re: Social Experiment: BK to offer a burger with Blak buns, cheese, etc

quote:

---

kind of like theoretical physics, i take it?

---

Well theoretical physics is just that, theoretical. But at least that's a political neutral discipline, as opposed to existing solely as a grandiose exercise in leaping to conclusions on inadequate evidence in order to support detestable behavior. I’d have more respect for the field if there was more principled internal striving.

No, evolutionary psychology has its own special methodology and logic, and that’s what I criticize. Your stock in trade is to make observations of behavior in a single species, often in a single population, and then to infer an evolutionary history from that data point. You don’t get to do that. It’s not that the observations are invalid (they’re often interesting in their own right), or that it’s not possible that human behaviors carry a strong genetic component, it’s that you scientifically can’t draw an evolutionary conclusion from the simple existence of a trait in a population. It fails the most basic ideas of what science is yet you foolishly pronounce it to be irrefutable fact in order to further your political agenda.

Quite different from how the field of theoretically physics operates

Instead of playing with food and eating nonsense, when do people grow up and start taking the food they put in their bodies a little more seriously?

it is truly surprising that BK is still a going concern. They regularly do all they can to screw their franchisees.

I pretty much lived on Chicken Royale's with cheese when I lived in London for the summer back in college. It was the closest "american" food to where I was staying.

quote:

---

close your eyes and i doubt you can taste much difference

but we are seeing evolutionary behaviorism at work

we're automatically sickened by black food b/c we've evolved to avoid it (to avoid mold and decaying food)

---

Are the buns and cheese on other burgers at BK SMOKED with Bamboo charcoal??? I seriously doubt it taste anything like anything else that BK serves.

quote:

---

, unlike the disciplines you just listed, evolutionary psychologists pretend their observations are facts

---

as much as sosh and psych, at least

quote:

---

Then on top of that you have the fact that evolutionary psychologists, unlike in the other disciplines you mentioned, do what they do primary to promote a right wing political agenda.

---

of course

you disagree with liberal-progressive groupthink and you must be doing research to further a "right wing" political agenda

same with the disparaging key words like "pseudoscience". agree with the group or have your ideas discredited...modern academia

you need to remember the great concept from AA: when you point your finger at something, you have 3 fingers pointing back at you

you're a pot calling a kettle black. you just perceive to be doing it for the right reasons so you justify your biases (as many "right wingers" do, too). you have beliefs and you seek out things to confirm those beliefs. i don't, no matter how much you claim i do. i'm heavily read in liberal-progressive disciplines (hell i spent 7 years at LSU invested in them) and after a certain point they stopped making sense and started having their biases exposed

most people will go back to more within the disciplines and thinking of comfort to confirm the existing self-perception biases, typically digging deeper in. i became much more broadly read

there is a concept you need to understand. what i wish and want about humanity is irrelevant when compared to what humanity is

you confuse statements with what humanity is with a belief that you know what i desire what humanity should be

it's just like people who claim i have empathy, when that's an outright lie. i fully get the range of emotions people go through. comprehending how and why people think doesn't mean you have to excuse or baby people's choices

quote:

---

it looks like i struck a nerve

---

naw man i'm like leo in the departed. this hand don't shake

quote:

---

as you're no longer even bothering to defend your absurd position anymore and have launched right into attacking me

---

wuh? i didn't attack you. i'm defending myself after you accused me of being a "right winger" (i believe twice)

also you attempted to dismiss a point by lazy intellectualism (using the term "pseudoscience" on top of the ad hom attack)

if you dismiss a point due to subjective evaluations, then there is no more discussion to have. you've already created the rules in a way to win the discussion, so devoting resources towards the discussion is pointless until you return to objectivity. i don't fall for liberal argumentative tricks n e more

quote:

---

you are a right winger.

---

"right winger" typically denotes a social conservative and religious person. that's often the signifying distinction

i am DEFINITELY neither of those things

what is a "right winger" then?