Well. That's kinda the thing about science. It's not enough to know that gravity exists. What matters is knowing WHY and HOW it exists.Tahaneira said:
The WHY and the HOW allows us to use that knowledge for other things in the future.
Science Proves That Trolls Ruin Everything
- Thread starter Fanghawk
- Start date
The WHY and the HOW allows us to use that knowledge for other things in the future.
Oh-ho-ho-ho. I've got my eye on you, mister! You shan't affect me in any meaningful way, no sir! But, the thing is, "professional troll", "devil's advocate", I don't know...those things are quite difficult to pull off since they obviously need to have the proper motivation, and often people misinterpret them as "antagonizing people for the sake of antagonizing them".kouriichi said:
Fanghawk said:
I see what you did there!
Ninjas. Damn.lacktheknack said:
Not that I'm surprised. This is a melting pot for almost everything the Escapist hates; Trolls, comments about polarizing topics, and "wasted" science money (like there's only a small number of scientists in the world, and this took away from things that "matter more"). Hell, throw in gun control and feminism/homosexual rights, and it's a perfect storm.
Anyway, yeah, that's why I tend to avoid commenting on topics that have inflammatory comments already. I don't need to get riled up, that happens enough when I'm offline.
It's nice to see the science of social cues get further research. These studies are important if you want to find out why people do the things they do. Ariely spoke about his very concept when it came to financially toxic decisions that lead up to the the 2007 recession. When a peer makes a bad decision and is not punished, in some cases is rewarded, then others take that cue to do similar or the same things. On comment threads it's the same situation. A few people make a comment that is just trolling (aka. you mad bro?) and it blows up. By the above logic, trolls should be banned on forums or punished in some way. They do it here on the escapist and you can even see they were punished, how long for, and for comments on what thread. It's an awesome thing they do.
Now if science could determine a way to teach people what trolling is, that is a real trick. You see, by disagreeing or having a different idea than other people, you are not trolling. People will say your trolling. I once used an analogy in one of my debates and the person responded with something like, "what kind of troll logic is that", when I was in fact not trolling.
I don't completely agree with the Theory of Motivated Reasoning. It's honestly just far too simple to explain complex human interactions. I also feel that if you were to make a list of what motivates the things people say to each other in a social situation, it would have to be much larger and rationality would have to be way down the list. If there is one thing most complex psychological version of various sciences (economics, sociology) have pointed out since Kahneman and Tverski's works that started in the 1960's, people are not rational. That is a strange sentence, but people are not rational creatures. We are capable of rationality. We are also capable of persistence hunting. Neither of which is done by everyone. Though it has a happy far step from on of the other theories that floats around, that would the cost benefit model. That one is completely off base in regards to what motivates people to do anything.
Now if science could determine a way to teach people what trolling is, that is a real trick. You see, by disagreeing or having a different idea than other people, you are not trolling. People will say your trolling. I once used an analogy in one of my debates and the person responded with something like, "what kind of troll logic is that", when I was in fact not trolling.
I don't completely agree with the Theory of Motivated Reasoning. It's honestly just far too simple to explain complex human interactions. I also feel that if you were to make a list of what motivates the things people say to each other in a social situation, it would have to be much larger and rationality would have to be way down the list. If there is one thing most complex psychological version of various sciences (economics, sociology) have pointed out since Kahneman and Tverski's works that started in the 1960's, people are not rational. That is a strange sentence, but people are not rational creatures. We are capable of rationality. We are also capable of persistence hunting. Neither of which is done by everyone. Though it has a happy far step from on of the other theories that floats around, that would the cost benefit model. That one is completely off base in regards to what motivates people to do anything.
"To scientists, this behavior bears a strong resemblance to the theory of motivated reasoning, which states that humans are emotional first and rational second....It only gets worse when discussing serious issues like climate change or Mass Effect 3, where opinions are so vitriolic that almost no one is capable of having a fully rational conversation in the first place."
Well if that "game" was more rationally designed, had a more stable story, instead of colossal inconsistent mess of emotional, shock value driven crap, maybe the response to the ending would have been more rational?
Well if that "game" was more rationally designed, had a more stable story, instead of colossal inconsistent mess of emotional, shock value driven crap, maybe the response to the ending would have been more rational?
VanQQisH said:
I am not a monkey. We may have a common ancestry, but any human has the capability to NOT behave like an animal.
It was very possible that trolls do not lower the quality of a conversation, and that people are capable of ignoring troll comments. It is also possible that people would not change there beliefs at all, just have disgust for the troll. Perhaps trolls aggression could have encouraged other people to troll as well, and the peer pressure causes people to agree with the trolls opinion because people are less likely to see something as trolling when they agree. Or perhaps trolling will cause people to tend to disagree with the troll out of antipathy. All these things are reasonable hypothesis that were rejected by the study. All of these conflicting outcomes could have been accused of being, "Obvious" by onlookers.Tahaneira said:
Even if you think that this outcome is the only obvious outcome, that would be the kind of conventional wisdom that science disproves on a daily basis. But you can't disprove conventional wisdom without first being willing to test something that most people consider obvious. Naturally, in unseating deeply held and deeply flawed beliefs that everyone assumes is true, you're often going to just support the obvious. That doesn't mean that putting it to the test and getting quantifiable measurements is not valid.
The main thing I took away from this article is that Science could be observing us right now... ¬_¬
There are alot of things we took as fact cause they were painfully obvious, only to discover we were wrong. This research is not as obvious as you think. What they are effectively saying is that anyone can put a reasonable argument up, have someone else stir up shit and the result will be a higher chance of everyone siding with their argument on the grounds of irrational response to the shit stirred. This is extremely important information about the human mind and can be used to calm major situation of rage, potential suicidals and high stress environments. It can also be used to better understand and counter coercive situations and reinforce the law with regards to unfair deals made under manipulative environments. It can also be used to better organize a military unit and in general circles get a more honest response from people in any situation.Tahaneira said:
So it seems minor and obvious, but the potential for it to expand out from the obvious rage against the something that is upsetting is an unexpected and important finding.
And of course there is the negative that govs and advertizes can now use the info to further encourage us to buy their bullshit and products. So be mindful.
Somewhat unrelated, but I wanted to point out that when people refer to "The Church", they are generally referring to one of the main Christian churches, usually the Roman Catholic church. Which specifically condemned witch hunts.VanQQisH said:
I don't disagree that there was a sheep mentality at play, but it wasn't a church conspiracy.
OT:It's not just internet trolls, but anything that makes you angry. It's why, in business, the old ways of "asshole boss belittling those below him" have completely disappeared from the bigger, more successful companies. Happy people are productive and inventive people.
It's funny because most troll comments I see lately are simply looking to get a reaction out of as many people as possible.
I guess they just won.
I guess they just won.