| Author |
Message |
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 6616
Location: Quitting smoking
|
 Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:20 am Post subject: |
 |
|
HuJwang, why go on forum tilt when you could've just quoted "Irony is fun." like I did?
| dumwaldo wrote: |
| If I were t participate in the study right now at 38 years old I am quite sure that my results would indicate th exact opposite of the studies conclusion. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Drtre1987, that's a perfect example of stupid childish behaviour.
- - - - - - - -
HuJwang, many of us would like to read constructive discussion instead of silly flaming. In this thread Mark somebody disagreed about the conclusion writing that the problem was that young people are told that they are dumb, dumwaldo questioned whether the study was representative and others supported the study with somebody using the Idol competition as a example. What all these people did was have a constructive discussion.
Whether they may be correct or incorrect is one thing. But I can tell you one thing. I would respect the views of all these people far more than anybody who chooses not to undertake constructive discussion but instead has a flaming session. HuJawng, I don't believe it's any secret that I don't view yourself too favourably. Try constructive discussions on topics. Even if I were to disagree with your opinion, I and hopefully many other people would form a more positive attitude to your views as a result. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5448
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
Drtre1987, that's a perfect example of stupid childish behaviour.
- - - - - - - -
HuJwang, many of us would like to read constructive discussion instead of silly flaming. In this thread Mark somebody disagreed about the conclusion writing that the problem was that young people are told that they are dumb, dumwaldo questioned whether the study was representative and others supported the study with somebody using the Idol competition as a example. What all these people did was have a constructive discussion.
Whether they may be correct or incorrect is one thing. But I can tell you one thing. I would respect the views of all these people far more than anybody who chooses not to undertake constructive discussion but instead has a flaming session. HuJawng, I don't believe it's any secret that I don't view yourself too favourably. Try constructive discussions on topics. Even if I were to disagree with your opinion, I and hopefully many other people would form a more positive attitude to your views as a result. |
I'm going to have to disagree that dumwaldo's posts are constructive in any way. And I have had plenty of constructive discussions on topics when I am able to talk with someone who is more interested in the discussion than making themselves feel superior. In fact, I think I've made some fairly constructive posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you're ignoring them. You seem to just like getting on my case for some unknown reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1813
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
Drtre1987, that's a perfect example of stupid childish behaviour.
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1813
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
In fact, I think I've made some fairly constructive posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you're ignoring them. You seem to just like getting on my case for some unknown reason. |
This is what I have a problem with. You have been posting good logical arguements and get accused of flaming and being a child. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| bdbranch wrote: |
Drtre1987, that's a perfect example of stupid childish behaviour.
- - - - - - - -
HuJwang, many of us would like to read constructive discussion instead of silly flaming. In this thread Mark somebody disagreed about the conclusion writing that the problem was that young people are told that they are dumb, dumwaldo questioned whether the study was representative and others supported the study with somebody using the Idol competition as a example. What all these people did was have a constructive discussion.
Whether they may be correct or incorrect is one thing. But I can tell you one thing. I would respect the views of all these people far more than anybody who chooses not to undertake constructive discussion but instead has a flaming session. HuJawng, I don't believe it's any secret that I don't view yourself too favourably. Try constructive discussions on topics. Even if I were to disagree with your opinion, I and hopefully many other people would form a more positive attitude to your views as a result. |
I'm going to have to disagree that dumwaldo's posts are constructive in any way. And I have had plenty of constructive discussions on topics when I am able to talk with someone who is more interested in the discussion than making themselves feel superior. In fact, I think I've made some fairly constructive posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you're ignoring them. You seem to just like getting on my case for some unknown reason. |
I did check through this thread before replying. If I was incorrect, I was going to apologize. Unfortunately what I saw was bush calling etc. I did see anumber of people give their constructive opinions on the subject, what I would like to see is your constructive reasons supporting the research paper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5448
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
| bdbranch wrote: |
Drtre1987, that's a perfect example of stupid childish behaviour.
- - - - - - - -
HuJwang, many of us would like to read constructive discussion instead of silly flaming. In this thread Mark somebody disagreed about the conclusion writing that the problem was that young people are told that they are dumb, dumwaldo questioned whether the study was representative and others supported the study with somebody using the Idol competition as a example. What all these people did was have a constructive discussion.
Whether they may be correct or incorrect is one thing. But I can tell you one thing. I would respect the views of all these people far more than anybody who chooses not to undertake constructive discussion but instead has a flaming session. HuJawng, I don't believe it's any secret that I don't view yourself too favourably. Try constructive discussions on topics. Even if I were to disagree with your opinion, I and hopefully many other people would form a more positive attitude to your views as a result. |
I'm going to have to disagree that dumwaldo's posts are constructive in any way. And I have had plenty of constructive discussions on topics when I am able to talk with someone who is more interested in the discussion than making themselves feel superior. In fact, I think I've made some fairly constructive posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you're ignoring them. You seem to just like getting on my case for some unknown reason. |
I did check through this thread before replying. If I was incorrect, I was going to apologize. Unfortunately what I saw was bush calling etc. I did see anumber of people give their constructive opinions on the subject, what I would like to see is your constructive reasons supporting the research paper. |
It's funny cause it was actually you that I was having the reasonable discussion with. Yet you seem to have ignored that and just went back to the one post earlier where I made a sarcastic remark. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drtre1987 wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
In fact, I think I've made some fairly constructive posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you're ignoring them. You seem to just like getting on my case for some unknown reason. |
This is what I have a problem with. You have been posting good logical arguements and get accused of flaming and being a child. |
Calling someone a bush supporter because you disagree with them isn't a 'good logical argument' (even if it's a good insult).
Btw, neither is stupid pictures.
Last edited by bdbranch on Mon May 12, 2008 12:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StevieWard
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 1212
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dumwaldo wrote: |
When I was 20 years old I knew everything.
When I was 30 years old I knew how much I did not know at 20 years old.
If I participated in this study when I was 20 my results would have matched the conclusions.
If I participated in the study at 30 years old then my results would have deviated from the conclusion.
If I were t participate in the study right now at 38 years old I am quite sure that my results would indicate th exact opposite of the studies conclusion.
So what exactly does a study of a bunch of college kids prove about the general population? The answer is it proves nothing. I could do a study of 3 year olds that concludes the majority of the population drools and it would be accurate by the burden of proof accepted by everybody that accepts this study as relevant.
This is one of the reasons why psychology is NOT an exact science and why any COMPETENT person would absolutely not accept this 'study' as blindly as the supporters in this thread have done so. A COMPETENT person would only accept it if it carried the disclaimer that it is only applicable to 18 to 23 year old people that are educationally centered enough to be attending advanced education institutions.
Basically it should have stated that the results are NOT indicative of the entire population but instead the ARTICLE ignorantly omitted that pertinent information and some of the members here in their blind mob mentality forgot to actually THINK for themselves and realize this.
This thread is about as reliable as a post about online poker being rigged after a sample size of 200 hands. Ironically some of the most vocal members that would denounce a 200 hand sample size have forgone their common sense and accepted this study as if it means something when the reality is it means nothing except privileged young people tend to overestimate themselves.
DW 
BTW
sorry I took so long to get back to this, I was in Atlantic City losing some more money. |
Did you not say you were leaving this forum? When is it you are leaving?
Please hurry up. You come across as a complete fool who responds to any post with whatever answer you can make up in your head as you deem fit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StevieWard
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 1212
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drtre1987 wrote: |
| bdbranch wrote: |
Drtre1987, that's a perfect example of stupid childish behaviour.
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5448
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GUYS STOP RUINING THIS THREAD WITH IMAGES. WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A VERY SERIOUS IMPORTANT DISCUSSION.  IMAGES ARE NOT LOGICAL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StevieWard
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 1212
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| GUYS STOP RUINING THIS THREAD WITH IMAGES. WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A VERY SERIOUS IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. IMAGES ARE NOT LOGICAL. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wwcd5215
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 1605
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rockycatt
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 2439
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
   |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
I did check through this thread before replying. If I was incorrect, I was going to apologize. Unfortunately what I saw was bush calling etc. I did see anumber of people give their constructive opinions on the subject, what I would like to see is your constructive reasons supporting the research paper. |
It's funny cause it was actually you that I was having the reasonable discussion with. Yet you seem to have ignored that and just went back to the one post earlier where I made a sarcastic remark. |
I would be interested to reading your opinion in support of the research paper. Personally, I don't view the research paper as being the most suitable example to use in support of the general opinion that people with low abilities in certain areas overestimate their ability. The reasons I gave for this was that the professor's bias showed & made the paper less than suitable material and also simple mathemathical fact that a person in the lowest 10% couldn't say that they were in the minus 20%. I've also stated the opinion that the Idol competition example raised by another writer was an excellent example of people overestimating their ability (embarrassingly so).
Now I'm confident that we both agree on the general issue of people overestimating their ability and therefore at least partially disagree with mark. Which leaves the question of the research paper itself. Kindly tell us why do you support the research paper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
