The Psychology Thread, I Guess...

Some ideas in Philosophy of Science:

 

How do you test the validity of a theory/model/concept (e.g. Computational Psychology)?

Well, first you make sure it wasn't 'p-hacked' specifically to back-predict the data you're trying to understand

(i.e. you took all existing data, used it to generate a theory/model, and then big surprise when it perfectly back-predicts all existing data! Problem is: it doesn't predict new/incoming data!)

 

Okay, so we wanna see if our Computational Psychology model/theory/metaphor is useful

(read: makes good predictions, affects good outcomes, etc)

Well, secondly: does its predictions align with the predictions from other (sub)disciplines?

If so, hey we're off to a good start

 

Think of your (classical) senses

(This is a JBP idea, btw):

How hearing something is so-so evidence (might be a hallucination, after all!)

But seeing something too is better evidence

And also smelling it is even better evidence the thing is real

Etc etc

 

 

Computational Psychology/Psychiatry is one 'sense' of many 'senses' kicking about

And so far it agrees with the other 'senses', so...

 

TL;DR = homeboy is overly concerned with the literal minutia of the language itself

Does he also think we shot two twins into space to test the (Relativity) Twin Paradox?

Language, as usual, is a finger pointing at the moon

Let's not squabble about the dimensions of the finger

Edited January 19, 2017 by LimpyLoo

Oh, and the language we use to talk about computers themselves is also merely...language

If the brain acts like a computer

who the hell cares if the language we use to describe computers

Is also literally apt for describing the brain

That is not a thing worth caring about

Look to the moon, m4!

You are a profound deep man who speaks wisdom. Am i a deciple of your acerbic short sighted observations? Hell no!

  On 1/19/2017 at 2:32 AM, Schlitze said:

You are a profound deep man who speaks wisdom. Am i a deciple of your acerbic short sighted observations? Hell no!

Please: tell me precisely where/how I'm mistaken

So I can understand where my thinking went wrong

Otherwise you're just prickteasing me with your genius (don't leave me 'blue', Schlitze!)

I actually can't be bothered with the benford's law thing - I don't want to have a repeat of the game theory thread that took me 3 pages to convince you what I was saying was true.

 

Re: jargon - actually you should try and use as little jargon as possible when speaking to the general public - jargon obfuscates and causes misunderstanding/miscommunication. To explain points, one should use as little jargon as possible.

 

I expect when i pop back in to this thread, you will have posted approximately 4 separate posts in response.

  On 1/19/2017 at 4:16 AM, chenGOD said:

I actually can't be bothered with the benford's law thing - I don't want to have a repeat of the game theory thread that took me 3 pages to convince you what I was saying was true.

 

Re: jargon - actually you should try and use as little jargon as possible when speaking to the general public - jargon obfuscates and causes misunderstanding/miscommunication. To explain points, one should use as little jargon as possible.

 

I expect when i pop back in to this thread, you will have posted approximately 4 separate posts in response.

As I recall in the Game Theory discussion, when you laid out the payout matrix, you put column '2' before '1'

But there was a good reason you did it,

but I didn't know the reason so I was confused

and we misunderstood each other until that '2/1' thing was pointed out

We didn't actually disagree on the facts, though

Edited January 19, 2017 by LimpyLoo

My first reply to the game theory problem you posted

I posted (roughly, from memory) the basic-blueprint 'non-dominant Nash equilibrium' matrix

And tried in real time to draw all the parallels

But I had not noticed the matrix columns ran '2',1'

Edited January 19, 2017 by LimpyLoo

Just an observation: limpy, you're wrestling with concepts which require complete lectures, courses, or even studies. Good to see your enthousiasm, but please consider you're in the banter section of a music forum. (As i'm sure you know) If you want serious answers to all your questions, you'd be better off at a university instead of the general banter section of watmm. If you just want banter, by all means go ahead. Other members seem to enjoy it as well. But, please don't expect scientific rigour in the general banter section.

 

I don't see a direct link between game theory and benfords law, btw. But i havent read the discussion you apparently had with chen back there. So that might have more to do with the type of argument than the actual subject. Dunnooooo

  On 1/19/2017 at 5:17 AM, goDel said:

Just an observation: limpy, you're wrestling with concepts which require complete lectures, courses, or even studies. Good to see your enthousiasm, but please consider you're in the banter section of a music forum. (As i'm sure you know) If you want serious answers to all your questions, you'd be better off at a university instead of the general banter section of watmm. If you just want banter, by all means go ahead. Other members seem to enjoy it as well. But, please don't expect scientific rigour in the general banter section.

 

I don't see a direct link between game theory and benfords law, btw. But i havent read the discussion you apparently had with chen back there. So that might have more to do with the type of argument than the actual subject. Dunnooooo

(No connection between game theory and Benford's law, btw

Was just replying to Chen)

 

 

So I'm just throwing ideas down

No expectations, really*

 

 

 

 

*Unless someone comes in and tells me I'm a fucking idiot

Then yes I expect them to show their work

And help me see exactly how

(Schlitze baby: holla atcha boy)

Re autism: 

It's the sort of thing that would be easily overlooked in the sports world.

Wow yeah

AKA

"Error: I am not programmed to enjoy abstract ideas"

Or

"The particulars of this fictional world aren't identical to the particulars of the current world around me, therefor this movie has nothing valuable to offer me"

Homeboy should watch the movie Goonies

Where the hero is a severely autistic manchild who

*despite* being frightened by the literal details of "rock-a-bye baby"

Is able to overcome his fear and save his friends from peril

 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pnrs3zu0xeI

  On 1/13/2017 at 6:13 AM, keanu reeves said:

i just realized, limpyloo is the son i had with jswift. he'd be about nine now, our beautiful retarded boy.

lol keltoi cum back

Some Thoughts on Some Movies

(Part 1)

 

(This one x-posted from 'Films Recently Watched' thread from like an hour ago)

Greenberg - perfect (imo)/10

Finally bought this on DVD

and watched it ~3 times

Perfect psychoanalytic gem

(Like all of Baumbach's films...except maybe Mr. Jealousy)

 

 

 

 

 

(Since this thread is more 'lopsided text-message conversation' than 'place where decorum is sacred', I'll just quadruple-post my thoughts on Anomalisa and a few other flicks I think are important...)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

  On 1/25/2017 at 6:59 PM, dr lopez said:

 

  On 1/13/2017 at 6:13 AM, keanu reeves said:

i just realized, limpyloo is the son i had with jswift. he'd be about nine now, our beautiful retarded boy.

lol keltoi cum back

Keanu-

Just lemme know if you'd like some real information to use to mock me

 

Here's a sample:

I was a breach c-section birth and when I was born the umbilical* cord was wrapped around my throat and my face was blue

(Dude, just think of the retardation possibilities!

Not to mention all the crucial probiotic vagina-juices I didn't get to soak up)

 

*i don't actually know how to spell 'umbilical'

probably because I was blue when I was born lol

 

 

But there's plenty more where that came from

Anytime you want dirt on me

Literally just ask and I will literally tell you why I'm probably as retarded as you think I am

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

Edited February 10, 2017 by LimpyLoo

Plus ur a maineiac

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

(P.S. ^my mom was all sobbing and freaking out about my condition

And the doctor who delivered me said "I bet he's gonna be retarded lol")

 

Anomalisa

 

So I was gonna post my thoughts on Anomalisa a few months ago

In the 'Films Recently Watched' thread

But Usagi advised against it

So instead I guess I'll just offer them here, now:

 

 

Anyone who recognizes the name 'Charlie Kaufman'

Already knows there's a lot of information crammed into Charlie Kaufman films

When I initially saw Anomalisa, I thought it was a return to simpler, more traditional forms

I thought he had mellowed out and had stopped micro-managing every crumb and millisecond of his films

And--although I really liked the film--I was actually somewhat disappointed by this

 

But when I watched it a second time

(And then when the DVD came out I watched it 2 more times)

I started to notice that the arbitrary details weren't so arbitrary

And that--as with literally all of his other films--he was up to some shit...

 

Microcosm/Macrocosm, Self-Reference, and Self-Similarity

 

One thing he was up to was condensing the entire macrocosmic arc into microcosmic details

So...[spoiler alert from here until end of entire post]

The shower scene...."Hot!......Cold!.....there, just right"

When I noticed that I was like "fuck me, I bet there's a bunch of shit like that in all the 'trivial' details..."

 

Does anyone remember how both Michael and Lisa trip in the hallway?

Well, I'm sure that's just for adding some human realism to a muppet movie,

because hey people trip all the time

Well, I found it very suspicious how Michael tripped

(

Almost like he was, y'know, tripping on an actual obstacle that was invisible to him because of his blinders, and so it looked...

 

The hallway on their floor is a fixed-throughout-the-film metaphor for 'general life strategy'

One reason I say this with such near-certainty is because the zooming in the hallway scenes is obsessively-precise, confusingly-extreme, and randomly-timed

(Remember that this is stop-frame animation, not a half-improvised Scorsese film where behavioral details and camera moves might be written or they might be cinema verite...)

Look how Michael and Lisa each carry them-self across the hallway, left to right:

Michael trips on account of his hubristic blindness...

Lisa trips on account of her tentativeness and self-doubt...

 

Through a Psychological Lens

 

For starters, Michael doesn't enjoy any situation he's in

As he's always impatiently grasping towards the next situation he'll be in

But of course he never actually enjoys that situation either, and so on and on

and just treats it like an obstacle standing between him and his happiness too

So he never actually enjoys anything

(Does that maybe sound like almost every person you've ever met in your entire life?)

And he really only enjoys alcohol and sex to the extent that they are momentary escapes from the pain of being-in-the-world

moment after moment, day after day, year after year...

But he can't even do those two things well

so they just bring about more suffering for him and those around him...

 

[i don't know how fractally I should delve into specific scenes and details

So I'll just offer some thoughts on the bigger more obvious ones: the dream, the doll, the breakfast apotheosis, the speech]

 

The Dream

 

Here's a fucking stupid question:

what if the World/Society/Universe/'The All' could literally talk, and it told you that it loved you?

(assuming, of course, that it didn't talk like some sarcastic asshole?)

Would you run away?

 

What if 'The All' suggested you 'walk across the room' like a normal human being,

but instead you decided to hop in a tractor/bulldozer thing (an overly-crude tool for the job, perhaps?), and as a result you fall in the completely-avoidable hole that's in the middle of the room?

 

What if you had an entire 'room' full of normal healthy potential-partners telling you they wanted to be with you, but of course if they got to know your inner tractor/bulldozer they would be fucking horrified, so you run away, because what you really need is the most (inner-)wounded partner you can find who perhaps even enjoys inner tractor/bulldozers....[micro/macro: Michael inadvertently smacks Lisa in the face while he's thrashing about in his sleep, of which she later says "it's okay, I actually kinda enjoyed it"]

 

 

[be back in 15ish, in next post]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

Edited February 11, 2017 by LimpyLoo

why do you format your posts that way? 

He said he writes like that because his eyes don't like scrolling all the way across the screen when he's reading someone's post

then I said 'that would only effect you if you were reading your own posts'

then he became evasive

  On 2/10/2017 at 11:22 PM, dr lopez said:

Plus ur a maineiac

Ayut!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

  On 2/11/2017 at 12:32 AM, keanu reeves said:

why do you format your posts that way?

So they're easier to read because personally I don't enjoy straining my eyes left to right and reading undifferentiated strings of dependent clauses and I think form should serve function and not vice versa also I'm just an all-around annoying person

 

But I like how you ignored the actual meaning of my post and focused/commented solely on what you disliked about it: the presentation

 

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

P.S. I misremembered a few details about the dream

Turns out years of oxy, heroin, Xanax, anti-psychotics, mood stabilizers and anti-depressants might've degraded my memory a bit

It's a golf cart, and 'Lawrence Gill' tells him to use it

And offers him instructions on how to use it, but he doesn't listen and falls in a hole

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

so what about the doll, the breakfast apotheosis and the speech?

:)

  On 2/11/2017 at 1:14 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 2/11/2017 at 12:32 AM, keanu reeves said:

why do you format your posts that way?

So they're easier to read because personally I don't enjoy straining my eyes left to right and reading undifferentiated strings of dependent clauses and I think form should serve function and not vice versa also I'm just an all-around annoying person

 

But I like how you ignored the actual meaning of my post and focused/commented solely on what you disliked about it: the presentation

 

 

 

I'm an unreasonable man, get on my case

 

 

it isn't easier to read. also i didn't read your previous post, because it wasn't easy to read. also i tend to dismiss things that aren't presented clearly, because communication depends on not obfuscating what you're trying to say behind a wall of bullshit. btw your whole condescending enlightened guru italicize random words tone in every post you make is the main reason myself and many others think of you as a kind of cancer on this board. there's always at least one though, always has been.

Come on, elitist drivel can be annoying but comparing someone with cancer isn't nice