Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Going green makes you mean!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedGoing green makes you mean!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15783
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Going green makes you mean!
    Posted: August 05 2014 at 21:07
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Both the article and the study are 4 years old. There were doubts about the methods used in the study at the time of publication (as the article mentions, unfortunately the links are dead).

Reading through the study paper itself (and not the newspaper conclusions), it seems like very naive "set of experiments" to me. The original study just goes to show why psychology and sociology are not real sciences as it fails to remember that correlation does not imply causation. 


That's a bit harsh. The standards in the fields are unfortunately low, but it's hard to say that psychology isn't a science. 
LOL yeah, I went a tad OTT there and my crass generalisation was indeed harsh. However, I think this particular study is specious and perhaps displays a degree of bias confirmation. To be taken seriously as a science it needs to raise the standards.



Yeah after having read through that this seems like rubbish. Priming results like these have been failing to hold up to repeatability, and I would be surprised if this one didn't as well. Also, was this written in word? What kind of academic paper is this?
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 05 2014 at 13:44
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Both the article and the study are 4 years old. There were doubts about the methods used in the study at the time of publication (as the article mentions, unfortunately the links are dead).

Reading through the study paper itself (and not the newspaper conclusions), it seems like very naive "set of experiments" to me. The original study just goes to show why psychology and sociology are not real sciences as it fails to remember that correlation does not imply causation. 


That's a bit harsh. The standards in the fields are unfortunately low, but it's hard to say that psychology isn't a science. 
LOL yeah, I went a tad OTT there and my crass generalisation was indeed harsh. However, I think this particular study is specious and perhaps displays a degree of bias confirmation. To be taken seriously as a science it needs to raise the standards.

Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

I don't know if "green consumers" are less kind to others and more likely to cheat and steal, but I do suspect that they are susceptible to being hoaxed.
 

 

Don't open that ca of worms.. 

The discussion is around 'moral balancing' not the gulliblity or otherwise of greenies.
'Moral balancing' isn't trading-off a one act with a morally opposite one, it is the 'golden mean' between two extremes. In the case of going green, moral balancing would be choosing mid-priced farm-assured instead of the expensive free-range or cheap battery-farmed. Conversely trading-off buying the ethically questionable fois gras by subsequently purchasing ethically wholesome free-range eggs would not be a moral balance (it is debatable whether that is even guilt-easing). Moral balancing is something that is applied before, not after, the act.

It's probably worth mentioning that "green consumer" as used in this study is too vague and not defined. There is also more to going green than just consumerism, but since consumerism was the only measure of "green" used in the study that's the only part of it I'm referring to here. 

Green-consumerism does not necessarily involve any morality at all: for example 'organic' is a green choice but not a moral choice. In that respect it is a selfish choice because it is perceived that 'organic' is better for the consumer, the organic-only green consumer has made a personal choice that affects no one but themselves. Green choices that are moral would be those that are concerned with ethics in relation to the well-being of the animal or the producer, examples of those would be free-range and fair-trade. However even those can be selfish choices based upon the perception that they are also better products for the consumer, in fact that is exactly how they are marketed - they taste better, they are healthier, they are better for you. In contrast non-green products are depicted as unhealthy, full of nasty chemicals and bad for you. It could be argued that green-consumerism is purely about "self" and thus green-consumers are inherently self-centred and 'mean'.

The problem with psychological studies is they are subject to psychology themselves, that is the nature of the 'science'; both the participants and those conducting the study are part of any experiments conducted. Assessing morality in a lab experiment (if such a thing is ever possible) cannot avoid hoaxing and gullibility since the experiments carry a level of inherent duplicity within them: the participants were randomly assigned to "green" and "conventional"; they were told the tasks were unrelated; they were told "they had been randomly paired with another person in a different room, when there was none" and that "they had been randomly assigned to the initiator’s role (even though they all played that role)". Also, the "dictator game" used in the study is more a measure of maturity than morality and is related to self-image and how they perceive that image is seen by others. 



Edited by Dean - August 05 2014 at 13:46
What?
Back to Top
Blacksword View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 05 2014 at 02:50
Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

I don't know if "green consumers" are less kind to others and more likely to cheat and steal, but I do suspect that they are susceptible to being hoaxed.




Don't open that ca of worms..

The discussion is around 'moral balancing' not the gulliblity or otherwise of greenies.
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Back to Top
someone_else View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: May 02 2008
Location: Going Bananas
Status: Offline
Points: 23999
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 05 2014 at 01:40
I don't know if "green consumers" are less kind to others and more likely to cheat and steal, but I do suspect that they are susceptible to being hoaxed.
Back to Top
The Doctor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 04 2014 at 16:24
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

Shut up about the CIA and let me buy fluoride mouthwash in peace.

But if we all use fluoride mouthwash, fluoride toothpaste and have fluoride in our water, my god, we might all end up with..................clean teeth.   
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 04 2014 at 16:07
"Ethical consumers less likely to be kind and more likely to lie, cheat and steal " Yes because usually they are richer people. And a recent study found a correlation between wealth and those three behaviors you mentioned. 
Back to Top
King of Loss View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16329
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 04 2014 at 16:01
I hate this thread already, just like my floss.
Back to Top
Gamemako View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 31 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1184
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 04 2014 at 14:44
Questions about the validity of the study's methods aside, I am not surprised to see that conclusion. Other studies have found, for example, that exercising self-restraint leads to pervasive anger. There was another funny study that found Prius drivers are a****les. And let's not forget the manipulable effects of the expectation of reciprocity. I can think of a dozen reasons I'd expect this outcome regardless of methods.
Hail Eris!
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15783
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 04 2014 at 14:14
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Both the article and the study are 4 years old. There were doubts about the methods used in the study at the time of publication (as the article mentions, unfortunately the links are dead).

Reading through the study paper itself (and not the newspaper conclusions), it seems like very naive "set of experiments" to me. The original study just goes to show why psychology and sociology are not real sciences as it fails to remember that correlation does not imply causation. 


That's a bit harsh. The standards in the fields are unfortunately low, but it's hard to say that psychology isn't a science.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2014 at 13:14
Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

^^^ I bet a lot of studys do that. You could probably prove that greenies are more likely to paint their &rse blue on a Sunday than everyone else if you know how, and as individuals we choose what to believe and what not to largely dependiong on what we WANT to believe. That's just my opinion...

Gore is the worlds leading faux greenie though isn't he.

Odd that the Guardian should report on this, as it's a left/liberal paper. I would expect to see something like this in our Daily Mail newspaper, which in the UK is like the Infowars of tabloid newspapers.



I think you can make a good case for Gore being a faux green.  I still haven't gotten over of his killing of Current TV...

And his wife, Tipsy doing the whole PMRC thing...

Having said that, he would have been a much better president than W.  We'd still have a lot of bones to pick with him, but I don't think he would have let us get attacked on 911.


Edited by Slartibartfast - August 03 2014 at 13:17
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2014 at 01:03
They're certainly more irritating. Shut up about the CIA and let me buy fluoride mouthwash in peace.
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34050
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 18:18
ask Dr Manhatten or Stitch
Back to Top
akamaisondufromage View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 15:02

I am absolutely sure that being Blue makes you mean? 


Help me I'm falling!
Back to Top
The Doctor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 14:59
Originally posted by CosmicVibration CosmicVibration wrote:

and smoking weed makes you violent...Dead



Yep. People murdering cheetohs and twinkies indiscriminately. It's disgusting.   
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 14:41
Well, momentarily it does Tongue
Back to Top
CosmicVibration View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 26 2014
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 1327
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 14:24
and smoking weed makes you violent...Dead
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 09:17
Just the trip to Stockholm to get the prize will be worth it Tongue
Back to Top
The Doctor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 08:48
Well, I think we can take that as scientific fact then. I can smell that Nobel Prize coming our way.
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 08:10
Originally posted by The Doctor The Doctor wrote:

New study shows most people are Censoredholes. 

Source:  45 years putting up with the human race.

Tongue
.

My study is 10 years younger and it reaches the same conclusion. Remarkable. Absolute science at work. Tongue


Back to Top
The Doctor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2014 at 07:35
New study shows most people are Censoredholes. 

Source:  45 years putting up with the human race.

Tongue
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.168 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.