Carl-Richard

@Nilsi

@Happy Lizard As for cross-cultural/inter-cultural empirical support, it's generally lacking in the more classical linear stage theories (Piaget, etc.) (you can read about this in Barbara Rogoff's paper "the cultural nature of development"), and the same is the case for SD (I believe you can read about it on the wikipedia). As for conceptual limitations, if you're going for an universal theory of development, maybe a linear stage theory is just not a good fit in general. Maybe it's just too reductionistic and doesn't fit what it's trying to describe. For example, you have other theories that map developmental influences (ecology) rather than developmental altitudes (ontogeny), which may be better for establishing universal features of development.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-structuralism#Post-structuralism_and_structuralism In order to properly understand SD, you need to learn about the intellectual traditions that produced SD, particularly Western developmental psychology. Merely reading a graph on Google images does not suffice. Merely watching a video that Leo made does not suffice. Merely reading the Spiral Dynamics book does not suffice. You need to find out where all these things came from, because the concepts presented in the model are not culturally neutral nor intuitively obvious. They're based upon centuries (or technically millennia) of thinking done by other people. Study related theories in the field of developmental psychology, find out how they were made, find out what assumptions they're using, find out how they define central concepts like "development", find out their conceptual and empirical limitations, distinguish what it's useful for and not useful for, find more models, don't limit yourself to just one lens. If you do that, you might see that SD is really not so special in the grand scheme of things. It's just one particular outcrop of many related things.

I appreciate the Gojira song of the same name

Education, not prohibition.

@Matt23 Not a long time ago, I thought I was discovering revolutionary stuff, but then I found out that the Ancient Greek philosophers have been talking about it 2500 years ago What I call "intrinsic health" is basically "eudaimonia" (instead of hedonism, you have vitality, health, functionality, resilience). If anything, that means I was truly onto something. Discovering perennial truths through your personal life is one of the highest things you can do.

Primary: 1.3. Secondary: 1.3.

Integrity, in every sense of the word.

Ok, so it's not propaganda, but safety concerns.

Do you think that is maybe because ChatGPT is known to sometimes give out misinformation, which could be particularly dangerous when it comes to medical information?

But it did talk about illegal substances.

One time I asked it which steroids strongmen tend to use during competition, and it answered "sorry, I can't give information about illegal substances". Then I followed it up by asking "which receptor systems does cocaine worked on?", and it started listing off all the answers. Yes, the thing is not logically consistent, and it's clumsy, but you don't have to necessarily attribute it to political bias. Sometimes all it takes is a different prompt.

@zurew There is of course some overlap between language and thinking in terms of appearances, but it can still just be drawing upon previous texts that happened to talk about deductive logic and spit out the right words. It doesn't require an abstract understanding of deductive logic, i.e. thinking.

@Topspin715 I'm saying you can have an Orange understanding of something in terms of practicality even when you're capable of something higher, and if you're in that camp when it comes to SD (which I believe most people actually are), this advice is for you.

One big downside is the danger of false information. These machines literally don't know what they're doing, and I've already been fed misinformation multiple times. Like some AI expert I forgot the name of said, ChatGPT is closer to the autocorrect on your phone than a thinking being capable of reasoning. It has simply been fed a huge database of text material and then learns how words are usually strung together, and then it predicts which words tend to come next in a given prompt. It's nothing like the process of thinking, so trusting your thinking mind on it is a gamble.

You can prove anything using Hancock's methodology of spinning narratives on top of ancients myths from all across the globe.

What do you want to know? ?

There exists other ways of coping with your emotions than cockblocking your fucking friend lol

@ZGROPIUS I see. The crop was very confusing.

@ZGROPIUS Can I ask what your profile picture is? I don't know what I'm looking at ?

@integral He has to be told that he is in the wrong at some point. That could've happened in that very conversation had they talked it out more.

What if he does it again? Every time they go out?

"Sorry dude, you can't come on the night out dude, you're too histrionic"? ? The guy was in the wrong. He should acknowledge that and get over it.

Bruh, what kind of long-term would he be getting with these histrionic cockblocks?

This thread just turned full BDSM Maybe chill a little bit.