nice hat

Never had any prompt for google services in 2+ years of owning a sd, i don’t know why you’re so affirmative about something you don’t actually seem to be sure about

it’s relative, he was progressive compared to the thousands of popes who came before him

I read the title of your post quickly in my feed and thought you were shushing me

I don’t understand the 11 downvotes… Thank you for sharing, I’ve wondered about this game for a long time.

It’s weird for a supersonic airplane to come back as a free-to-play game but ok

I’m not going to replay an ontological debate that has been happening in the fields of sociology and psychology for decades with an engineer on the internet, who claims his own rationality a bit too hard. MBTI is considered pseudoscience because of its weakness against proper scientific validation processes, as well as its lack of support among both practitioners, theorists and researchers in the academic circles.

But to be clear, just because knowledge isn’t scientific doesn’t mean it doesn’t have value, there are tons of example like that that we use every day. The main issue I have with MBTI is that it takes the appearance of scientific knowledge, which I find deceitful and thus suspicious.

It’s pseudoscience in both cases, saying you’re so and so because your personality is INFJ has almost as little value as correlating to being a gemini. Now if you find some sense in those personality types, maybe that contains some lessons.

I have never agreed more with a stranger on a topic so niche

When you talk about international politics, terrorist is a useless word because its definition is vague and often defined by the power in place: when the Hamas kills civilians it’s “terrorism”, when Israel does it it’s “protection”. The fact that you use it so passionnately instantly disqualifies your argument, underlining its biases.

That’s not world news, that’s propaganda. The article is so biased and doesn’t even pretend to understand the dynamics or context of Switzerland’s parliament.

reminds me of the abu ghraib photos

You’re just presenting nuanced conclusions as overwhelming truths to put weight on your opinion, while taking a few shortcuts. You’re entitled to your opinion of course, but that doesn’t mean you get to dismiss any contradicting ones by deciding unilaterally what the words mean.

Chiropractice in the US might be just “cracking joints”, but it’s not true everywhere. If you can’t accept that, then I don’t know what to tell you.

Psychoanalysis was invented almost at the same time in Vienna and a lot of freudian concepts have since been critiqued due to his biases. Does it mean Austria forever owns psychoanalysis and anything that could be discovered since? There is a difference between a field of research, a scientific discipline and a paradigm. Debunking a theory that was invented more than a century ago doesn’t disqualify every research done after that. Also, paradigm change often comes from opposing theories from the same field they oppose. If we did like that, there wouldn’t be a lot of research field left standing.

You accept yourself that osteopathy was able to go beyond its suspicious origin, but refuse to imagine that chiropractice could do the same. Which is why I reiterate: chiropractice requiring no medical training is a north american thing.

in the us, again, it doesn’t happen like that in a lot of countries.

That’s just not true, regulations imply healthcare reimbursement, which implies strict control on the treatment and the practicians, because insurance companies hate paying.

…from a north american perspective.

Those definitions are just not true in a lot of countries outside of the us.

This is a very north american opinion, which also happens to be very condescending in tone, while op explicitly dismiss commenters who disagree with them. The practices designated by the various terms, such as chiropractors, osteopath, physical therapists, etc. vary depending on the countries and contexts, especially in some european countries where chiropractors must answer to the same standards and regulations as the other medical professions. This should be taken into account.

Do you realize how insane you sound? The person you’re talking to expresses skepticism and uses their critical thinking, while not taking sides, and you’re accusing them of being a terror apologist.

Here’s a crazy idea: you can be critical of both hamas and the idf. Being suspicious towards information that can be instrumentalized and asking questions to one side at one point is not and endorsement of the other side.

I just had to stop and note how great this comment is, I learned more in two sentences than in several articles relying on my attention for money. Thank’s!