Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 4 hours ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,791 posts, read 3,598,050 times
Reputation: 5696
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooseketeer
We all do form judgements within seconds, I think that is human nature. However what we do with that first impression is what counts.
I don't think I am that superficial actually, if anything I tend to over-analyse everything .
Like everyone else first impressions count. But then I genuinely try to over-ride those judgemental prejudices and take people on a one to one basis , taking them as I find them. I try very hard to give people a chance before throwing in the towel. Anything else to me is stupid and short sighted and ultimately you lose out on potential friends.
Great comment, Moose. You have what I call The Taste Acquisition Ethic. I think people need to take this just as seriously as they do the Work Ethic. No doubt you're a healthier person for it.
Just as with trying new foods, you occasionally run across one that you have to acclimate your taste buds to in order to get the full nutritional benefit of it, so it is with superficial imperfections in a person. The new food you developed a taste for gives you extra nutritional value, the new person does likewise for your soul - or perhaps even practical everyday matters.
Maybe that's how famously "wacko" San Francisco Bay attained the highest per capita income of all US metropolitan areas (yes, even beating out New York and Washington). The more open and nonjudgemental your culture is of wackos, the more likely it is to be open to "weird" ideas about business and industry and technology. We all see what that got for SF $-wise.
No-Fault Divorce. You can buy N-FD kits right on the internet. But wait -- there's more. If you order within the next 60 minutes we'll include a FREE 6-month membership in Match.com.....where you can hook-up with someone you never have to vocally speak with, or ever come in physical contact with.
No fuss, no muss. So order your divorce kit right now.
You have a point but just because divorce was more difficult in my grandmother's day doesn't mean couples were happy.
The fact of the matter is, we change as we age. Unless you're really working at it, chances are you won't change in the same ways as your spouse. This is why relationships with common goals and hobbies are the strongest.
Ha ha ha this topic is fun. I can see that most people are suffering from a whole host of cognitive biases from their answers that they are not even aware of. Most common is heuristic mistakes. We do judge people on their surface appearance, but we can choose to accept our snap judgement or not. Most people (an assumption based on evidence that has come out of the field of Psychology) assume that their conclusions are correct, even if they are based on nothing more than conjecture. We assume that our feelings are correct because we only really remember the times when they are correct and we ignore the times when they are incorrect, giving us what Psychologists call confirmation bias. Things like this lead us to make irrational and erroneous decisions. As a great mind once said (and I am paraphrasing) "we only think when we perceive a problem" and since nothing truly detrimental happens (that we are aware of) when we make snap decisions, we do not perceive the need to alter our faulty belief systems. Another great mind said "Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of our time". Due to the explosion of information that we receive on a day to day basis, we have tried to become more efficient in our thinking and feelings, however this has caused us to make even more heuristic mistakes. We are slowly becoming more psychopathic in our thinking, which is dangerous. For example, if someone is acting in a way that we perceive as strange and they are look middle eastern, we might assume that they are dangerous (todays climate would suggest terrorist), however the only thing that you can truly infer, is that the person is acting in a way that we perceive as strange. You may make a link via experience " I saw someone acting like is before and they turned out to be dangerous", but that does not guarantee that it is correct this time, in that way you have something akin to the Gambler's fallacy. I find that a lot of the time people will attribute their feelings to evolutionary truths which simply are not true at all due to misinterpreting what has been concluded, and have mistaken beliefs. If you ask any of these people to explain the actual biology, they mostly likely will not be able to, since they do not have a true grasp on the basic biological concept of evolution. Most think of it as adaptions, when in fact it is mutations. One such mistaken belief is that attraction is 100% biological, when in fact it is not. Some of it is, but some of it is taught. This can be concluded from, amongst a whole host of experiments conducted, the idea that wider genetic material gives progeny more DNA to construct hardier immune systems. If this was the be and end all, then the natural dispensation of humans would be to procreate with those of greater genetic diversity from our own. In this case, mixed origin couples would be more prevalent as the biology would make diversity more attractive. However what you find is that most mates are picked that are similar to one another, even to the point where some experiments have shown that people pick those who look similar to themselves. Psychology says that we are more comfortable with the familiar, and tend to emulate that which we see in our environment, nurture. Now you have biology(nature) in direct opposition to psychology(nurture), therefore that which is taught can override biology. To be honest though, I prefer people to be superficial and make snap judgements because usually they are wrong, where as I appear almost mystical because I adopt a more Sherlock Holmes type approach, active observation, whereby I can marshal the power of logic and deductive reasoning to make more correct decisions than the average person.
Ha ha ha this topic is fun. I can see that most people are suffering from a whole host of cognitive biases from their answers that they are not even aware of. Most common is heuristic mistakes. We do judge people on their surface appearance, but we can choose to accept our snap judgement or not. Most people (an assumption based on evidence that has come out of the field of Psychology) assume that their conclusions are correct, even if they are based on nothing more than conjecture. We assume that our feelings are correct because we only really remember the times when they are correct and we ignore the times when they are incorrect, giving us what Psychologists call confirmation bias. Things like this lead us to make irrational and erroneous decisions. As a great mind once said (and I am paraphrasing) "we only think when we perceive a problem" and since nothing truly detrimental happens (that we are aware of) when we make snap decisions, we do not perceive the need to alter our faulty belief systems. Another great mind said "Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of our time". Due to the explosion of information that we receive on a day to day basis, we have tried to become more efficient in our thinking and feelings, however this has caused us to make even more heuristic mistakes. We are slowly becoming more psychopathic in our thinking, which is dangerous. For example, if someone is acting in a way that we perceive as strange and they are look middle eastern, we might assume that they are dangerous (todays climate would suggest terrorist), however the only thing that you can truly infer, is that the person is acting in a way that we perceive as strange. You may make a link via experience " I saw someone acting like is before and they turned out to be dangerous", but that does not guarantee that it is correct this time, in that way you have something akin to the Gambler's fallacy. I find that a lot of the time people will attribute their feelings to evolutionary truths which simply are not true at all due to misinterpreting what has been concluded, and have mistaken beliefs. If you ask any of these people to explain the actual biology, they mostly likely will not be able to, since they do not have a true grasp on the basic biological concept of evolution. Most think of it as adaptions, when in fact it is mutations. One such mistaken belief is that attraction is 100% biological, when in fact it is not. Some of it is, but some of it is taught. This can be concluded from, amongst a whole host of experiments conducted, the idea that wider genetic material gives progeny more DNA to construct hardier immune systems. If this was the be and end all, then the natural dispensation of humans would be to procreate with those of greater genetic diversity from our own. In this case, mixed origin couples would be more prevalent as the biology would make diversity more attractive. However what you find is that most mates are picked that are similar to one another, even to the point where some experiments have shown that people pick those who look similar to themselves. Psychology says that we are more comfortable with the familiar, and tend to emulate that which we see in our environment, nurture. Now you have biology(nature) in direct opposition to psychology(nurture), therefore that which is taught can override biology. To be honest though, I prefer people to be superficial and make snap judgements because usually they are wrong, where as I appear almost mystical because I adopt a more Sherlock Holmes type approach, active observation, whereby I can marshal the power of logic and deductive reasoning to make more correct decisions than the average person.
Congrats.
If you could also "marshal" the "indent" key, that would help.
If you could also "marshal" the "indent" key, that would help.
As well as spacing.
All logic and deductive reasoning drowns in a wall of text.
I also like how logical beginning a post with ha ha is.
You sir, are the poster child of logic and reasoning.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
