Bad Brain Habits: How to Change Them

  • Thread starter Thread starter BillTre
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Brain
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of a post that some participants believe may be satirical or intentionally uneducated. The conversation explores the implications of language use, particularly double negatives, and the difficulty in discerning the author's intent. The scope includes conceptual analysis and meta-discussion about communication styles.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express disbelief that it took so long for others to recognize the post's nature, suggesting it aligns with ideas attributed to Einstein.
  • Others argue that the post may be purposely written to appear uneducated, with some suggesting it could be satire.
  • A participant proposes that if the post is satire, it should have been placed in a joke thread, indicating a division on its classification.
  • Concerns are raised about the use of double negatives in posts, with some participants feeling it complicates understanding.
  • There is a suggestion that distinguishing between satire and genuine expression requires more data, reflecting uncertainty about the author's intent.
  • References to Poe's law are made, highlighting the challenges in identifying parody versus sincerity in extreme views.
  • One participant humorously proposes legislation to eliminate Mondays, indicating a light-hearted tone amidst the debate.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the original post is satire or a genuine expression of thought. Multiple competing views remain regarding the author's intent and the implications of language use.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes unresolved questions about the nature of the original post and the impact of language structure on comprehension. There is a lack of clarity on the author's intent, which complicates the interpretation of the content.

BillTre
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
2,769
Reaction score
12,185
Screen Shot 2018-09-19 at 9.36.37 AM.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-09-19 at 9.36.37 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-09-19 at 9.36.37 AM.png
    96.7 KB · Views: 856
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: OmCheeto, diogenesNY and S.G. Janssens
Physics news on Phys.org
BillTre said:
View attachment 230879
. ...u have to be kidding me ! HOW COULD IT TAKE SO LONG FOR PEOPLE TO REALISE THIS !
Pffff...Einstein knew this !
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: OmCheeto
Hmmm. I'm not convinced it's not purposely written to appear completely uneducated.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre and russ_watters
I t
Drakkith said:
Hmmm. I'm not convinced it's not purposely written to appear completely uneducated.
I think its satire
 
Drakkith said:
Hmmm. I'm not convinced it's not purposely written to appear completely uneducated.
If that's the case, it should have gone into a joke thread.
 
BillTre said:
If that's the case, it should have gone into a joke thread.
Agreed...but maybe this is not just a joke maybe the uploader is assembleing a group of wise intelectuals like us to find out something...to uncovrr a secret so grave no one knows...i guess
 
Navin said:
. ...u have to be kidding me ! HOW COULD IT TAKE SO LONG FOR PEOPLE TO REALISE THIS !
Pffff...Einstein knew this !
:doh:
 
Drakkith said:
Hmmm. I'm not convinced it's not purposely written to appear completely uneducated.
There should be a law, here, and I'm sure I've said it before, that there should not be allowed, more than a "double-negative", in a post, as they get my head spinning, wildly.

Wait! Negating the "nots", was not that difficult.

Drak-2_nots said:
Hmmm. I'm convinced it's purposely written to appear completely uneducated.

Never mind. That makes sense.
Ok. I'm off to take my nap now...
:sleep:
 
  • #10
OmCheeto said:
There should be a law, here, and I'm sure I've said it before, that there should not be allowed, more than a "double-negative", in a post, as they get my head spinning, wildly.

Wait! Negating the "nots", was not that difficult.

I ain't never not paid attention to no 'double-negative' nonsense before! And I ain't startin' now!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: phinds and OmCheeto
  • #11
Drakkith said:
I ain't never not paid attention to no 'double-negative' nonsense before! And I ain't startin' now!
No!
 
  • #12
or Not No!
 
  • #13
Drakkith said:
Hmmm. I'm not convinced it's not purposely written to appear completely uneducated.
On the other hand, I have met some people who had some incredibly weird (including stupid) ideas.

I guess there is no way to distinguish between the two without more data.
Satire or Real?
 
  • #14
BillTre said:
I guess there is no way to distinguish between the two without more data.
Satire or Real?

You better believe it. It's a bit like Poe's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of the parodied views.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970, gmax137 and BillTre
  • #15
OmCheeto said:
There should be a law, here, and I'm sure I've said it before, that there should not be allowed, more than a "double-negative", in a post, as they get my head spinning, wildly.

Remember the compuserve diskettes?
compuserve Instructions said:
If you don't want to not uninstall the current instance of cserv.exe, type "Yes" or "Y".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith
  • #16
BillTre said:
If that's the case, it should have gone into a joke thread.
No need to, it just converted the present one! :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
  • #17
The author's name appears too real for this to be a joke.
 
  • #18
Signed. I would also like to propose legislation to get rid of Mondays. In doing so, we wouldn't have to go to work after a good weekend.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
  • #19
Drakkith said:
You better believe it. It's a bit like Poe's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Also confused by double by double negatives, (Alan Greenspan did a funny extension “ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant”)POEs law talks about creationism as a good example and below is an illustration of that.Difficult to tell first viewing if they are serious or not.Same with the OP, I think it’s a joke (95% certain) perhaps the editor wasn’t sure?
 

Similar threads

Is Gaming Good or Bad for Brain Development?
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
8K
Can random, unguided processes produce a rational brain?
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
Hair's influence on the brain
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
The predictive brain (Stimulus-Specific Error Prediction Neurons)
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
Medical A First of Its Kind: A Calcium-based signal in the Human Brain
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Medical New Alzheimer's Treatment Clears Plaques From Brains of Mice Within Hours
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Is brain and decision making similar to cockpit and pilot
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Studying Handwritten Notes Improve Learning
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Undergrad Are Boltzmann brains predicted by our current cosmological theories?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Medical Brain Death: Tests & Secondary Reactions
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K