User talk:TheSocktor

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, TheSocktor!

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards.

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

Nice start! - David Gerard (talk) 12:36, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Sysop[edit]

Blessed with the mop - David Gerard (talk) 22:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

The reason why your ears are itching.[edit]

You've been mentioned at User talk:Stabby the Misanthrope#First world problems. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 06:04, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Minor edits[edit]

You are mislabeling edits that add meaningful content as minor. Minor edits are edits that don't change anything except spelling/grammar/format/other non- meaningful content. Just fyi. Nullahnung (talk) 13:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Thanks. TheSocktor (talk) 14:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Climate models[edit]

Replied. Hope that helps. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Research on neuropsychology by Jordan Peterson[edit]

Wiki lists it as "neuro" with a link to neuropsychology here [1]. If you can't find it, just ask.Ariel31459 (talk) 20:30, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Lol, I dug down, find it's a self-description. And when I dug further into the particular works he also described that way, he calls giving people a paper test called a "neuropsychological test battery" makes it worth labeling as neuropsych. You hear that social pyshologists, if you measure someone's verbal learning one time, you're also a neuro-psych expert! Ultracrepidarianism the whole way down. And then there's this one from early in his career. Oh my fucking god. It's flagrantly insane psychobabble he somehow got published. And called describing things as "dieties in animal form" as neuropsych.
Prior to this, I'd only ever been exposed to his mid-career Big-Five pattern matching par-for-course social psychology work, but this level of complete insanity is hilarious. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:41, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
I'd like to see criticism by someone with more neuroscience credentials than an anonymous user on this wiki. Nothing personal. It's a rule I generally apply in all situations.Ariel31459 (talk)
You'd I'm sure like to see that, ignores now several articles by credentialed neuroscientists lambasting him for his bullshit but not specifically addressing his one-off self-description as one. Sure. You're not just pointlessly defensive, you're just "concerned". Read the papers Ariel. They're listed with full abstract on the very wikipedia citation you're referring to. I'm sure, if you're not completely full of shit, you can find legitimate research where he's done any sort actual neuropysical examination of humans. Surely he's done at least one piece of research with standard tools like, I dunno, FMRIs, electrophysilogy, neuron simulation, brain chemistry or... anything relevant. I'm sure it's there since you're so intellectually honest. (Sorry, socktor, for filling your talk page with this). ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 22:13, 21 February 2019 (UTC)