by single fathers are roughly twice better off financially (less likely to suffer poverty) and suffer 1/2 the abuse. Those are arguably the most important predictors of the future success of a child. The children of single fathers are better off than those of single mothers. All the more astounding when you consider that most single fathers are actually from the lowest socio-economic background.

>You'd do that to your child?

Yes, yes I would.

> Knowingly denying it a (biological) mother before it is even born?

As opposed to what? A 50% chance that it gets a mother who will then divorce me and take the child away? How much do you care about your child to find those acceptable odds to lose children?

>Hell, only denying breastfeeding will already fuck up its immune system.

No, it won't "fuck up" the child's immune system. It's immune system will probably be weaker, but with modern medicine always available this can be dealt with in the early years until the child catches up. With the number of modern women giving up on breastfeeding anyway to keep their boobs, your theory of "fucked up" immune systems is weak. Men who use surrogate mothers (straight and gay) deal with this effectively.

>do you really think cutting out the mother straight after birth will have any less of an effect?

Yes I do. The children of single mothers are not worse off simply because they don't have a father. There are many other factors such as their mothers being much more poor, low IQ, abusive, compulsive, unable/uninterested to participate in the child's education etc...

Listen, if I ever go the route, I will not be having baby I cannot support with a chad I couldn't close my legs for before he ran away, or a husband I got bored with. I will be starting from a very comfortable position, with enough wealth to provide anything the child could need and much, much more. Not having a mother will be an handicap, but it can be overcome; much more easily than a typical single motherhood.

Not that mothers are that important. As research shows (twin studies in particular), parents influence little to nothing of who their child will become. So long as you provide decently for them, show emotional support and do not abuse them, almost everything your child becomes will be genetically inherited. The best you can do is find kickass genes for your child (easier with surrogacy) and the correct peer groups. It is human hubris which makes parents think that their children are pets they need to teach tricks to instead of fully independent human beings with their own natures.

>There are single parents out there who didn't choose for it, and I applaud them for their great efforts at making the best out of this situation. But knowingly, willingly denying your child a parent, just so you can have a mini-me is beyond my comprehension, and I don't have a good word for it.

Do you have a good word for people who throw a coin in the air to find out if they'll get to keep their children? I thought people on this sub would understand this shit: hate the game, not the player. The US family court system changed the rules of the game by denying men guaranteed equal custody (except in the case of the child's refusal or physical abuse);I am just adapting. If you can change the laws, I will change my strategy. But that will never happen so keep your good word for men who gamble their children away, I don't need it.

u/MisanthropicScott · 2 pointsr/DebateReligion

> I recognize that your view of God is set in stone

... only until someone shows me a single shred of hard scientific evidence that there is such a being.

> and so I won’t waste our time trying to convince you that God is God.

God is a tautology??!!? You don't have anything more positive to say about him that YHVH, He is? Wow.

> He can’t make any wrong moves he is absolute and so we puny humans can’t even begin to understand and as a result judge him.

Interesting. So, you don't claim to know whether God is good or evil? I claim the fictional character described in both the Torah and the New Testament is demonstrably evil. I do so by pointing to the words of the Bible. You claim not to even know if you're worshiping and following a force for good or evil. What if God is evil? Would you still follow?

> But while your opinion of God is grim don’t you at least agree with the teachings of Jesus many of which are the foundations of western society morals?

This is a loaded question. Your assumption that western society is built on the teachings of Jesus is false, see part B of my answer below.

A) No. I don't agree with the teachings of Jesus. Of course, I'm posting deliberately cherry-picked statements from the Bible. But, these are all legitimate statements in the Bible.

Scroll down to the list at the following link starting with number 1158, which should be the start of the New Testament's cruelty, unless anyone has edited the list since the time I am typing this.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

Here's a list of intolerance in the Bible. Scroll down to Matthew again started at 538, for instances of intolerance in the New Testament.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html

And, this is a list of misogyny. Scroll down to number 330 for the start of the New Testament here.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/women/long.html

Here's a list of some of the wonderful family values of which the Bible speaks. Start at number 360 for the New Testament.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/fv/long.html

Here are some interesting Biblical views on sex. The N.T. stuff starts at number 231 this time.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/sex/long.html

B) No. Western civilization is actually founded on views from the period of the enlightenment.

From wikipedia (emphasis mine): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment

>> The Enlightenment (also known as the Age of Enlightenment or the Age of Reason; in French: le Siècle des Lumières, lit. '"the Century of Lights"'; and in German: Aufklärung, "Enlightenment") was an intellectual and philosophical movement that dominated the world of ideas in Europe during the 18th century, "The Century of Philosophy".

>> The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy and came to advance ideals like liberty, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutional government and separation of church and state.[4][5] In France, the central doctrines of the Enlightenment philosophers were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. The Enlightenment was marked by an emphasis on the scientific method and reductionism, along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy—an attitude captured by the phrase Sapere aude, "Dare to know".

Compare the Bill of Rights to the Ten Commandments. Which one gives rights? Which one takes them away?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

If western society is founded on Christian values, why is it that only 3 of the 10 commandments are actually illegal?

> is there any other reason for compassion other than Jesus telling us to be servants and to love others as yourself and to do to the lowest as we would to Jesus?

Yes. The reasons are the same ones that caused Jesus to say what he said. We evolved as a social species. All social species have morals.

Humans have performed some horribly cruel experiments on animals. One of them was performed on rats. They taught rat #1 to press a lever to receive food pellets. This is easy to do. Rats are quite smart and have no trouble at all making the connection to pressing a lever for food. Then, they put a cage with rat #2 (a rat that rat #1 does not even know) in sight of rat #1. When rat #1 presses the lever, s/he continues to receive food. But, rat #2 receives an electric shock. Seeing that the lever visibly causes pain to rat #2, rat #1 stops pressing the lever and may even starve him/herself to death.

Not all humans are so caring and empathetic.

But, the point is that morals exist to varying degrees in all social species. These are an evolved trait. Even social fish have morals. This is far from unique to humans. And, it sure as hell didn't begin with Jesus.

https://www.livescience.com/24802-animals-have-morals-book.html

> I’m sure you know of all the great missionaries of the last centuries that under the threat of death flew to the most hostile to western civilization countries and helped the people there not only with the good news but also with material goods.

And also with homophobia within the last century.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-kaoma-uganda-gays-american-ministers-20140323-story.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/18/us-evangelicals-africa-charity-missionaries-homosexuality

When African wackadoodles say that homosexuals "eat da poo poo", they're getting that crap from American missionaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Ssempa

> I myself as a child spent five years with my family in Haiti helping the people that had previously suffered from the earthquake 2010.

That is truly wonderful and I applaud your efforts. Not all Christians are so nice. Many vote Republican!

> There is no moral or social reason to do anything out of selflessness in today’s society.

That is false. The reason is that we evolved as a social species, as noted above, and that all social species have morals and whatever it is you're calling social reason.

> In the end there is no moral ground at all, everything is subject to people’s opinions at the time.

There is tons of moral ground that evolved over hundreds of millions of years! That this moral ground is changing and improving over time is a good thing. I'm proud that my morals are not dictated by my sheepshagging ancestors who wrote the book on genocide. My morals reflect the improved moral zeitgeist of western society that has been improving morality for centuries.

Good book on our improving morals: The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined Paperback by Steven Pinker

u/SeamusHeaneysGhost · 1 pointr/atheism

I love this book and I think even if you stay religious you will get a lot from it. http://www.amazon.com/Out-Character-Surprising-Truths-Lurking/dp/0307717763

One of the early pieces in it discusses all this evil and good and our understanding of what that really is. You know the whole good angel and devil sitting on your shoulder, common in christian teaching. ie: if you listen to your angel you'll do good etc etc devil gets you in trouble.

It asks you for the book and life to replace the good angel with a ant and the devil with a grasshopper. Stick with me!

The ant believes in long term plans. He works hard and devotes his time to working as part of a group for a bigger project. He always looks at the long term of each of his actions inside his colony.

Then there's the grasshopper. He wants things now. He feeds alone and grabs what he can. He won't resist a passing fly and enjoys consuming everything alone. He has his relationships anywhere. In his world its about him and his survival and instant gratification.


The book then takes on some of the more difficult characters we have known who have dramatically changed in front of our eyes. Take one like Tiger woods. Why did a guy with a beautiful wife, a perfect career, a huge sponsorship and the love of the sports world throw it away with affair after affair, the book will tell you much more than me. I will say it was to do with his development. He never had much freedom growing up. He never experienced life outside the watchful eyes of his father. He was not satisfied in his marriage and was also missing something inside himself. It goes on to show you how his grasshopper actually came to his rescue (yeah I know rescue!) but it did get him to change his life by destroying the one he was living that was actually a lie. A loveless marriage, a passionless existence. You know what, I'm not doing this book any justice at all. Just get it.

The lessons for me were that nobody is fit to be judged by me. Nobody can be fully understood by a list of shameful things. What is happening to them is a sort of evolution of themselves, a breaking of the shackles so that they can find true happiness.

I grew up in catholic ireland where looking at a girl was nearly a sin. Our entire school was like an indoctrination. To cool kids like myself that was hell. We're listening to rap, playing guitar, dropping xtc, and taking on the clubs, we wanted to rebel in the hardest way possible. I know exactly what you mean by "born a believer" sure I was baptized at four months old! The church is and was trying to get kids as early as possible. The churches of all countries want to drill this middle eastern import into your head about a guy from 2000 years ago called Jesus. The vikings came to ireland, I could have been swing Thors hammer!. The celts came here, I could have been praying to Alaunus in a river, but no a middle easter religion came in and took over. It was forced through europe by the prussians and repacked into pagan festivals like easter and christmas, or Ostara and Yule by some fella call Patrick.

But you know all this. It's just a bunch of stories to help us feel less frightened of death. I challenge you to reach above your head now, open your palm and close the eye of god. You are not being watched. You are NOT a "sinner". You forgive yourself not anybody else. You were born with morals not thought them. Nothing will give you more peace than knowing you have a life and its great. Enjoy your week and most of all have fun.



u/y0nkers · 3 pointsr/IAmA

Ah I didn't really mean it like that. I meant that having advanced technology is a sign of being around a long time which would've given them time to transition out of primitive behavior -- like we are slowly doing. But maybe their technology progressed at a more exponential rate than ours and their social evolution wasn't as fast. This is all so speculative and we only have one example (us) so it's really just a fun guessing game.

You make a good point about how long it takes us to advance morally. But the key idea is that we ARE advancing. A great book on this is The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Stephen Pinker. Things now are immensely better than they were even 100 years ago.

One unnerving thought is how little our treatment of animals has progressed. Arguably, it has gotten worth with our factory farming methods. Perhaps this is insight into how we would treat other species. We have a threshold for what we deem as worthy of protection laws based on our interpretation of intelligence. Will that threshold be raised if we advance our intelligence through artificial means? Do beings of lesser intelligence deserve and equal chance at life as those of higher intelligence?


u/AfroElitist · 3 pointsr/linguistics

I would read some more "casual" or pop linguistics books to really cement your interest in linguistics before any of the more heady pieces of literature scare you off. As a side note, I'd learn the English IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) chart before you pursue further literature. Not knowing would be like performing math calculations without knowing what any of the operator signs were. As a high schooler, this is your time to read. God knows you won't have as much time to do it in college. Only after you get a general feel for what linguists actually do and study, would I recommend making a choice, it's certainly not for everyone :)

Great story demonstrating just how different certain languages can be.
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Sleep-There-Are-Snakes/dp/0307386120/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335511683&sr=8-1

If you want a great pop introduction that'll really help you tap your toe on the vast ocean surface known as linguistics, I'd give this a try too http://www.amazon.com/The-Stuff-Thought-Language-Window/dp/0143114247/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335511905&sr=1-2

If you like what you read, and think it would be admirable to contribute to the swiftly growing pool of knowledge we currently have in this wonderful field, then pursue more academically oriented sources, and as others said, maybe narrow your interests further by contacting a certain professor or researcher. Hope this helped :)

u/AdamColligan · 4 pointsr/atheism
  1. The press environment in the US is very free. That does not mean that there are no serious challenges to press freedom here, especially on specific national security issues. However, several indices on the subject tend to fairly seriously under-represent important elements bolstering US press freedom. Some of these are: strong underlying freedom of information law at state/local as well as federal level, very aggressive judicial protection in First Amendment cases, and an effective and still-burgeoning system of recourse to counter strategic lawsuits against public participation. The three isolated examples you gave are not even good ones. With regard to the Snowden saga, the actual journalists working on the story have actually enjoyed much more legal leeway and suffered much less harassment in the US than in the UK and some other places. And while a better statutory defense should be available for Snowden with regard to presenting justification for the crimes he committed, the lack of one is not any kind of distinguishing feature of the US system. Similarly, Chelsea Manning and Barrett Brown's actions would have been considered serious crimes in every country on the planet. The idea of Barrett Brown being a press hero is laughable, and it's especially ironic given that the Stratfor hack was essentially an attack on the privacy of an independent media company and its readership. [Full disclosure, I worked at Stratfor for a bit in the mid-2000s and still know people there, and the paranoia people have about that company never ceases to amaze].

  2. Your point about lobbying has some technical merit, but it's really just another version of the same misconception. There are really separate ideas here: bribery, campaign donations, and persuasive lobbying. Straight-up bribery involves a politician getting personal, pecuniary benefit in exchange for policy. Bribery renders people less free, since they are no longer able to effectively control government through voting. It happens, and it's a problem in all governments, but America doesn't especially stand out from its peers in this area. Campaign donations are of course problematic and also often discussed as a form of "bribery". But, as I pointed out above, this muddles an important difference. When the campaign money is just being spent on dumb ads, it does not really reduce the voters' freedom. Your reply is that a ton of money is also spent on lobbyists. However, (1) much of this is the same money -- lobbyists do a lot of work sourcing campaign donations; and (2) to the extent that lobbyists are actually lobbying, this is just putting politicians in the same shoes as voters. And, frankly, many of those conversations are also about how much campaign money could be raised to unseat them if they do the "wrong" thing. Access can be important to the forming of impressions, but politicians have a ton of tools at their disposal to manage to whom they listen and for how long. Politicians that are stuck in the culture of lobbying-cash-fear are guilty of cowardice, but they aren't "not free" and neither are their constituents.

  3. The way you make this argument, your point of view is never falsifiable. If a poor person votes Republican, you can just say it's because their society must be so "not free" that they were mind-controlled / brainwashed into voting against their interests. If only they were better educated, they would be "free" to vote for the things that you think are in their interests rather than the things that they think are in their interests. This perspective just dehumanizes the very people that you are trying to claim are being robbed of their agency by American society. Of course I think it should be made even easier for Americans to be better-informed and even easier to participate in political life. But surely freedom has to be recognized for what it is regardless. Nobody can force voters with stupid ideas to go out and correct them. But the practical barriers to any voter doing so -- even a voter with low education and no personal wealth -- are remarkably low in the US.

  4. (5) The GPI is not a good measure at all of "how safe the streets are", which was your original point. It includes lots of variables that have nothing to do with that. The US homicide rate is on par with the Baltics; the US assault rate compares pretty well to many of its peers. But the larger point is lost in these snapshot comparisons. Pretty much all current OECD societies are on the sharp tip of a very dramatic decline in violence. Yes, there are some places in America that are blighted and dangerous. And we still have more violent crime than we should have. But in general, I absolutely stand by the statement that America is a very safe place by any rational standard. Having double the murder rate of 2012 Finland is like doubling your risk of being struck by lightning or exposing yourself to double the normal level of background radiation. It's more dangerous, but it isn't not safe.

    To your last point: there are significant threats to important freedoms in the US. Personally, I am especially concerned about not only surveillance in particular but the general attitude in successive federal administrations about the rule of law in general. And I am not alone in that at all. But, especially when it comes to essential political liberties and the freedom of conscience, our underlying legal and social protections remain very strong. And they are just now being given the opportunity to more directly confront the latest threats. We have a long way to fall before it would start to make sense to talk about being "not free".
u/neko_nero · 1 pointr/belgium

>Values only work if you truly uphold them all the time.

Nonsense, all humans work with situation-dependent evaluation. There is no absolute ethical value that does not have a "but under these circumstances" exception (which in itself is dependent on the individual). In addition to that, values can change over time. Machines are rigid, humans are flexible, which is necessary for adaptation and survival in a world with endless situational variations.

>Will you teach your children this absolute egotism

As I find it morally disagreeable to create life, I long ago decided not to have any children. But if I did, I would definitely teach them to look out for themselves first, wouldn't you? What parent would want their child to sacrifice itself for the parent's sake? Parenthood means sacrifice, that's why nearly all animals fight to the death to protect their brood.

>We could chose

The individual might be able to choose, but the whole of the species has a direction of its own. Egotism is an extremely positive trait for survival, that's why all species have it. Your best bet for improving selflessness among humans would be to support genetic manipulation.

If you're interested in a much better and much more detailed exposition, I recommend The Biology of Moral Systems by Richard Alexander.

u/roveboat · 1 pointr/Finland

> Yes, those are factors that could plausibly affect the learning curve.

Sure, plausibly they could affect the learning, but that's a bit different than 'it doesn't make sense that every language is as easy to learn', don't you think?

> If we take any language, and then artificially make it twice as difficult to learn by making new, difficult rules to the grammar, it would (almost by definition) mean that such a language would be more difficult to learn to a toddler.

But that's the thing - even very complex grammar rules such as grammatical genders or Finnish-style agglutinated suffixes (and their order!) are pieces of cake to toddlers. They just pick them up very rapidly while second language learners struggle with these for decades.

Here's a paper on the magnificient Stephen Pinker on the topic of language acquisition and also touching a little bit on the different languages topic. If you're interested, his book The Language Instinct is a more in-depth look at the issue at hand and a fun read. Pinker, in general, is a wonderful writer and I'd especially recommend his book The Blank Slate for an interesting look into humanity.

The study you linked to is interesting, but using different parts of the brain - in this case, to decode the tonality of the language - doesn't really say anything about difficulty. Note that the researches uses the term 'different' while the journalist invokes 'more difficult'. This would explain, however, why speakers of tonal languages more commonly have perfect pitch, though..

u/thesunmustdie · 1 pointr/IWantToLearn

Okay, this is going to be my last big reply in this conversation (over two comments because it's almost 2000 words). I appreciate your time with me, but you know as well as I do these conversations are better had in person than over a medium like Reddit. Here goes:

> Video

  • A mathematical thought experiment by an agnostic-atheist hero of mine Carl Sagan using Flatlander (one of my most recommended books). I've seen this clip many times and don't get your point. I suspect you're reading way too much into it in a way that would disappoint Sagan. The time to believe a thing is when there's good reason and evidence and not a nanosecond before.

    > "Actually, I don't get the difference."

  • Okay, so imagine someone makes the claim that there's an even number of blades of grass on earth. My position is "I don't believe you" which is not the same as "there's not an even number of blades of grass" or "no, there's an odd number!". With god(s), I'm not necessarily convinced by the claim that they don't exist and not necessarily convinced by the claim that they do exist — even though the god(s) either exists or does not exist. Both contrary claims have a burden of proof to meet.

  • For specific god definitions, such as a god that's all-loving and all-powerful, I do go the step further and assert that it doesn't exist. I say this with virtual certainty because of incidents like child rape. Yet, not only do you believe such a being exists, but that its failure to intervene is a necessarily good thing and you're going continue worshipping it. And you're even so cavalier as to refer to Epicurus as if you're very aware of this argument and don't really care about its theodical implications.

    > "Actually it's quite the opposite. Since my morality is not my own then it's not my opinion, it's God's"

  • Well first you'd have to demonstrate the god exists or else you might as well be talking about the opinion of a Flying Spaghetti Monster or angels dancing on the head of a pin. But even if such a god does exist, it's still that being's opinion (as you said) what's right or wrong. "Might" does not make "right". To cite an example, chattel slavery is condoned the bible. If that's God's opinion, then God's opinion is immoral and he is an immoral thug for endorsing it. You can say what this immoral thug dictates is objective all day long and until you're red in the face, but that doesn't strengthen your case one iota. If real, why should I care for its opinion? What reason do I believe he's good and Satan, for example, is evil? Satan appears rather upstanding compared to God if we're just going by the bible. But as I said, it's all angels dancing on the head of a pin as far as I'm concerned until you and other theists meet your very heavy burden of proof.

    > "it's what's been carried on throughout the thousands of years of revelation on God's word"

  • Is this why we have a bazillion denominations of Christianity with almost every point of doctrine being fought over? Is this why Christianity appears to evolve as we become more secularly enlightened? Is "thousands of years" relevant? Because I can point to religions much older than Christianity and I can point to Islam as a religion that's about to overtake Christianity in its impact and influence. I can also point to any number of religions with their very own revelations that contradict what you believe. What these religions all have in common is the adherence of human psychology and the need to seek patterns and insert stopgap explanations into phenomena not understood — including "revelations" very likely borne of schizophrenia, "demonic possession" very likely borne of epilepsy, etc.

    > "It's like following a code of conduct. If you live in a society you abide by it's law"

  • Law =/= morality. I view quite a number of laws as immoral actually – even those in my own country (like locking people in a cage for smoking marijuana). As a citizen who is part of the electorate, I see it as my duty to influence the law by my own views and rationally-formed morals. I try to affect change from the bottom up. Outside my country, I see laws in heavily religious and/or theocratic populations as undermining morality and human rights — faring poorly on world development and equality indexes compared to secular nations with high atheist populations.

    > "Don't drive without your seat-beat or else you'll receive a ticket (this is not a threat, it's a warning. And it's true in my country, at least. You know what I meant)."

  • Yes. For reasons of practical necessity. We're stuck living in a world of physical limitations in which car accidents can happen and so we have to make rules to ensure the people involved sustain minimal harm. A god is not constrained by such limitations, right? A god does not have to do things out of practical necessity, right?

    > "That's not superior morality"

  • It's superior morality because it requires a process of moralization with wellbeing considered. If you're doing something because a god said so, then you're not moralizing over your decision — you're being obedient. If the god tells you to kill people (like Yahweh does throughout the bible) then you would have to think that's good. You said yourself that superstition comes before human need by pointing to Matthew 22:37-40.

    > As you stated, that's YOUR metric.

  • Yes, I said it was my metric. My question is why the heck isn't it yours? If we're not talking about "wellbeing" when discussing morality, then what are we talking about? What pleases a god first and foremost (and according to whose interpretation?)?

    > "One could argue that majority well-being is better than individual, and by that..."

  • Yes. So what? We can argue the contrary and we can have heated debates and rational discussions. We can point to secular documents like the US constitution and its proscription of the tyranny of the majority/masses and the huge number of reasons why, in the long term, it's ultimately a terrible idea for everyone at all levels of society (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority)
    . As I said, we seem to be stuck in having dialog and dialectic based on reason and rationality as the most effective way of making the world better. As we learn more and take heed of past mistakes we evolve as a society — slowly edging towards a post-conventional form of moral development where we begin thinking in more universal, far-sighted and selfless ways (think Kant's categorical imperative, the veil of ignorance, etc.). In the past, when society was much more religious, we suffered from a pre-conventional morality with a mainstay of punishment avoidance. You still see this level of morality in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia.

    > "we could extrapolate to things like different teams, races, nationalities and we could, then, get to justify wars and all sorts of bloodshed"

  • Compare the incredibly religious world of yesteryear to today. We, right now, are living in the most peaceable time in human history... by far (despite being much more exposed to bad news creating an illusion to the contrary). Steven Pinker backs up this claim with all sorts of facts and figures in his excellent book, which I recommend: "The Better Angels of Our Nature": https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0141034645

    > "Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:37-40)

  • Right, and many teachers before the Jesus character said this without putting primitive superstitions before human needs or appealing to threats of hellfire (both being morally repugnant to me). Jesus, it should also be said, seems fine with people owning their fellow human beings as property. And before you mention this being indentured servants working off a debt and not being like Transatlantic Slave Trade, I know what indentured servitude is (and am opposed to that too), but I'm referring to full-blown chattel slavery.

    > "Elaborating on it: I won't do to another what I believe will harm him but I'll do what I believe will bring this person closer to God"

  • Which is good, but the second part worries me because the god character you're referring to is a genocidal maniac.


    [SEE REPLY TO THIS COMMENT FOR PART 2]
u/TheGreasyPole · 3 pointsr/PurplePillDebate

OK.

The single best evo-psych book I can think of is

The Blank Slate by Stephen Pinker. It's extremely readable as well as very informative.

Where you'd want to go next depends on what you'd like to learn more about, and whether you liked Stephen Pinker as an author.

If you'd like to know more about the genetics that underlying the evo-psych then you want.

The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins

If you're interested specifically in what evo-psych has to say about human sexuality you want

The Evolution of Desire by David Buss

And if you really like Stephen Pinker and want to know what evo psych means for human societies I'd recommend

The Angels of our Better Nature by Stephen Pinker

or (if you don't like Pinker)

Origins of Virtue by Matt Ridley.

I've given you US Amazon links, and no. I don't get a cut :(

u/christgoldman · 3 pointsr/DebateAnAtheist

> The idea that the mind is in some way non-physical.

The mind is a product and an element of the physical brain. It may not be concretely tangible (i.e., you can't hold a mind), but that does not mean it is not a part of the physical universe. Physics explains the mind quite well, actually. The neurons in our brain are developed in compliance to the laws of physics and biology, the neurochemicals in our brain are physical substances, and the electric currents in our brains that communicate signals between neurons operate in compliance to the laws of physics.

Evolution also provides insight into the development of consciousness. While, sure, humans are the only terrestrial species with advanced enough consciousness to develop religious and philosophical ideas, we know now that many animals have forms of consciousness and proto-consciousness like what we would expect if humans evolved consciousness from simple origins. The mind is perfectly explainable through naturalistic sciences, and our naturalistic model of human consciousness makes predictions that are falsifiable.

I'd suggest reading Steven Pinker's How The Mind Works. Here's a talk he gave on the book. I'd also suggest his The Stuff of Thought, The Language Instinct, and The Blank Slate.

I'd also suggest Sam Harris' The Moral Landscape. While it's main thrust is to show how science can inform morality, it offers some pretty decent layperson explanation of consciousness, and it is written by an accomplished neuroscientist (whatever your opinion on his religious works may be). His pamphlet-esque Free Will also covers some good ground here.

> All able-bodied humans are born with the ability to learn language.

Not at all true. You can be able-bodied and learning disabled. There was a nonverbal autistic student at my middle school years ago who ran track. Trivial point, but still incorrect.

> I would argue humans also have a Spiritual Acquisition Device.

I would argue that this argument is SAD. (pun; sorry.)

You're positing a massively complex hypothetical neurological infrastructure to link human brains to a divine alternate universe or dimension that has never been shown to exist. Not only has this neural uplink never been observed, but it is entirely unnecessary, as neuroscientists and psychologists have a perfectly functional, testable model of consciousness without it. You're adding a new element to that model that is functionally redundant and untestable. Occam's Razor would trim away your entire posited element out of extraneousness and convolution.

u/jjc55 · 0 pointsr/WaltDisneyWorld

I'm not a perfect parent, but I'm working on improving. A couple points though:


  1. this discussion could be more of a symptom than the root cause of the behavior. We all, kids & parents, have a continuum of mood, from 1 being the Zen tranquility to 10 being active eruption. A small thing pushing an 8 to 10 is not about that small thing, but being at 8 to start. I noticed this more with myself than my kids and work, even on good days to get closer to tranquility.


  2. A time like that is not the time to discuss why things are happening. You give choices and tell your kids you'll discuss more fully when they are calmed down.


    What I'm reading right now:


    https://www.amazon.com/Setting-Limits-Strong-Willed-Revised-Expanded/dp/0770436595
u/jrg1610 · 6 pointsr/infp

At 27 I did. Wish I knew sooner because my life has been improved dramatically by acknowledging who I am rather than who I think I should be (which was largely determined by others' expectations of me).

If you want to deep dive, I'm a huge evangelist concerning the personalityhacker podcast/website -> https://personalityhacker.com/

You can find some INFP-specific podcasts on the site which can validate a lot of things in your life.

There are also some neat books that I think are great introductory/overview material to this area of study that you can probably find at your local library like the ones below. I recommend them to people that I think find MBTI-related study interesting/want another lens to look at themselves with.

(My favorite broad introduction to types. Hardly technical but accurate, I believe)
https://www.amazon.com/What-Type-Discover-Who-Really/dp/014026941X/

(Career focused one)
https://www.amazon.com/Do-What-You-Are-Personality/dp/031623673X

(One that talks about the theory in general but gives interesting suggestions on how to communicate with different types [note to self, look at what you need in conversations under your section to get your needs met conversationally])
https://www.amazon.com/Art-SpeedReading-People-Speak-Language/dp/0316845183/

(One that talks about personality types for children but can still be used to be insightful for yourself)
https://www.amazon.com/Nurture-Nature-Understand-Childs-Personality/dp/0316845132/

(Excellent book about just infps)
https://www.amazon.com/Comprehensive-INFP-Survival-Guide/dp/1945796154/

Warning: if you're an INFP and you start looking at information about other types, you will probably be constantly debating in your head as to which type you are. This is normal.

I think the best thing an INFP can do with such self knowledge is to a build a life to get their needs met without being righteously indignant (i.e. a jerk) about it when faced with resistance

u/DWShimoda · 0 pointsr/MGTOW

>so hedonism?


No, hedonism is all about thrill-seeking, ephemeral pleasures...

It's more about the "journey being the reward"...
--
Which isn't JUST about travel but also applies to the joys of designing, building & making things (everything from meals to skyscrapers).

To wit: a passage from Tolkien's Silmarillion:

>"...but the delight and pride of Aulë [*] is in the deed of making, and in the thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."

[*] "Aulë" is the "blacksmith/maker/craftsman" (a minor "god" - Valar/powerful angelic being in Tolkien's mythological pantheon)

--
If you have trouble comprehending that side of things -- which alas far too many young men do these days (never having really been given even the opportunity to "make" much of anything) -- then there are a couple recent books you might read by guys who had a similar problem, and found their way through it, like "Shop Class as Soul Craft" or the same author's more recent (2015?) follow-up book "The World Beyond Your Head: On Becoming an Individual in an Age of Distraction"...

I mean there are plenty of other books (as well as even more non-book "paths") to finding & figuring out some OTHER fulfilling joys and purposes in life... I suggest those two because they're decent works on the subject, and written by a guy who has fairly recently faced the same kind of "malaise" that many other young guys are -- plus the dude QUIT being an academic to become a motorcycle mechanic.

Not saying he's some "uber guru" -- just that reading his works MIGHT help you to figure out your own path.

u/vibrunazo · 2 pointsr/atheism

> It ends there?

On our end? Yes, the whole plan is: be honest. Period. End plan.

From then on it's up to them, the Muslims. Can the peaceful minority of Muslims convince the violent majority to change? I hope they can, and historical evidence tell us that they will. Given time and proper transparency. People like Reza Aslan, instead of telling atheists to lie about Islam, should be telling Muslims to stop stoning gay people.

On Better Angels of our Nature, Steven Pinker thoroughly demonstrate that spread of information and reason are, by far, the greatest causes of the reduction of violence. So the best thing we can do to accelerate the process is: tell the truth, be honest, stop lying about it.

Great book, I highly recommend that you read it: http://www.amazon.com/The-Better-Angels-Our-Nature/dp/0143122010

u/i77 · 1 pointr/scifi

> Some yes, but I've found that pretty much all of these differences come down to reproduction and child rearing.

That's the politically correct belief. Apparently is not true. That's why I mentioned as an example autism, which affects males a lot more than females (like four times more).

> Statistics are a human creation used to better organize data and to recognize patterns.

I'm not sure what are you trying to say with this, other than dismiss statistics.

> It's worth adding that your social environment, especially why you're developing as a child, can actually effect the development of your brain.

Sure, but not so much as we used to think. There are studies with adopted children (different genes, same upbringing), separated twins (the reverse), etc.

Again, I recommend this wonderful book.

u/babydave371 · 1 pointr/anime

>I have no idea how to judge this kind of stuff on my own and would really like to learn how to.

It is gonna be the same as any other narrative medium. So maybe try reading something like this or this.

But it generally comes down to basic stuff such as keeping the characters consistent, giving characters more than one trait unless that is the point of the character, making sure the characters act according to their traits instead of the plot, etc.

So examples for FMA:B. An example of good characters writing (and I would always start with specific instances and moving outward to assessing the character as a whole rather than starting with the character as a whole and moving inward) would be [FMA:B Spoilers](/s "Greed's refusal to go along with Father's plans . Greed's obvious trait is that he is greedy and so he only looks out for himself. Going along with Father's plans would not be in his interests and so he doesn't"). An example of bad character writing in the show is [FMA:B Spoilers](/s "Scar's about face when the other Ishvalen in Briggs tells him that he is trying to reform Amestris from the inside. Scar suddenly being chill with everything all of a sudden doesn't really make sense seeing as up until that point he had been filled with wroth. Sure he might soften slightly but a casual conversation shouldn't cause such a massive change. It is inconsistant with what we've learnt about his character so far. ")

Of course it should be noted that good character writing does not always necessarily correlate with our personal enjoyment nor vice versa. They tend to agree but not always. 'Good character writing' is merely a measure of how close the writing is to rules and systems that we've figured out almos always work pretty well, and by not sticking to them things tend to go wrong.

I hope this helps a little!

u/dkusa · 1 pointr/linguistics

If you're interested (especially) in why people "do the things they do," I recommend Ray Jackendoff - Patterns in the Mind, as well as pretty much any Steven Pinker book you can get your hands on -- The Blank Slate was an excellent read that goes well beyond basic linguistics as well. These two are some of my favorite "layman" authors for psycholinguistics. Enjoy!

u/yager13 · 2 pointsr/samharris

>This doesn't make you not racist.

That's just semantics.

> And what are those racial differences?

Let's start with the obvious. Clearly, given the sheer size of the population, Chinese and Indians ought to dominate the Olympics 100m-dash. But they do not. Almost all of the medalists have come from descendants of West Africa. Interestingly, as of late, Jamaicans have outperformed African-Americans despite coming from poverty-stricken environment with inferior training infrastructure. Same story with long distance running and marathons, where East Africans have dominated. These people are at a severe environmental disadvantage, so the case for cultural difference doesn't make sense in this case. So what is the reason? Well, a gene called ACTN3 - sometimes called a "sprint gene" - which is expressed primarily in fast-twich muscle fibers, were found in high frequency among the West-Africans. So, more ACTN3 genes you have, the more likely you will run faster in short distance. On the other hand, slow-twitch fibers aid you in endurance sports - such as distance running - and East Africans tend to have more of them than fast-twich fibers.

If you are interested, have a look at "The Sports Gene" by David Epstein, where he goes into depth on this topic.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Sports-Gene-Extraordinary-Performance/dp/161723012X

The science is already pretty clear on this issue : There are meaningful, statistically significant differences between varying ethnic/racial groups. And this is common sense, if you think about it. The reason Japanese are shorter on average than Dinka people of Sudan is not because they are more poor and nutritionally deficient.

So, the burden is on you to explain to me why there can't be any differences in terms of mental capacity or personality traits between races - of which there are some scientific evidence, although not as conclusive - when there are clear differences regarding physical makeup and ability. If you take animals of the same species and let them evolve in separate environments for centuries, exposed to varying degrees and kinds of selection pressure, they will show significant differences in physical strength and temperaments. Why shouldn't the same law of nature apply to human beings? Not all scientific facts are in favor of liberal/leftist ideology. Just as right-wingers are in denial about climate change, liberals have their fair share when it comes to scientific blind spot.

>I don't think it's so much that the west are the only ones who have done it. It's that the west has done it to far greater effect and has done far greater damage with it than anyone else. And sure, I'll bet if Southeast Asia was in a position to colonize Europe, they would have. I don't see why that should matter, though.

>You're not supposed to "feel sorry" for Southeast Asia as though the region itself has feelings. Individual people were harmed by colonialism, and are still by its lingering effects.

That's just sheer display of ignorance.

You can easily make a case that Mongol Invasion of Europe and other continents in 13th century were more devastating in terms of the number of people died as a proportion of the world population at that time. Do you also feel sorry for all the casualty deaths incurred by Muslim invasion of the West that happened throughout Middle Ages and up until 19th century by the Ottoman Empire? If you do not, you have very partial understanding and biased view of world history.

Yes, the West has done some damage to the world in recent times. At the same time, a lot of great modern scientific breakthroughs and technological innovation of the Western civilization have brought about unprecedented amounts of wealth to this world. People are living longer than ever due to advances in medicine, and we are living in one of the most safest, peaceful, prosperous, and most egalitarian (with regards to human rights) time period than ever before.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Better-Angels-Our-Nature/dp/0143122010

u/OddJackdaw · 6 pointsr/DebunkThis

So the first thing to debunk is your title. This does not attempt to show "overall female inferiority". It is explicitly dealing with the role of women in combat. It is trivial to debunk your claim, harder to debunk theirs. No cherry-picked list of statistics remotely proves "overall inferiority."

Ok, now as for their claims: I will agree with one core observation they make: They are right that "gender equality"-- in a purely biological sense-- is a myth. There are very clear and obvious differences between men and women. The physical differences are obvious, and the mental and emotional differences should be clear also. But note: "unequal" does not mean "inferior." Until you cite a specific task, you cannot make broad claims about inferiority.

That said, their conclusion-- "Females are clearly unsuitable for combat"-- completely wrong.

The differences between the genders are statistical, not absolute. To use the first item in their list as an example, sure, the average woman has 35% less muscle mass-- yet there are a shitload of women who can kick the average guys ass. So on any given stat, some women will actually rate higher than some men. Some women are clearly unsuitable for combat, but so are some men.

If this is a topic that interests you, check out Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate for an excellent examination of the role biolgical differences have on human behavior. It goes into the topic in detail and shows how both the political right and the political left are almost completely wrong on the topic (which is pretty much to be expected when people try to determine reality by only choosing facts that match up with their ideology).

Edit: "Until you cite a specific task, you cannot make broad claims about inferiority" sounds a bit like I am endorsing the view that one gender is inferior. That is absolutely not the case. It is certainly true that in specific contexts one gender may be better than the other on average, but beyond those specific contexts any claims of superiority are absurd.

u/succulentcrepes · 2 pointsr/changemyview

If you find the video interesting, I highly recommend the book on the same subject. I'm reading it right now, and if offers a pretty good case (so far) that we should be optimistic about the future, largely by showing that humanity and life has been consistently getting better throughout history so far. We have a natural tendency to assume the past was better than it really was.

u/Marmun-King · 1 pointr/videos

I initially followed the principles of Stoicism, which is a philosophy that's very close to the principles of CBT. So my first resource was /r/Stoicism, where you can find things like this and this that have direct correlation with CBT principles. Greek and Roman literature might be hard to get into, but there are very readable translations and the principles are applicable.

Of course, not everyone is interested in philosophy, so my recommendation would be to find something along the lines of Judith Beck's Cognitive Therapy, or other similar resources that are based on research. I can't really recommend else because I haven't read much from other authors.

But in general I would recommend reading about cognitive biases in general, along the lines of this, this, this, or this. Being conscious of how everybody thinks might help you see some negative spirals in your life, and can help you change the environment that might lead you to that negativity.

But again, professional help can be very useful, so definitely consult a professional who is maybe better for you. Good luck!

u/DalinarK · 1 pointr/CGPGrey

I think Grey may know this, but we're more like 50 or 200 on a neurological level, rather than two. Quite a lot of our brain systems don't talk to each other, not just the right and left hemisphere in corpus callosotomy patients. Robert Kurzban has a great book about this: Evolution and the modular mind

Edit - Should have mentioned, but he makes a pretty convincing case (moreso than Grey imo) that one's coherent sense of self is mostly an illusion.

u/truebuji · 1 pointr/changemyview

Granted, i know nothing of how that world works im new to it, and i just read the books coming out of it(they are really good). I just thought it was an amazing paper and that if someone was going to convince the people who believe that gender is all a social construct, it would be someone who understands the subject better than i do, who had lived trough it, and who's has been within the community, but if you want a better one, how about all the one's cited by Steven Pinker on the Blank Slate https://www.amazon.com/Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial-Nature/dp/1501264338

there is also other books, like https://www.amazon.com/Why-Gender-Matters-Teachers-Differences/dp/0767916255

there is plenty of other's as a quick Amazon search will show, but i know mostly those 2.



But if citations is what you want, well so be it, here it is the most cited worked i could find on scholar.google.com
http://imgur.com/a/XXHEw

I investigated and it does delve into the average behavioral differences.

And here is a link to it:
http://doi.apa.org/PsycBOOKS/toc/10370

Anyways, im stepping back, it bothers me a lot that people ignore what i consider to be known as proven science, like evolution, but at the same time i understand to a degree that i don't understand everything, and that perhaps, im doing more wrong by trying to shove it down people throats... the memo didn't help, just another show of reactance[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactance_(psychology)], and it got me as well i realize that, i re read it again, and i did realize a few things were he could just have saved his commentary and just ask for a look small look at the biological component that is overlooked, soooo... believe what you want, you don't like the article or what i say you don't have to believe it, thanks for your time.

u/jamestown112 · 1 pointr/PoliticalHumor

I think you're missing the point here.

Many don't like Obama, but is anybody really excited enough about Romney to post pro-Romney stuff? Apparently this guy is . . .

Also: The caricature you described fits Romney supporters quite well. Visit a trailer park sometime.

Obama is a politician; they are all hypocrites for some very interesting reasons. A good book to check out was written by a colleague of mine.

u/MonsieurJongleur · 2 pointsr/AskWomenOver30

Hoow. Well, I'm in the middle of re-reading The E-Myth, since it's a good refresher and I find myself having to scale up one of my businesses.

I'm looking at (re)reading Deep Survival next week because I'm going on retreat. I have saved it for a close reading and copious notes because I think there's something similar in the people who survive dangerous situations and the people who survive and thrive in starting small businesses.

I'm in the middle of The Social Animal, by David Brooks, which I adore. I think I'm going to keep it. (That's saying something, since I read voraciously, but I have only one shelf of books I felt was worth revisiting.) The way he's tackled the book is very interesting and it's incredibly deftly done.

I have Republic of Thieves out from the library, the newest in the Gentleman Bastards series. I don't know when I'm going to get to it. When I start a fiction book I tend to read it straight through, and nothing else gets done, so I'm loathe to start one.

I also have TapDancing to Work the new Warren Buffet autobiography, The Compass of Pleasure (which has been on my wishlist so long I've forgotten what I wanted it for) and Medieval Mercenaries a book about the history of mercenaries. I've always been very interested in mercenaries. I don't know why.

Today a friend recommended The Small Business Life Cycle which I already own, so it will be moving up on the list. I really admire the author, a US Army veteran and philosopher.

u/justsomemammal · 3 pointsr/BabyBumps

I am starting to feel like a shill for this book because it's the third time I've mentioned it on reddit in as many days. There is a wonderful book by the cognitive neuroscientist Steven Pinker called The Better Angels of Our Nature. It talks about, in great detail (maybe too much), all of the overwhelming evidence that we live in a more peaceful and harmonious time than ever before in civilization. I read it last year when I was pregnant and having some of the same thoughts you are and it did help to put my mind at ease.

Every organism is always dealing with some kind of threat and the possibility of an imminent catastrophe. All we can do is work with the environment we're in and do our best. So far, so good :)

u/d3pd · 0 pointsr/worldnews

>We have mass surveillance

When physicists at CERN investigate reality, the do so using staggeringly good technology, everything from enormous particle accelerators to vast detectors to the most advanced data analysis using machine intelligence.

Having information about things makes you good at doing things. What matters is what you do. I think that could be argued for surveillance. Having complete surveillance of everything (meaning the government having surveillance on the people and the people having a completely transparent government) could be fine if what is done with that intelligence is genuinely for the benefit of civilisation.

>We have the world's biggest prisons.

Yes, and the mass incarceration (particularly of the likes of those who self-medicate using currently-illegal chemicals) shall be remembered as one of the worst breaches of human rights of our time.

>against nations that never threatened us

Why "us"? If there is genocide, intervention is mandated by the convention.

>We are by far the most prolific killers of human beings outside our own borders in the post-WW2 period.

Technology has improved and we are far more targeted in our approach to fighting. However, the world is on a clear trend towards peace: http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Better-Angels-Our-Nature/dp/0141034645

u/johngthomas · 1 pointr/u_ZapTheSwampWorldWide

William Barr would benefit from checking out Peter Singer and Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek’s recent work. They're real utilitarians, not pretend ones. That might also help him better understand that leading secular moralists are not relativists or subjectivists and that their morality is about making the world a better place. Barr would also benefit from reading about the moral progress we Homo sapiens have made by reading Steven Pinker’s two recent works: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/utilitarianism-a-very-short-introduction-9780198728795?cc=au&lang=en& https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010 https://www.amazon.com/Enlightenment-Now-Science-Humanism-Progress/dp/0525427570

u/Bubbassauro · 1 pointr/Psychonaut

One thing that helps for me is to think how much I would like to see the future, and then I remember that we are living in the future of so many past lives. How many brilliant minds a hundred years ago wouldn't give anything to see the technology that we take for granted today. I think we're living in exciting times.

Your journey is unique. Thousands of years of humanity before you and hopefully thousands more after you won't be as lucky to say "I lived both before and after cell phones and internet".

And if you are looking for something more concrete to convince yourself that today is not that bad and to see the good in humanity (if you like to read long books), I recommend: The Better Angels of Our Nature Surely it doesn't do away with the all the bad things but it helps to put things in perspective.

u/Autodidact2 · 2 pointsr/DebateAChristian

I don't base my views on my own experience, but on more objective sources. You may be interested in, and surprised by, The Better Angels of our Nature, by Stephen Pinker. It is fascinating and surprising.

Also, I'm almost 59, so I'm not sure whether I'll have another 20 years or not.

u/TheAbyssGazesAlso · 2 pointsr/starcontrol

I highly recommend both Sapiens, and also The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Steven Pinker (which Bill Gates calls "the most inspiring book I've ever read")

They'll make you think (a lot) but they're good reads and super interesting.

u/The_Mighty_Atom · 6 pointsr/exchristian

Brilliant minds have been attempting to answer this question for centuries, and there doesn't seem to be a clear-cut answer yet. It remains to be seen whether there ever will be.

If you'd like to do some research, check out the book The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature by Steven Pinker. Pinker has challenged the idea that humans are essentially a blank slate, and in turn, he has been challenged by those who disagree with him. There's a big debate that rages on the subject --- you might find it interesting.

What I would say is that human nature is a mixture of good and evil. We're both a product of our external environment and of our internal choices and characteristics. The dividing line between those two things can be difficult to determine.

We can definitely rule out the Christian (specifically the Calvinist) understanding of human nature, however. The idea that human beings are inherently completely evil, save for the intervention of a deity and the existence of civil governments and laws, is largely at odds with large portions of human history.

Despite what we hear on the evening news, the world today is far better than it ever has been, and it is only continuing to improve in many ways. I think it's safe for you to err on the side of taking a positive view of humanity.

u/roboroller · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Juliane Koepcke's story a long with a bunch of other super badass survival stories are told in Laurence Gonzales's book Deep Survival. It's a pretty great book. Not only does it tell some pretty harrowing survival tales, but he goes into the psychology of surviving and tackles exactly how and why some people survive while others don't and how it's not often the people you would expect. It's really interesting.

u/wothy · 5 pointsr/consulting

Personally I've found there to be few helpful books which directly relate to management consulting / business strategy. The only one that I've found really helpful is:

  • Winning - an overall look on business strategies and philosophies used by Jack Welch (former CEO of GE)

    But here are some books that are very helpful in developing people / soft skills essential to effective consultants:

  • Getting to Yes - an incredible book on negotating skills.
  • How to Argue and Win Every Time - not as argumentative as it sounds, this is a great book which is hugely helpful on how to present your positions and how to get the best outcome for everyone in a situation.
  • Influence - brilliant book on the ways in which we are influenced to do things.
  • The 48 Laws of Power - a very Machiavellian put pragmatic look on the ways in which personal power is gained / lost.
  • Vital Lies, Simple Truths - how to recognise self deception that we're all prone to and how to overcome its limitations
  • The Blank Slate - a mindblowing book on human psychology and what we're naturally predisposed to be. Helps you to better understand people and their motivations in not just business but all aspects of life. Read from Part 2 onwards.
u/kater_tot · 1 pointr/Parenting

I recently read Setting Limits for your Strong Willed Child and it's been working great for my 2.5 year old. He's not even particularly 'strong willed,' we just don't know wtf we're doing with discipline so this has really helped. Some of the examples with the older kids in the book seem a bit restrictive but for basic limit setting and consequence based problem solving it's great.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0770436595/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1404881657&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40
Three's awfully young for a kitten. I would not leave them unsupervised ever, and before your son even interacts with the cat, remind him that any hitting/chasing/ tail pulling means the cat gets 'put away' and then take the kitten away- hopefully to a toddler-free room with its food, water, and litter.

u/BoldnessReigns · 2 pointsr/INTP

I don't like planning, because planning is decision making, and decision making is limiting your options.

You're right about meeting any demand with an automatic refusal, but there is a huge difference between a demand and a suggestion, this is what I was referring to originally as planning vs controlling.

Imagine I'm going to come up with cool ideas of fun things for you and me to do and ask you if you want to do them, does that sound bad? That's what I would consider planning for someone else.

Your Taco Bell example isn't really about making plans, its about breaking plans. An INTP would be very unhappy to change a plan that's already been decided precisely because we don't like planning. It takes so much thinking to finally come to a decision that once something is decided it is decided. If I've already been through all that to decide on Taco Bell I don't want to go back to the drawing board and start thinking about a new option, this is me avoiding going back to planning.

As for the food-related boundaries, I'm surprised to hear that is an INTP thing, and don't really understand why it would be. However, I'm afraid of new restaurants for exactly the reasons you describe. That said, I've learned to face that fear and be willing to try new restaurants more, and I definitely recommend working through that issue as it is very socially limiting.

But going back to planning vs controlling, its not 'carte blanche permission' unless its controlling. I wouldn't want someone deciding on things I didn't have a say in at all, but I would rather have someone else come up with the options, so long as I still have the ability to say no if I want. If I try to pick a restaurant myself, I'll open up yelp and see 1000 options, and think about the pros and cons of each one and alternately decide why each one can't work or is good and never really come to a decision. If I really have to pick I'll probably just end up picking the same place I've been to a million times because I can't convince myself a new option is the right one and I'll be kind of unhappy with that decision because its boring. This is not fun for me, a bunch of indecisiveness followed by doing the same thing I'd always do. If someone else has basically picked one or a few options it makes it much easier to convince myself that's a good idea and I'll actually try something new and be much happier.

As for me being INTP vs INTJ, I'm pretty sure. I've done a lot of reading on it and this book and this description describe me extremely accurately.

u/Capolan · 3 pointsr/IAmA

Read "Emotional Intelligence" and "Deep Survival". Seriously. Go google them right now. If you like the human brain - get those. Absolutely fascinating books. Trust me.

Let me know your thoughts on this.

Here: Links for you

Emotional Intelligence

Deep Survival

u/Demortus · 148 pointsr/worldnews

The world is way more peaceful and prosperous than it has been at nearly any other point in human history. Take for instance Rwanda. Two decades ago it was engaged in one of the worst genocides in human history. Now it is run by a very efficient government that has banned tribalism and is presiding over some of the fastest gains in human development in the world.

That doesn't mean that there aren't areas where things are getting worse, but the overall trend is generally positive.

Edit: A lot of you are making valid points that there are some important trends moving in a negative direction: climate change, environmental degradation, the fraying of the international liberal order. While it is still true that humanity has never been more peaceful than it has today (this is objectively true across a wide variety of metrics), I agree that these are pressing problems that if not addressed quickly, threaten our survival as a species in the long-term. But, I want to push back against the deep despair that I know many of you feel, because humanity has survived worse.

Around 70,000 years ago, humanity faced the greatest crisis in its history. A volcanic explosion of gargantuan proportions caused global temperatures to drop as much as 20 degrees in many places. This change caused a massive decline in our population to as few as a few hundred or thousand individuals. But we endured, despite having virtually no recognizable technology to aid us. We bounced back and 60,000 years later, we were building cities and had colonized almost the entire planet. We are now facing the second greatest threat our species has ever seen, but now we have something we never had before: we have science. We have technology. And we have governments that can harness the wealth and intelligence of billions of people to serve our collective will, if we choose to use them. I am not saying that will be enough, but it is a much better starting point than that faced by our ancestors. If I were to make a bet, I'd bet on our survival at a minimum, as humanity has already survived worse with less. I'd even say that given all that we have to fight climate change, that we will probably suffer nowhere near as much as we did then.

Edit2: Thanks for the gold!

u/plebian-seppuku · 3 pointsr/RandomKindness

I love this offer! I've been looking for a PDF copy of this book for a while. I've been studying tarot as a tool for introspection, and container for self care, and would love a copy as it's sort of the holy grail of books in that vein!

https://www.amazon.com/Holistic-Tarot-Integrative-Approach-Personal-ebook/dp/B00LRHUJ9C

u/allthewhite_horses · 1 pointr/ADHD

I'm big on Tarot as a sort of psychological tool/way to organize my thoughts, and my bible on it is this book Holistic Tarot. It has a really thorough introductory section that establishes a good framework for using Tarot as a tool for self-discovery, and is a really comprehensive resource-- I can't recommend it enough!

As an aside, if you feel overwhelmed by learning the full Tarot/all the baggage it carries, an Oracle Deck is a good way to get your feet wet with cartomancy without getting too bogged down. This is the deck I have and I'm in love with it, but if you go to Amazon and google "oracle cards" or go to a New Age store and ask about Oracle decks, it's easy enough to find one that vibes with you.

u/JasonLooseArrow · 1 pointr/CampingandHiking

Don't bring a handgun. Statistically, there aren't any boogeymen out there. Perhaps the best thing you can do for you and your parents is to bring with you the best survival gear in the world, a well-stocked brain. For this, you already likely have everything you need. But here are a couple of good books:

http://www.amazon.com/Deep-Survival-Who-Lives-Dies/dp/0393326152
http://www.amazon.com/98-6-Degrees-Keeping-Your-Alive/dp/1586852345

Source: 30-day-a-year backpacker and SAR team member.

u/nckmiz · 2 pointsr/IOPsychology

I strongly agree with this. I think what separates a good I/O from a straight statistician is the theory and understanding when and how to apply specific measurement techniques.

I would strongly recommend Denny Borsboom's book Measuring the Mind for a conceptual and philosophical discussion on psychological measurement.

https://www.amazon.com/Measuring-Mind-Conceptual-Contemporary-Psychometrics/dp/0521102847

u/fullstop_upshop · 2 pointsr/CampingandHiking

[Not Without Peril: 150 Years of Misadventure on the Presidential Range of New Hampshire] (https://www.amazon.com/Not-Without-Peril-Misadventure-Presidential/dp/1934028320/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1469484204&sr=1-1&keywords=not+without+peril+150+years+of+misadventure+on+the+presidential+range+of+new+hampshire) by Nicholas Howe is a fascinating book filled with hiking and backcountry history, adventure, and misadventure.

Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies and Why by Laurence Gonzales is an interesting look at survival in the wilderness, which is always handy for those of us who spend a good deal of time in the backcountry.

u/iVowi · 2 pointsr/mbti

It’s possible I’ve seen others mention their results are different based on mood. So the online tests aren’t that great.

I became more confident in my result after reading some books about my type.

Such as : https://www.amazon.com/Comprehensive-INFP-Survival-Guide/dp/1945796154/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539050811&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=infp+survival+guide&dpPl=1&dpID=412knVQuKlL&ref=plSrch

Iam no parent but I found this book to also be interesting.

https://www.amazon.com/Nurture-Nature-Understand-Childs-Personality/dp/0316845132/ref=mp_s_a_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539050902&sr=8-1-fkmr1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=nurture+by+nature+mbti

Iam not sure how accurate MBTI is, but I do know it can be an effective tool for introspection.

u/bloomindaedalus · 2 pointsr/AskMen

Yeah i wasn't being snarky. just dorkily name-dropping. (cause im uncool like dat)

In fact, as somebody who almost seriously went to graduate school for linguistics and/or cognitive science, I can attest that though Pinker is an old hero of mine, when he started getting all positive about the world i wasn't all in at first..

But he is persuasive.

.

For those playing "life sucks but i want to believe it is getting better" along at home here's a start:

​

https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1539983039&sr=8-2&keywords=books+by+steven+pinker

​

https://www.amazon.com/Enlightenment-Now-Science-Humanism-Progress/dp/0525427570/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539983039&sr=8-1&keywords=books+by+steven+pinker

​

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1487001681/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_taft_p1_i11

​

​

u/mhornberger · 17 pointsr/JoeRogan

His book The Better Angels of Our Nature changed my life, and my entire outlook on the world. I've given away 4-5 copies since then, and I encourage everyone to read it. I also loved The Blank Slate. About to start his new book, Enlightenment Now.

u/Praesentius · 2 pointsr/atheism

I get the feeling that you probably already know about this stuff, but here is is anyway: Steven Pinker at Edinburgh

And the book.

The book is pretty long, but worth it from cover to cover. The lecture at Edinburgh is a nice summary.

u/ThorLives · 2 pointsr/PurplePillDebate

Just a quick comment. Your post reminded me of this book:

> Robert Kurzban shows us that the key to understanding our behavioral inconsistencies lies in understanding the mind's design. The human mind consists of many specialized units designed by the process of evolution by natural selection. While these modules sometimes work together seamlessly, they don't always, resulting in impossibly contradictory beliefs, vacillations between patience and impulsiveness, violations of our supposed moral principles, and overinflated views of ourselves.

> This modular, evolutionary psychological view of the mind undermines deeply held intuitions about ourselves, as well as a range of scientific theories that require a "self" with consistent beliefs and preferences. Modularity suggests that there is no "I." Instead, each of us is a contentious "we"--a collection of discrete but interacting systems whose constant conflicts shape our interactions with one another and our experience of the world.

> In clear language, full of wit and rich in examples, Kurzban explains the roots and implications of our inconsistent minds, and why it is perfectly natural to believe that everyone else is a hypocrite.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Everyone-Else-Hypocrite-Evolution/dp/0691154392

u/lizerpetty · 5 pointsr/Parenting

Looks like you've got a SWC (strong willed child) on your hands. Do you want a weak willed child? There are books on how to handle a strong willed child. Here is what we do for my daughter. (She is 4.5)

When we are presented with inappropriate behavior from her. We tell her "this behavior is inappropriate and unacceptable and you will not get anything from it. Go sit on the steps, this is a time out for your inappropriate behavior" if she won't go to time out, she goes directly to her room. If she won't go to her room we take her to her room. We put her in her room and tell her to count to 50 to calm down. (It usually stops here, if it escalates) If she tries to come out of her room, the door gets locked. If she hangs on the door and bangs on the door, she gets threatened with a spanking, if she continues to bang on the door we go ahead with spanking. (Spanking is four swats on the bottom) she is told if she continues to bang on the door she will get another spanking. She usually doesn't go this far. She usually gets spanked about 2-3 times a year. We have been very consistent and most unacceptable behavior stops with a time out.

She needs to learn how to cope with her emotions on her own. You can help her do this. Counting works great for this.

I suggest reading: https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0770436595/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=HM9P1BV18AG37RQERGBV&dpPl=1&dpID=51URtF9fnSL

It's difficult to begin implementing a discipline plan, but children need discipline. Otherwise your daughter will end up like this: https://youtu.be/bIyW_-6IILk

As for food and meals, we give our children 3-4 options for dinner and we try to get them to help cook. We usually don't have issues with eating. Good Luck.

Oh the down votes I shall get for spanking my child. I can just feel my karma go negative. I'm just no good at Reddit. In fact I bet my comment will be removed.

u/Atu_IX · 2 pointsr/occult

I don't think there's an “ultimate guide” out there, since there are so many different ways of seeing and interpreting the tarot, not to mention, there are lots of different decks and philosophies behind them. I think we're bound to be jumping from one book to the next, just as we do in every other field of interest, speaking generally.

Having said that, there is actually one book that comes to mind, and that's Holistic Tarot by Benebell Wen.

> I've started, then stopped, then started then stopped over and over because everyone has a different opinion on how it should be done and frankly, it's just discouraging.

You sound sooo much like me, I feel I should say something about that (not sure how much of this really applies to your situation — basically I will write this as if I were talking to my past self): Whatever book or guide you decide to follow, stick with that. You will always encounter different opinions, some of them completely dismissive of the path you chose to follow. Allow them to be and please, allow yourself to ignore them. They will always be there for you to expand your horizons, but in the meantime, they're nothing but noise. What you want right now is to have a strong foundation and build up until you reach a certain level of understanding that you can consider to be “comprehensive”. Once you've done that then, by all means, open the gates and let all esoteric books come your way. 👍

u/iowanaquarist · 4 pointsr/DelphiMurders

This book is a great read on this topic to help gain perspective.

u/ultimape · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

I highly recommend picking up Steven Pinker's book "The Blank Slate"

He goes deeply into the history and effects of this type of thinking and how it is used to subvert our understanding of ourselves.

He has a TED talk on the subject. And a couple of lengthy talks at various institutions that are similar to this one The national academies

He also has a great, if tangential, talk on his other book "the language instinct" over at Google authors, and a very well done one for "the floating universty" over at bigthink.

u/LocalAmazonBot · 3 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Here are some links for the product in the above comment for different countries:

Amazon Smile Link: http://smile.amazon.com/The-Better-Angels-Our-Nature/dp/0143122010


|Country|Link|
|:-----------|:------------|
|UK|amazon.co.uk|
|Spain|amazon.es|
|France|amazon.fr|
|Germany|amazon.de|
|Japan|amazon.co.jp|
|Canada|amazon.ca|
|Italy|amazon.it|
|China|amazon.cn|




To help donate money to charity, please have a look at this thread.

This bot is currently in testing so let me know what you think by voting (or commenting). The thread for feature requests can be found here.

u/nubbled21 · 2 pointsr/CampingandHiking

Hey there. YES. Touching the Void is a must. If you like it, go ahead and read Deep Survival. That book changed my life. So amazing.

u/mac_question · 4 pointsr/space

I don't think we're going to cure aging for another couple of centuries. The human body is an unnecessarily complicated piece of hardware just for supplying nutrients and input/outputs for a 2 pound chunk of grey matter.

I do think that we'll be downloading our consciousness to a digital medium within the next 100 years, though. Or otherwise keeping brains alive in vats, with the ability to communicate digitally.

Then things get weird. You can either live forever in a VR world, or you need a robotic body to travel in.

The poor will never be "euthanized" as such, although it will take money to live forever.

And if that sounds like some kind of horrible world with inequality you couldn't possibly abide, well... yeah. Super fucked up, but we're already in that world.

And things have never been as great as they currently are, and continue to get better.

So yeah, there will be an awkward period where some rich folks are chillin in VR heaven and tons of poor children are still dying of starvation. But the long-term trend should be for the best.

I feel like the #1 thing that isn't talked about is the rate of change we've had for 50+ years, and which has been accelerating, has absolutely no precedence in history. Shit is nuts.

u/backtowriting · 0 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I told you, quite clearly I thought, that I got my information from this from a scholarly book written by a Harvard scientist - not from the partisan press.

Here's the Amazon link to the book..

Incidentally, the same work explains how capitalism may well have contributed to the decline of violence throughout history. Countries that trade together tend not to fight each-other.

Maybe it's just me, but I think that one of the best received science books of the past decade is likely less partisan than 'The Black Book of Capitalism".

Edit: I can't even find 'the Black Book of Capitalism' on Amazon. The first reference I could find using Google was on some Marxist website.

u/byrd_nick · 26 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

Your reading of the testimony (and opening statement) seems to disregard indirect speech.

  1. Comey said that he took Trump's request about "I hope you can see to ...letting Flynn go" was an attempt to "change the investigation". That's how indirect speech works. You make commands and threats indirectly. (E.g., "I hope you will be not be late to work again tomorrow.")

  2. "I need loyalty. l expect loyalty." Is a classic loyalty pledge. And it's pretty direct. I don't see how that's open to dispute. If it's indirect, it's barely indirect.

    For more on this kind of indirect speech, see chapter 8 of Stephen Pinker's The Stuff Of Thought.
u/TooManyInLitter · 3 pointsr/DebateAnAtheist

> What are some popular books on atheist morals that atheists live by?

Another strawman where one attempts to argue that atheism is anything more than a position/belief in the existence of God(s)? Really lightning?

However, as an atheist, or one that is not tied to a specific Religious text(s) from which to derive morality, I will start with popular books that I have rejected as a source of a sustainable and workable morality against the moral precept of: On a societal basis, reduce actual or potential harm and pain and suffering (evil) and increase actual or potential happiness (good):

  • Qur'an (and the Hadiths related to the expressed moral words and actions of the Prophet, the "Most Perfect of All Men," who is said to be the best example of following the Timeless Absolute Morality of Allah)
  • Bible
  • Torah/Tanakh
  • Vedas

    For books I recommend to assist one in examining their own morality, with the goal of developing a workable and supportable contempary morality, I suggest:

  • Alexander, Richard. The biology of moral systems. Routledge, 2017. (PDF download link for the first part of the book)
  • Friesen, Bruce K. Moral systems and the evolution of human rights. Springer, 2014.
  • Hauser, Marc. Moral minds: How nature designed our universal sense of right and wrong. Ecco/HarperCollins Publishers, 2006.
  • Gewirth, Alan. Reason and morality. University of Chicago Press, 1981.

    Lightning, usually I would ask you to address the flip side of your post - you know, so that the post is not a low-effort post where you merely make assertions against atheists or Theists of other Religions; but in this case, I suspect that for this post topic, the question of what reference(s) of where you, a Muslim, gets your morality, the answer is obvious. So, instead, I will ask - How is the Absolute morality/moral tenets, as expressed in the Qur'an and with the required supplementation by subjective Hadith, supportable as "Good" (with your presentation of what "Good" is) and is acceptable as a source of moral guidance in modern society across all actions and circumstances?
u/SyntheticAperture · 14 pointsr/Colonizemars

As someone left of center and an environmentalist.... Free markets and enlightenment values have lifted humanity out of squalor and superstition into modern day lives of plenty and comfort. Check out Steven Pinker's works if you don't believe me.

As long as we bring both to Mars with us, we'll be fine.

u/ifonly12 · 4 pointsr/books

Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why? by Laurence Gonzales

Swimming to Antarctica : Tales of Long Distance Swimming by Lynne Cox

Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers by Mary Roach

I was home for a holiday, and found these laying around my mother's book stash. She recommended all of them and I thoroughly enjoy each one. Although, usually I read fiction. All of these books are intriguing, well-written, and educational. If you never read non-fiction a good place to start is reading Mary Roach. Here is her TED talk about orgasms.

u/Amp4All · 8 pointsr/AcademicPsychology

There are a few titles I really love. I hope you like a few things on the list, if you have any questions let me know.

u/VeggieLover · 9 pointsr/Parenting

I have two books to recommend which might help, although our daughter is only 6 and had many of the explosive/destructive bursts that you describe (they are greatly improved now).


Setting Limits with Your Strong-Willed Child, Revised and Expanded 2nd Edition: Eliminating Conflict by Establishing CLEAR, Firm, and Respectful Boundaries

Reading and implementing the techniques in this book recently stopped almost all of the behaviors that we were going crazy over. Our daughter was getting more and more abusive with name-calling, hitting, breaking things, etc and after reading this book and implementing the techniques, it is 95% gone. When it still happens, we now feel like we have tools to deal with it calmly but firmly.

The Explosive Child

This book focuses on preventing explosions and managing explosions proactively/in the moment. It focuses as well on the type of child that acts out in this way, and how to deal with it. A co-worker recommended this book to me after dealing with his son's explosive outbursts. His son's therapist recommended it to him.

Our daughter also showed little remorse for things like pushing her brother down the stairs, hitting him in the face, breaking doors, etc. One of the biggest realizations to me was that my wife and I were being permissive in our parenting approach, and the lack of firm consequences was causing our daughter to act out more. The Setting Limits book describes the three parenting styles (authoritarian, permissive, mixed) quite articulately.

u/seriouslyslowloris · 1 pointr/INTP

This is a pretty good book specifically for INTPs who wan to work on personal development. I'm not 100% done with it, but it is definitely worth reading.

u/jcbsmnz · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

Glad I could help! For more info, you should check out Steven Pinker's The better Angels of Our Nature.

u/travisdy · 1 pointr/ffxiv

Human nature isn't a matter of opinion--modern psychology and associated disciplines show humans to genuinely care about behaviors that show good will toward most strangers. The idea of humans as having a selfish core with a friendly exterior has been labeled "veneer theory" by the leading primatologist Frans de Waal and thoroughly debunked in that form. The idea that humans are generally unsociable and won't be nice to strangers if given zero motivation to do so has been shown to be incorrect by social psychology. The "Lord of the Flies" view of humans as unable to self-organize in uncertain times is also false as argued by cognitive psychologists. Humans are severely interested in being nice to other humans, according to the latest multicultural research in moral psychology.

I could give scientific articles instead of books, but these books are actually fun to read!

u/dcunit3d · 5 pointsr/tarot

I would recommend buying Benebell Wen’s book Holistic Tarot. It’s a great intro to Tarot & western esotericism that covers’s everything from beginner to advanced.

u/deus_voltaire · 11 pointsr/news

It's not a study so much as a thesis that analyzes many different studies, but I would highly recommend Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature as a jumping off point.

u/procrastimom · 1 pointr/news

Read “The Better Angels of Our Nature” by Steven Pinker. It’s an amazing book about the history of violence in societies and it’s steady decline. (I really recommend the audio book).

The Better Angels of Our Nature

u/ThoreauWeighCount · 1 pointr/news

I find books like Steven Pinker's "Better Angels of our Nature" helpful in remembering this. It enumerates and explains exactly what the poster you're replying to said: that in so many ways, we're making the world a better, less deadly place.

u/mikneleh · 2 pointsr/infp

In addition to 16personalities, I also took tests at personalityhacker.com, truity.com, personalityperfect.com, personalitymax.com, and onlinepersonalitytests.org.

For books, I just started reading Late Bloomers and plan to read Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World and The Comprehensive INFP Survival Guide next.

I also find the blog posts at Introvert Dear and Psychology Junkie very helpful.

EDIT: fixed some of the links

u/Newtothisredditbiz · 7 pointsr/blog

According to Steven Pinker's book, The Better Angels of our Nature, violence has been on the decline over the millennia, and we're living in the most peaceful times in human existence.

However, he says:

>The decline, to be sure, has not been smooth; it has not brought violence down to zero; and it is not guaranteed to continue.

Pinker presents five forces that favour peacefulness over violence, but there have always been people fighting against them. They are:

  • The Leviathan – the rise of the modern nation-state and judiciary "with a monopoly on the legitimate use of force," which "can defuse the [individual] temptation of exploitative attack, inhibit the impulse for revenge, and circumvent ... self-serving biases."

  • Commerce – the rise of "technological progress [allowing] the exchange of goods and services over longer distances and larger groups of trading partners," so that "other people become more valuable alive than dead" and "are less likely to become targets of demonization and dehumanization."

  • Feminization – increasing respect for "the interests and values of women."

  • Cosmopolitanism – the rise of forces such as literacy, mobility, and mass media, which "can prompt people to take the perspectives of people unlike themselves and to expand their circle of sympathy to embrace them."

  • The Escalator of Reason – an "intensifying application of knowledge and rationality to human affairs," which "can force people to recognize the futility of cycles of violence, to ramp down the privileging of their own interests over others', and to reframe violence as a problem to be solved rather than a contest to be won.

    We should be very concerned when leaders fight against these forces, because these forces are what make humanity better.
u/IUsedToBeACave · 1 pointr/politics

Pinker actually wrote a great book on this subject called The Better Angels of Our Nature.

u/ristoril · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

Just what was described in Pinker's Better Angels of Our Nature was good enough to make it clear that humans can be extensively and creatively despicable.

u/oyp · 14 pointsr/todayilearned

This slideshow is essentially the same thesis as Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature. A great book.

u/Bzerker01 · 3 pointsr/todayilearned

There is a great book on this subject, Called Better Angels of our Nature, which actually discusses this in depth.

u/SomeGoodInThisWorld · 1 pointr/Showerthoughts

"The Better Angels of Our Nature" is a great book about this by Steven Pinker

u/oddlylovely · 1 pointr/tarot

I haven’t dove into it, but I believe the Holistic Tarot takes a more psychological and less spiritual take. I like what I’ve read of it so far, although the book is HUGE.

u/timfitz42 · 4 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

Got a few days? LOL!

Start with the source material for The Better Angels Of Our Nature by Steve Pinker.

This is from a large group of data sets from many many sources compiled.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Better-Angels-Our-Nature/dp/0143122010

u/igrewold · 1 pointr/INTP

Sorry, I dunno what you are after.

If you meant, which is better, I dunno I just read the first book but maybe you can get an idea by seeing Amazon readers reviews:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00H7NWLJ6/#customerReviews

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LZU843T/#customerReviews

If you meant why not get the bundle, I think it is a good idea but because the single book is cheaper.


u/dragonlocke · 1 pointr/EsotericOccult

https://www.biddytarot.com/ is an excellent place to start. As far as books go, I'd say my favorite by far is the holistic tarot, I've been reading for two years and still pull something new from it every time.

https://www.amazon.com/Holistic-Tarot-Integrative-Approach-Personal/dp/158394835X&ved=2ahUKEwjYz66i6KbdAhWI-qQKHd-SCS0Q5OUBMAd6BAgEEAE&usg=AOvVaw0KMKbGPgI5VKFy1V7mNC3m

u/IamShadowBanned2 · -6 pointsr/AskMen

> Young girls talk a lot more

You could have stopped right there. I'm going to throw a recommendation for this book as its a good read:

http://www.amazon.com/Female-Brain-Louann-Brizendine/dp/0767920104

Again a teenage girl's desire for communication and social bonding is very well documented. They even have that saying "Talking on the phone like a 16 year old girl".

> caused by societal pressure

I have an issue with this as well. Over the last few decades we have been playing with this idea of "societal pressures" shaping people. I'm on the other side of the fence with the idea that our nature is what shaped our society in the first place.

Throwing out another recommendation on your second point, also a great read.

http://www.amazon.com/Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial-Nature/dp/0142003344/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1368644663&sr=1-2&keywords=blank+slate

You are welcome to challenge any of my opinions but calling them "simplistic" seems rather dense on your part.

u/joeblessyou · 1 pointr/DebateReligion

You do need a plan to shoot someone. I'm talking from a reductionist image here. If you think about every single thought that occurred in the shooter up until the point of them pulling the trigger, lets say up to that point there is a collection of thoughts that gave rise to every action that culminated in the shooter pulling the trigger. Most of the thoughts in that collection, where did they come from? Where did the shooter get the idea to get the gun in the first place? While it's possible that thought might have been 100% created by the person, most likely the person was exposed to an environment containing some kind of information about guns, if not he/she will have had a direct influence by someone else. Basically, I can't picture someone who has never heard of a gun or doesn't even hold a concept of firearm, to spontaneously pull the trigger on a gun. All these thoughts came from somewhere. I think there's enough evidence in certain fields of sciences that say most behavior is learned, and we're only born with predispositions (or buttons and dials as an analogy), and these buttons and dials get set with our environment and experiences. Steven Pinker's book Blank Slate talks in depth about this.

I added the last part about religion because as a set of ideas, they are put on a pedestal as if they were special by having been conceived in some mystical setting the past. They're just a set of ideas that people actually do cherry-pick (if you're a good person), but then my point is why even bother cherry-picking? This set of ideas is actually claiming to be the one true set of ideas, yet we're here cherry-picking it? This is what I meant by "not accomplishing what it says". It's like following a blueprint for a house, and as your building it you realize it's a warehouse, but you keep building it trying to adapt the warehouse to a house because the blueprints says it is a house in the title.

u/in_time_for_supper_x · 3 pointsr/DebateReligion

I would recommend the book "The Better Angels of Our Nature: A History of Violence and Humanity", which posits that human violence has drastically declined through the ages, and uses a whole lot of properly referenced scientific data and research to support its bold claim. It also describes the reasons why this has happened.

I'm still going through it myself, as it's a big book, but I think it's worth it, and it's quite an interesting read too.

u/MarcoVincenzo · 1 pointr/atheism

I'll add in a couple that aren't (I believe) on the FAQ.

Lawrence Krauss's Atom if you're interested in the evolution of the physical universe since the "big bang".

Stephen Pinker's The Blank Slate if you're interested in evolutionary psychology. There are several good "discussions" on the biological basis of moral behavior if you're into the good/evil debate.

Edit: I've read both and I feel they're worth the time and effort needed to understand the author's arguments.

u/Adenverd · 1 pointr/bodybuilding

This is a basic premise of Evolutionary Psychology.

Steven Pinker, one of the best non-fiction writers of our time, has an entire book about how we all share a common human (animal) nature.

u/mhaus · 2 pointsr/RPGMaker

If you're doing something focused on characters, I can't recommend Edelstein's Guide to Character Traits enough. It's like a reference manual or dictionary on creating believable characters. Helps you add depth to your heroes and villains alike.

u/catburrower · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

One of my favorite books about Psychology was not intended for psychology majors.
It's called "Writer's Guide to Character Traits" by Linda N. Edelstein, PH. D.

I really enjoyed it as a writer, and because it's like a psychological profile for a lot of things. I feel like I'm in criminal minds when I read it sometimes. Some of the reviews are relatively negative, because it's not a textbook, and many of the profiles are "stereotypes" [which in my opinion is what you're trying to do when you're profiling someone], but overall, the book is really fun to get lost in.

Shaynoodle is damn sexy.

u/RadicalOwl · 1 pointr/politics

When it comes to universities, for instance, yes people are entitled to a platform.
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/10/25/16524832/campus-free-speech-first-amendment-protest

Yes, a lot of conservatives deny evolutionary biology. But a lot of liberals deny that humans (and in particular the human brain) is a result of those same processes.
https://www.amazon.com/Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial-Nature/dp/0142003344

GMOs are safe.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/05/17/gmos-safe-academies-of-science-report-genetically-modified-food/84458872/

As for taxes and size of government, liberals have increasingly argued for larger government and increased taxes. You may think this is "right", but it also a shift to the left per definition. Here you go (if you accept quantitative studies...):
http://www.people-press.org/2017/10/05/1-partisan-divides-over-political-values-widen/

u/boringboringbuttrue · 1 pointr/GavinMcInnes

I agree that I would much rather have Italy over Iran.

I do t believe Canada is weak. Countries that spend much more on their military (Saudi Arabia) are not going to outlast a western country with a military alone.

I think the US needs to stop policing the world, and we need to bring people out of poverty to lower these birth rates ie subsaharan Africa, parts of Asia.

I would rather we avoid mass extinction of humans to reset though. I think if we give people democracy, they will demand more freedom. And since we use democracy in the west to further our economies, we will be stronger than any nation. Besides, even places like China are beginning to democratize (albeit very slowly). The good news for democracy is that you can’t really stop it if you want to your economy to sustain and expansive action.


But I don’t think we need more forcing of people to do what we do, only being safe, and even then we can’t fight or police the world. That’s how won the Cold War. We basically gave them the Beatles and Levi jeans. Now it’s iPhones and cars/Uber.


Here is a good book you may enjoy.


https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010

u/ImNotJesus · 273 pointsr/AskReddit

Modern society. Some people seem to have this impression that society is falling apart at the seams when the reality is that we live in objectively the best and safest world that has ever existed. Historically, you have about a 15% chance of dying due to violence. Over the last century, despite two world wars and constant smaller ones, the chance was only 3%.

Source.

u/Trumpetjock · 6 pointsr/self

In the book Deep Survival, there is a section that talks about an individual's age and their likelihood of surviving being lost in the wild. Interestingly enough it was the 4-9 year olds that survive the most often out of any age range, due to the way their brain processes their model of the world. 9-13 year olds are the least likely to survive. I may be off by a year on either side for those age brackets, but that's the gist of it. I don't have my copy of the book on hand for a more detailed retelling.

A one year old would have absolutely no chance. Unless, of course, they were adopted by a pack of wolves and befriended a bear and a black panther.

u/ortolon · 1 pointr/exmormon

Another good book along this line is The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker.

https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010

u/SanJoseSharks · 2 pointsr/pics

No I'm not. I troll it from time to time for beta on routes and stuff. I believe I used to post there during my active climbing years (I started doing tree work for a living and have since slowed down much on my climbing).

I didn't even know who he was at the time. I was camping out there about to start the JMT and decided to shoulder tap to get some beer. He said Sure! and i asked if he spent much time in Yosemite. He laughed it off and said yea, 8 or 9 seasons...

We briefly spoke about a book he was reading ( Deep Survival )

He was such a nice guy. Told me to climb certain routes and stuff....

Then I humped my gear up the death slabs to the base of half dome to start my JMT hike and while running away from a rock fall (you can hear it coming) I sliced my heel open and ruined my opportunity to complete the JMT.

So i bummed around the valley for a about a month and climbed and set up slacklines over the river below middle cathedral.

u/B3de · 3 pointsr/latterdaysaints

I highly recommend you read Pinker's book "The Better Angels of our Nature."

​

https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010

u/sansmalice · 7 pointsr/Survival

I'm not sure if this is exactly what you're looking for, but I really enjoyed this book - https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Survival-Who-Lives-Dies/dp/0393326152

u/Chakosa · 1 pointr/ted

Why Everyone (Else) is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular Mind totally changed the way I see myself and others, and our interactions with one another. It's not a hard or particularly long read (the Kindle version is something like 272 pages and the last 70-ish are citations so it's about 200 pages of actual reading) and it's one of those books that I think EVERYONE needs to read, even if you have zero interest in psychology or biology, because it will dramatically change the way you view your life.

u/Easy_Rider1 · 1 pointr/homestead

I'm currently reading the better angels of our nature by Steven Pinker and i think you may find it interesting and insightful.

u/TwargBot · 1 pointr/Bitcoin



 

>Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester



>All this Twitter joking and memeing may actually play a significant role in helping Bitcoin investors survive periods of heavy Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt. (src: www.amazon.com )

>🔁️ 89 ❤️ 367 ~ 📅 14/4/2018 🕑 22:46

 

Tweet Image: Image

 

^Original-Tweet ^| ^Source ^| ^Feedback ^| ^There's ^a ^tweet ^ergo ^i ^exist.

u/tweettranscriberbot · 1 pointr/BitcoinAll

^The linked tweet was tweeted by @TuurDemeester on Apr 15, 2018 01:46:19 UTC (89 Retweets | 368 Favorites)

-------------------------------------------------

All this Twitter joking and memeing may actually play a significant role in helping Bitcoin investors survive periods of heavy Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt. (src: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393326152/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_Y4Q0AbEGD2QEH )

Attached photo | imgur Mirror

-------------------------------------------------

^^• Beep boop I'm a bot • Find out more about me at /r/tweettranscriberbot/ •

u/jinxlover13 · 1 pointr/Parenting

http://smile.amazon.com/Setting-Limits-Strong-Willed-Revised-Expanded/dp/0770436595/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1464493529&sr=1-2&keywords=strong+willed+child This book has taught me how to effectively discipline my strong willed terrorist as well as helped me understand where we are both coming from. 123 magic was also helpful. I rarely get past "2" these days, if I get to 2.

u/josiahstevenson · 3 pointsr/Jokes

Interesting, I don't think I've ever seen "cussing" written in any but extremely informal contexts in the wild, and the chapter on vulgar words in Stephen pinker's Stuff of Thought definitely uses "swearing" throughout to describe the entire broad set of things you call "cussing" here, which is consistent with the usage I'm most used to otherwise

u/geewhipped · 5 pointsr/IAmA

Thanks! I'll check these out... and maybe I'll reread the Dark Tower series, so friggin' great.

<>

Edit:

Amazon links:

The Rational Optimist by Matt Ridley


Abundance Peter H. Diamandis and Steven Kotler


Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker

Stephen King's Dark Tower Series

Patrick Rothfuss's Name of the Wind (Kingkiller Chronicles)

Scott Lynch's Gentlemen Bastards series

(yeah, these are smile.amazon.com links... if you aren't already supporting some organization with your Amazon purchases, how about my kid's school's PTA?)

u/beholder2014 · 1 pointr/INTP

Yeah. I discovered the INTP book a couple of days ago: http://www.amazon.com/INTP-Personality-Careers-Relationships-Meaning-ebook/dp/B00H7NWLJ6

It shocked me right out of my "Unique Little Snowflake" self-expectations. Down to "After a lot of thoughts, INTP usually become popularizers" - which I did. Oops, there go all my internal struggles, just to end up where the book predicts.

So, don't read the book if you have a sense of self. On the other hand, maybe do read it. It may help as it also talks about the dark sides of INTPs.

u/ANewMachine615 · 12 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

The idea that this is the least violent time in history comes from a book called The Better Angels of Our Nature by Stephen Pinker, which purports to show that violence has been decreasing over time, and we live in the least violent period in history. That is not to say that our world is not still too violent, but rather that it is not as violent as it once was.

u/tomo89 · 10 pointsr/aww

That’s a nice fairy tale, isn’t it? The fact that you insult over me saying something completely reasonable doesn’t put you in a very good position.

I didn’t say they were actors or anything was staged. You’re arguing a point I never made. Nice job.

Brooding about our “sick society” doesn’t pass the shit test, unless you’re a C+ college freshman. I have a suggestion for you. Or this one. Why read when you can dismiss arguments with pictures of tin foil hats, though, right? We all know how smart 16 year olds are...

u/jellyislovely · 2 pointsr/exchristian

To anyone who wants to read more about this I thoroughly recommend "Better Angels of our Nature" - http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0141034645

It's a study into the reduction of violence throughout history, why it happens, why it's beneficial and comparisons with other animals societies. It's really good.

u/iamcrazynuts · 3 pointsr/history

We read this book for an international relations class recently, I think it is appropriate for this conversation. It's a great read with lots of data and explanation for this hypotheses [Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker] (http://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1422579828&sr=8-3&keywords=Steven+pinker)

u/earthwrldshaman · 2 pointsr/INTP

Read this book and you will get a great introduction to a) MBTI as a system and b) how our minds work and its relationship to behavior patterns/preferences.

u/usernamecheckingguy · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

Deep Survival

Is about why people survive horrible circumstances and is extremely thought provoking. Not exactly what you asked for but based on what you are interested in I thought you might like it.

u/stalker007 · 2 pointsr/MorbidReality

Deep Survival by Laurence Gonzales is good as well.

http://amzn.com/0393326152

u/notheanix · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

Take a look at http://www.amazon.com/The-Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial/dp/0142003344

Edit: To clarify, I had a philosophy professor that tried to explain everything as being a result of the environment that a thing exists in. These are some of the positions that he held, and I believe they are held to an extent by certain leftists and SJWs.

  1. There is no individual self.
  2. Nothing has an ideal true "Nature."
  3. Knowledge is always localized and subjective.
  4. There is no biological determination and there is no instinct.

    These positions we held for the purpose of "pragmatic" social justice reasons.

    The importance of no self is that it can be used to explain how even a society that is only negative in thoughts towards an "other" can harm that "other."

    Removing a "true nature" was intended to prevent defining people as inherently good or bad. If there is "true nature", then individual differences of not should come from the environment and their society.

    The idea of localized knowledge was intended to prevent dismissive and colonial attitudes.

    That last one means that everything must be learned. This a product of an overly simple understanding of human psychology, which resulted in an acceptance of behaviorism as the end all be all.

u/ctphoenix · 2 pointsr/EnoughTrumpSpam

That's generally what I think, but I also think people's behavior is highly contingent on social circumstances. If I had to pick a book that represents my view, it would be Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature.

u/-Lemma- · 31 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

The list of categories isn’t limited to those two. Others include disease/disability as in “a pox on you” or “four eyed”, animals such as “bitch” or even species such as “Neanderthal”, ethnic slurs such as “nigger”, etc. Steven Pinker goes into some detail linguistics and neuroscience in his book The Stuff of Thought. He discusses swearing in chapter 7.

Here a couple of nice clips from a talk he did on the book (~10 minutes each) that address swearing: Part 1 and Part 2. Since they are short, easy to understand, Pinker is a greater speaker and available on youtube so I won’t summarize them any further.

u/theorymeltfool · 1 pointr/philosophy

Check out The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker.

As a metaphor, I agree with The_Absurdist that the world could be considered the canvas, and to quote an old Hollywood adage, you have to work to "leave your mark." But yes, it is up to you to decide what type of mark you leave, and how you leave it.

u/rambo77 · 1 pointr/hungary

>Ehhez képest a legfrissebb német statok szerint: "A statisztikák szerint a nem németek által elkövetett bűncselekmények száma 736 ezer, ami egy év alatt 22,8 százalékos csökkenést jelent."

Fura, mert az osszes forras, amit google-on talalsz, epp az ellenkezojerol beszel. Mint ahogy azok is, amiket feltettem.

Erdekes.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/25/migrant-crime-germany-rises-50-per-cent-new-figures-show/

>“This is not something to gloss over,” Thomas de Maiziere, the interior minister, said as he presented the figures. “Those who commit serious offences here forfeit their right to stay here.”

>Crimes by migrants had “increased disproportionately” even when the huge influx into Germany under Angela Merkel’s “open-door” refugee policy was taken into account, he said.

Ja igen. Valaki hazudik. Es az te vagy. Vagy a nemet belugyminiszter. Vajon melyik a kettotok kozul?

>Ehhez képest, ha nem vakítana el a düh és végigkattintanád az általad is linkelt ourworldindata oldalt a 7-ik oldalig, akkor te is látnád hogy amit írtál tényszerűen NEM IGAZ!

Masodik slide, share of violent deaths, Europe 1900-1960.

Ennyire vak vagy?

De ha kepes vagy olvasni, akkor van errol konyv is. Sok-sok statisztikaval. Nagyon vastag, es nincsenek benne szines kepek.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0141034645

u/henrythorough · 1 pointr/Showerthoughts

Anyone interested in this might turn to a deep study on the topic, Better Angels of our Nature by S. Pinker. He analyzes at length how this is actually the safest era for our species, global calamities and death rates are down, but with media exposure and broadcasting small events into national tragedies we get the opposite impression. Great read: The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined https://www.amazon.com/dp/0143122010/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_v8sMAb47CJ4RG