A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby achan1058 » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:08 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:And saying that what one watches on TV makes one superior in intelligence still isn't a good message to send your child. Unless you're discussing reality shows.

Christ.

There are actually studies that show that the watching of reality shows correlates with negative qualities, such as the proneness to motivation and revenge, views of relationships as material prizes, superficiality, and possible even crime. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V84-50C71NH-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1709300073&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=b2c686216c7588d0da09b030bb194396&searchtype=a
Ya, and the next report is that classical music induces violence (Stravinsky effect), long hours of crying about death (Mahler effect), writing hidden messages to mock authority (Shostakovich effect), etc.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:11 pm UTC

achan1058 wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:And saying that what one watches on TV makes one superior in intelligence still isn't a good message to send your child. Unless you're discussing reality shows.

Christ.

There are actually studies that show that the watching of reality shows correlates with negative qualities, such as the proneness to motivation and revenge, views of relationships as material prizes, superficiality, and possible even crime. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V84-50C71NH-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1709300073&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=b2c686216c7588d0da09b030bb194396&searchtype=a
Ya, and the next report is that classical music induces violence (Stravinsky effect), long hours of crying about death (Mahler effect), writing hidden messages to mock authority (Shostakovich effect), etc.


You can't immediately denounce studies because you don't like their message. If you think that there is a specific problem with the methodology, please state it.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby achan1058 » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:14 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
achan1058 wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:And saying that what one watches on TV makes one superior in intelligence still isn't a good message to send your child. Unless you're discussing reality shows.

Christ.

There are actually studies that show that the watching of reality shows correlates with negative qualities, such as the proneness to motivation and revenge, views of relationships as material prizes, superficiality, and possible even crime. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V84-50C71NH-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1709300073&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=b2c686216c7588d0da09b030bb194396&searchtype=a
Ya, and the next report is that classical music induces violence (Stravinsky effect), long hours of crying about death (Mahler effect), writing hidden messages to mock authority (Shostakovich effect), etc.


You can't immediately denounce studies because you don't like their message. If you think that there is a specific problem with the methodology, please state it.
Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. Furthermore, the paper is cited by 0 when I checked google scholar. I might even say, read the comic from Wednesday.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:22 pm UTC

achan1058 wrote:]Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence.

These claims are hardly extraordinary. Shows that idolize materialism and selfishness appeal to people who are materialistic and selfish.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby achan1058 » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:23 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
achan1058 wrote:]Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence.

These claims are hardly extraordinary. Shows that idolize materialism and selfishness appeal to people who are materialistic and selfish.
Perhaps, but saying that it links to crime is extraordinary. If you stopped at materialism, I wouldn't have bashed you for it.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:27 pm UTC

achan1058 wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
achan1058 wrote:]Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence.

These claims are hardly extraordinary. Shows that idolize materialism and selfishness appeal to people who are materialistic and selfish.
Perhaps, but saying that it links to crime is extraordinary. If you stopped at materialism, I wouldn't have bashed you for it.

Hence my "possibly." I agree that for a claim like that, one study is insufficient, but it does indicate that there might be a link.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

KingofMadCows
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:12 am UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby KingofMadCows » Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:59 am UTC

I hate how these kinds of stories always attribute genius entirely to some innate quality of the child. Granted, this kid no doubt has a natural predilection for the acquisition of math but I highly doubt that he "taught himself calculus, algebra, geometry and trigonometry in a week." These skills don't just magically appear on their own.

And "kids his age would normally have problems adding fractions," really? Are American schools really that bad? Most Chinese schools already teach algebra at that age. Some curriculum in China start teaching algebra in 4th grade and calculus starting in high school. My second cousin finished calculus II when he graduated high school.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:11 am UTC

KingofMadCows wrote:I hate how these kinds of stories always attribute genius entirely to some innate quality of the child. Granted, this kid no doubt has a natural predilection for the acquisition of math but I highly doubt that he "taught himself calculus, algebra, geometry and trigonometry in a week." These skills don't just magically appear on their own.

And "kids his age would normally have problems adding fractions," really? Are American schools really that bad? Most Chinese schools already teach algebra at that age. Some curriculum in China start teaching algebra in 4th grade and calculus starting in high school. My second cousin finished calculus II when he graduated high school.


American schools generally start teaching pre-algebra at that age, and you can usually finish calculus II by the time you finish highschool if you're in the more advanced levels. To say that kids his age have problems adding fractions is a hyperbole. And that think about classifying genius as something innate also bothers me. He didn't really teach himself calculus, algebra etc., in a week. He spent a long time learning and deriving the concepts and ideas behind them himself and the formalized them within a week.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

KingofMadCows
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:12 am UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby KingofMadCows » Fri Apr 08, 2011 3:20 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:American schools generally start teaching pre-algebra at that age, and you can usually finish calculus II by the time you finish highschool if you're in the more advanced levels. To say that kids his age have problems adding fractions is a hyperbole. And that think about classifying genius as something innate also bothers me. He didn't really teach himself calculus, algebra etc., in a week. He spent a long time learning and deriving the concepts and ideas behind them himself and the formalized them within a week.


I don't think this kind of thing bothers people enough. I think that emphasis on innate abilities over other factors is indicative of a much bigger problem. It is simply assumed that if someone is good at something then it's due to some innate factor so then implication is that if you're not good at something then you don't have the innate capability for that skill and you'll never get as good as people who have those innate advantages. It has had a very negative impact on education. Teachers are classifying kids as being smart, average, or dumb and they simply assume that the smart kids will learn and the dumb kids won't.

Media reports like these only compound the problem. They seem so enamored with this kid's genius that they don't even bother to investigate all the factors that have contributed to his advanced math skills. They don't even tell us how time the kid spends studying math or working on math problems every day.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby achan1058 » Fri Apr 08, 2011 3:33 am UTC

KingofMadCows wrote:I hate how these kinds of stories always attribute genius entirely to some innate quality of the child. Granted, this kid no doubt has a natural predilection for the acquisition of math but I highly doubt that he "taught himself calculus, algebra, geometry and trigonometry in a week." These skills don't just magically appear on their own.
I very much agree with this. While I have little doubt that the kid is a genius, I doubt that he can derive or absorb all that information in a week, or even several. You still need to find the references, read them up, and most likely familiarize yourself with them to some extent. While I can imagine one to blast through a course in a week or 2 with a good amount of time put into it per week, media always make it sound more impressive and physically impossible than it really is.
KingofMadCows wrote:And "kids his age would normally have problems adding fractions," really? Are American schools really that bad? Most Chinese schools already teach algebra at that age. Some curriculum in China start teaching algebra in 4th grade and calculus starting in high school. My second cousin finished calculus II when he graduated high school.
Ask my MATH 138 kids 2 summers ago.

User avatar
Kag
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 am UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Kag » Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:39 pm UTC

Kid seems pretty smart. If he does anything cool it'll speak for itself.
The Great Hippo wrote:I am starting to regret having used 'goat-fucker' in this context.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:44 pm UTC

Kag wrote:Kid seems pretty smart. When he does nothing cool it'll speak for itself.

FTFY
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sat Apr 09, 2011 12:03 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:And saying that what one watches on TV makes one superior in intelligence still isn't a good message to send your child. Unless you're discussing reality shows.

Christ.

There are actually studies that show that the watching of reality shows correlates with negative qualities, such as the proneness to motivation and revenge, views of relationships as material prizes, superficiality, and possible even crime. [browser-breaking broken link]

The last study is a dead link for me, and its url doesn't hint at a journal name, author or article title, so for the purposes of the rest of this post consider it ignored.

Now, where to start? Motivation is a negative quality? I would have gone with "free of morality" from that article but, that's just me. However, the article gives that these base impulses aren't bad in of themselves: vengeance, for example, is defined as the trait corresponding to the animal impulse of wanting to fight off an intruder. We're not talking "Cask of Amontillado", here. In any event, the article is theorizing that we have different base impulses and that people who are attracted to reality TV tend to priorities those impulses in a certain way---note the article isn't claiming reality TV engenders such traits in people, but is more reinforcing a "different boats, many floats" understanding of people. People who prioritize their desires in a certain fashion, that is, have a predilection for reality TV over opera or horror porn.

The focus of the second study was to determine meaningful sub-genres of reality TV based on audience consumption and appraisal, so the question of how reality TV adversely affects these people was outside its scope. What the article states is that when people divide the range of reality TV shows up into sub-genres they most converge on placing shows under the "romance" and "competition" sub-genres: it does not claim that people confuse these sub-genres for one another, or that reality TV drives them to make such a confusion. The inclusion of this article in reference to your point is a juxtaposition.

The third study is perhaps the most interesting to discuss. Its abstract first states that people who are interested in shows about cosmetic surgery are more likely to pursue cosmetic surgery, and then describes a Study 2 which implies that watching a reality TV show might engender negative desires in a person (assuming a desire for cosmetic surgery is a negative one). This study most serves your point, but only weakly. First of all, it does not discuss how reality TV shows adversely affect their audiences (again, assuming an interest in cosmetic surgery is undesirable) to the exclusion of non-reality shows. Your point was that TV-viewing preference do not indicate or affect a person's intelligence unless those preferences include reality TV, and the article simply does not bear that out. Further, the article makes the point that audiences with these interests are seeking out these shows, which supports the mother's point. That is, the mother implied that because she most enjoys a show which does not discuss theoretical physics, but rather discusses contemporary celebrity and lifestyle culture, then she is ill-equipped to engage with a person on questions of theoretical physics. Because her knowledge and interests, as indicated by her entertainment preferences, lie elsewhere. This aligns perfectly with the first claim in the abstract.

The problem here is that you're getting all up in your moral concern about a speculative claim you have dick-all support for. You're taking an off-hand comment and using it to accuse someone of being a bad parent, when the comment isn't that questionable even if we're going by the studies you used to try and call it into question.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Sat Apr 09, 2011 10:10 pm UTC

Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:And saying that what one watches on TV makes one superior in intelligence still isn't a good message to send your child. Unless you're discussing reality shows.

Christ.

There are actually studies that show that the watching of reality shows correlates with negative qualities, such as the proneness to motivation and revenge, views of relationships as material prizes, superficiality, and possible even crime. [browser-breaking broken link]

The last study is a dead link for me, and its url doesn't hint at a journal name, author or article title, so for the purposes of the rest of this post consider it ignored.

Now, where to start? Motivation is a negative quality? I would have gone with "free of morality" from that article but, that's just me. However, the article gives that these base impulses aren't bad in of themselves: vengeance, for example, is defined as the trait corresponding to the animal impulse of wanting to fight off an intruder. We're not talking "Cask of Amontillado", here. In any event, the article is theorizing that we have different base impulses and that people who are attracted to reality TV tend to priorities those impulses in a certain way---note the article isn't claiming reality TV engenders such traits in people, but is more reinforcing a "different boats, many floats" understanding of people. People who prioritize their desires in a certain fashion, that is, have a predilection for reality TV over opera or horror porn.

That was a typo. I meant to say that they were motivated by vengeance. And I don't believe I said that reality TV causes those traits, I said it correlates with them.
The focus of the second study was to determine meaningful sub-genres of reality TV based on audience consumption and appraisal, so the question of how reality TV adversely affects these people was outside its scope. What the article states is that when people divide the range of reality TV shows up into sub-genres they most converge on placing shows under the "romance" and "competition" sub-genres: it does not claim that people confuse these sub-genres for one another, or that reality TV drives them to make such a confusion. The inclusion of this article in reference to your point is a juxtaposition.


There was a specific quote in the article mentioning what I said, give me a moment to look for it...

The third study is perhaps the most interesting to discuss. Its abstract first states that people who are interested in shows about cosmetic surgery are more likely to pursue cosmetic surgery, and then describes a Study 2 which implies that watching a reality TV show might engender negative desires in a person (assuming a desire for cosmetic surgery is a negative one). This study most serves your point, but only weakly. First of all, it does not discuss how reality TV shows adversely affect their audiences (again, assuming an interest in cosmetic surgery is undesirable) to the exclusion of non-reality shows. Your point was that TV-viewing preference do not indicate or affect a person's intelligence unless those preferences include reality TV, and the article simply does not bear that out.

No, that's not what I said. I said that those negative traits correlate with watchers of reality TV. The studies are not supposed to show a causal link: I think that the best explanation for their data is that people who idolize these poor qualities watch shows that do the same. This means that whether or not somebody watches reality TV is a good predictor of whether or not they have those negative traits.

Further, the article makes the point that audiences with these interests are seeking out these shows, which supports the mother's point. That is, the mother implied that because she most enjoys a show which does not discuss theoretical physics, but rather discusses contemporary celebrity and lifestyle culture, then she is ill-equipped to engage with a person on questions of theoretical physics. Because her knowledge and interests, as indicated by her entertainment preferences, lie elsewhere. This aligns perfectly with the first claim in the abstract.


I think you're misinterpreting the purpose of what she said. It wasn't "my interests are different so you teach me about this" it was "my interests are more low-brow, therefore I am unequipped to deal with this".

The problem here is that you're getting all up in your moral concern about a speculative claim you have dick-all support for. You're taking an off-hand comment and using it to accuse someone of being a bad parent, when the comment isn't that questionable even if we're going by the studies you used to try and call it into question.

I didn't accuse her of being a bad parent, I just criticized that specific aspect of her parenting. And your misunderstand what I've drawn from the studies: you seem to maintain that I think I've found some causal link, which I haven't.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:24 am UTC

I saw through your typo, and correctly interpreted it to the word you meant. You can see, because in my reply I used the word "vengeance" rather than "revenge". So what was the point or re-stating the understood? And you wrote that watching reality TV corresponds with negative qualities, when the first article notes that it corresponds with desires that aren't inherently good or bad and the second said no such thing as what you claimed (unless you can produce your quotation, but I haven't discovered anything of it in a re-read). Neither reinforces the correlation you were attempting to demonstrate. The third demonstrates a correlation between having an interest in the topics and themes of a reality show and watching that reality show, but not to the exclusion of watching other shows, such as Ellen.

I was hoping that after reading through all that material there would be something in there to support your initial implication that although it's not okay to judge a person on their general viewing habits it is okay to judge them on their reality TV viewing. It turns out, dismissing you out-of-hand was always the correct course to take, because despite a bunch of links you haven't shown that whatsoever.

More importantly, however, you think I'm misinterpreting the mother's implication, but I fail to see how your interpretation is any more robust than mine. (I have to note that I didn't interpret the mother as, "My interests are different so you teach me about this," because she isn't asking for an explanation but throwing her hands up in defeat. I'm interpreting her as, "My interests are different, therefore I am unequipped to deal with this.")

You're doggedly insisting that the mother is engendering a superiority complex in her child, but so far it has just been that: your insistence. And my point remains that you're basing too much criticism of the parent on a very small amount of ambiguous information.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:36 am UTC

Pez Dispens3r wrote:I saw through your typo, and correctly interpreted it to the word you meant. You can see, because in my reply I used the word "vengeance" rather than "revenge". So what was the point or re-stating the understood? And you wrote that watching reality TV corresponds with negative qualities, when the first article notes that it corresponds with desires that aren't inherently good or bad and the second said no such thing as what you claimed (unless you can produce your quotation, but I haven't discovered anything of it in a re-read).


Found it:

The Study wrote: Further, repeated pairing of these two attributes might create and/or reinforce the view of potential mates as prizes to be won rather than cherished long-term relational partners.


Pez Dispens3r wrote: Neither reinforces the correlation you were attempting to demonstrate. The third demonstrates a correlation between having an interest in the topics and themes of a reality show and watching that reality show, but not to the exclusion of watching other shows, such as Ellen.


I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that, because people who watch Ellen might also watch reality shows that the watching of Ellen also correlates with those qualities? Because if so I'd like a citation.

More importantly, however, you think I'm misinterpreting the mother's implication, but I fail to see how your interpretation is any more robust than mine. (I have to note that I didn't interpret the mother as, "My interests are different so you teach me about this," because she isn't asking for an explanation but throwing her hands up in defeat. I'm interpreting her as, "My interests are different, therefore I am unequipped to deal with this.")

They are different in that they were more low-brow.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:01 am UTC

If you're going to quote-snipe, perhaps limit yourself to quoting only the text you intend to respond to, or consider neglecting the practise altogether. Regardless, that quote relates to the purely speculative and not to anything demonstrated in the study. It's still irrelevant.

sourmìlk wrote:
Neither [study] reinforces the correlation you were attempting to demonstrate. The third demonstrates a correlation between having an interest in the topics and themes of a reality show and watching that reality show, but not to the exclusion of watching other shows, such as Ellen.

I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that, because people who watch Ellen might also watch reality shows that the watching of Ellen also correlates with those qualities? Because if so I'd like a citation.

No, of course I'm not. I'm saying that what you haven't demonstrated is how reality TV shows are fair game for a correlation between the subject matter of the show and the interests of the viewer, but that other TV shows such as Ellen aren't. Because that is the claim that I have always objected to, and that is the claim that hasn't been born out in any of your research.

sourmìlk wrote:They are different in that they were more low-brow.

What are they, that is different?
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Sun Apr 10, 2011 4:04 am UTC

Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Neither [study] reinforces the correlation you were attempting to demonstrate. The third demonstrates a correlation between having an interest in the topics and themes of a reality show and watching that reality show, but not to the exclusion of watching other shows, such as Ellen.

I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that, because people who watch Ellen might also watch reality shows that the watching of Ellen also correlates with those qualities? Because if so I'd like a citation.

No, of course I'm not. I'm saying that what you haven't demonstrated is how reality TV shows are fair game for a correlation between the subject matter of the show and the interests of the viewer, but that other TV shows such as Ellen aren't. Because that is the claim that I have always objected to, and that is the claim that hasn't been born out in any of your research.


The burden of proof isn't on me to show that those qualities don't extend to other TV shows, the burden of proof relies on another person to show that they do. I'm not supposed to be able to prove a negative.
sourmìlk wrote:They are different in that they were more low-brow.

What are they, that is different?

Yeah, I phrased that horribly. Here's what I meant: an interpretation in line with her other actions would be that she meant "I don't understand this theoretical physics thing because my interests indicate that I'm too stupid."

And yeah, sorry about the quote sniping. I have a tendency to address arguments point-by-point, as I feel like I've missed or forgotten a part of the argument if I address the point as a whole.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:03 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:The burden of proof isn't on me to show that those qualities don't extend to other TV shows, the burden of proof relies on another person to show that they do. I'm not supposed to be able to prove a negative.

Your claim exactly was that these qualities don't extend to other TV shows so yes you do, in fact, need to demonstrate it, because you're claiming a special exemption.

sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:They are different in that they were more low-brow.

What are they, that is different?

Yeah, I phrased that horribly. Here's what I meant: an interpretation in line with her other actions would be that she meant "I don't understand this theoretical physics thing because my interests indicate that I'm too stupid."

Indeed, and another interpretation could be that she doesn't understand theoretical physics because her interests lie elsewhere than theoretical physics.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:08 am UTC

Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:The burden of proof isn't on me to show that those qualities don't extend to other TV shows, the burden of proof relies on another person to show that they do. I'm not supposed to be able to prove a negative.

Your claim exactly was that these qualities don't extend to other TV shows so yes you do, in fact, need to demonstrate it, because you're claiming a special exemption.

No. My claim is that you can predict a likelihood of negative qualities in somebody that watches reality TV shows, but you can't predict those qualities in other kinds of shows. Not because I'm certain the principle doesn't extend to those other kinds of shows, but because there's no evidence that I've come across saying such a judgement would be valid.

sourmìlk wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:They are different in that they were more low-brow.

What are they, that is different?

Yeah, I phrased that horribly. Here's what I meant: an interpretation in line with her other actions would be that she meant "I don't understand this theoretical physics thing because my interests indicate that I'm too stupid."

Indeed, and another interpretation could be that she doesn't understand theoretical physics because her interests lie elsewhere than theoretical physics.

Right, but that wouldn't be as much in line with her habit of filming her son's mathematical genius and her telling the media about it.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:51 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:No. My claim is that you can predict a likelihood of negative qualities in somebody that watches reality TV shows, but you can't predict those qualities in other kinds of shows. Not because I'm certain the principle doesn't extend to those other kinds of shows, but because there's no evidence that I've come across saying such a judgement would be valid.

None of your studies demonstrate or even discuss whether you can or can't predict the qualities of a person based on their non-reality TV viewing. Your claim implies there is an exceptional nature to the reality show, but it hasn't been shown. I'm making the more discrete claim that no such exception exists, and it's one supported by the first study which claims its model may have broad applicability purely because there is nothing exceptional about reality shows.

I see, also, that you're still misrepresenting the literature by focusing on the negatives that can be correlated with reality TV viewing when your own references either indicate there are as many positives to it or else present the entire shtick as benign. I don't know how many times I need to repeat myself: you're making claims that aren't reflected in your own reading, or else are only reflected weakly or based on unsupported speculation.

sourmìlk wrote:Right, but that wouldn't be as much in line with her habit of filming her son's mathematical genius and her telling the media about it.

She claims she records him to promote awareness of autism in a positive light. That's also consistent with her behaviour, rather than that she just wants the world to understand how brilliant her son is.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:04 am UTC

To clarify or perhaps redefine my ideas: assuming certain qualities of somebody based on the shows they watch isn't only reasonable with reality shows. But as far as I've seen, judging somebody as having those specific qualities is only reasonable when considering reality shows.

Pez Dispens3r wrote:She claims she records him to promote awareness of autism in a positive light.


I can't believe I missed this. Okay, forget everything else , this is what annoys me. People need to understand that autism is a disorder and that it needs treatment, whatever other idiots say. I have high-functioning autism (no, not self-diagnosed), and I have an uncle with down's syndrome, and my grandma in particular has had to deal with this kind of Basically Decent shit all the time. Mental disorders are disorders, and people who don't recognize that aren't doing anything to help those afflicted by such disorders. They're making it worse by suggesting that they don't require treatment.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:45 am UTC

So you can assume someone has certain qualities based on their non-reality show viewing habits, but you can't judge someone as having those specific qualities based on the very same? You can't do that with reality shows either.

Regarding your other comments, I fail to see how autism can be "treated", except by understanding that autistic children have different behavioural needs as opposed to those of non-autistic children and accommodating them. Promoting an understanding of autistic children as people who don't deserve to be vilified, which seems to be the default response, is hardly inconsistent with that goal.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby sourmìlk » Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:55 am UTC

Pez Dispens3r wrote:Regarding your other comments, I fail to see how autism can be "treated", except by understanding that autistic children have different behavioural needs as opposed to those of non-autistic children and accommodating them.

There's therapy and there's also some medication to help with specific symptoms.
Promoting an understanding of autistic children as people who don't deserve to be vilified, which seems to be the default response, is hardly inconsistent with that goal.

Okay, but most of these people say things like "most autistics don't want to be cured" when that's clearly a statement inconsistent with the goal of helping autistic people. They treat it as though it's not even a disorder, which rather bugs me. Your statement that she tries to portray autism in a positive light indicates that she thinks it's a good thing, which it absolutely isn't.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Kag
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 am UTC

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Kag » Sun Apr 10, 2011 10:49 am UTC

This argument is all the way stupid, but this bothered me:

Pez Dispens3r wrote:it's one supported by the first study which claims its model may have broad applicability purely because there is nothing exceptional about reality shows.


That sounds like speculation on the part of the writer to me, not actual support.
The Great Hippo wrote:I am starting to regret having used 'goat-fucker' in this context.

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: A 12-year-old developing new Theory of Relativity

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:24 am UTC

Kag wrote:This argument is all the way stupid, but this bothered me:

Pez Dispens3r wrote:it's one supported by the first study which claims its model may have broad applicability purely because there is nothing exceptional about reality shows.


That sounds like speculation on the part of the writer to me, not actual support.

With the claim that their model may have wide applicability, the authors lean on a body of work known as sensitivity theory and directly reference a Reiss and Havercamp study from 1998. It's not pure speculation.

And you're stupid.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests