@Kenshin If they can't explain it to you in a way that you'd agree with, I think that indicates either a problem with your (general "you") reasoning or, much more likely, that it's not a good enough reason
@Kenshin sounds like you just encountered a specific example. Care to share?
@Jim no specific example I've just been thinking about this. For example, if someone loves to study, is it because people love learning or is it because that person has been conditioned to associate studying with something good
See if one tries to work out what people find to be good, it's hard to disentangle what's been conditioned upon them, and what is naturally found to be good
advertising exploits this to try to condition people into thinking their products are good. Teachers like teaching students the right way to behave etc.
Often by rewarding students with something that is actually good when they do something the teacher wants the students to think of as good (or punishing them for the reverse)
Clearly the joy of eating is a real good, but even then McDonalds has made a business of making people feel more good about eating their product by including play grounds etc.
@Justwinbaby hunger sells not from a desire to feel good, but from a desire to feel not bad. However, going from bad to neutral is pretty much the same as going from neutral to good, so you could argue it's the same thing
Usually when you make others feel good you are rewarded (either through empathy or directly). Thus this becomes conditioned in the sense that your brain associates doing good for others as a good thing
@Kenshin not necessarily. Social collaboration is coded into us instinctively, as pack animals. Sacrificing yourself for the good of many has survival advantages for the species and so, understandably, may not be conditioned learning as much as it may be natural behaviour
@Jim Jim you're right. But it again brings me back to my earlier point, it's very hard to disentangle what is conditioned and what makes us feel good in its own right
But I do question whether social stuat is fundemental. Perhaps it is again a conditioned response because those with low social status feel suffering (e.g. through lack of resrouces)
@Kenshin That's because you're comparing two different things there. It's not "the need to play video games", it's a "need for diversion", or a "need for entertainment".
"playing video games" is not on the level of "eating" - the proper comparison would be "eating bananas", which is certainly not a fundamental need
@ACuriousMind the brain doesn't care the brain just feels happiness. My point is some activities are conditioned to be pleasurable. I think self actualisation is conditioned rather than inate
@ACuriousMind My believe was stated above (not a secret), but my believe above isn't published because as you said it's not science yet, just like MAslows isn't either
@ACuriousMind mate stop trolling. Maslow's isn't Scientific (as opposed to not published)
People who are satisfied with Maslow are like those satisfied with the ether before Einstein. The theory is clearly BS and accepting it is just mental laziness
@ACuriousMind I understand why you and many others might be drawn to Maslow, because it provides some structure to an otherwise complicated topic, but people are drawn to it in the same way they are drawn to religion. To provide some answers to the unknown. The truth is, human needs are not nicely structured as Maslow portraits them to be.
@Avantgarde well to put the discussion in context we were discussing the intricacies of human needs, and some dude comes along as says "Maslow" like as if it solves all our problems - but it doesn't.
I think we should all read psychology in greater depths than the first sentence of the wikipedia page or something and then indulge in these discussions.
Guys, say we have $12$ lamps of $50$ Watts on a plate. Is there an easy way to guess what the power is on a surface parallel to this plate, on a distance of $50$ cm?
And of course not the entire power radiated by them will be on the plate - I'm not sure there is a good way to guess how to model how the power is radiated without measuring it
Might be better to consider the plate a point source and go with a 1/r^2 dependence, might be better to consider it, well, an infinite plate and then the power on the plate would just be the power radiated. The truth is, of course, somewhere in between
@ShaVuklia Wait, your lamp setup draws just 600 W. If the efficiency is 20% then you should at most measure 120W.
I have learnt basic java programming. Now which is better for coding practice: TopCoder or HackerRank or something else? Ideas anyone? (TopCoder's interface looks a bit strange to me)
you will eventually convince yourself that the toothache, to the intelligent man, is a weapon, which can be used to cause humiliation and suffering to your neighboring human beings, and extract pleasure out of it. if you fail to cause suffering, you will suffer for that reason yourself, and extract self-gratification out of your own suffering
"Only the Good Die Young" is a song from Billy Joel's 1977 pop rock album, The Stranger. It was the third of four singles released from the album. The song was controversial for its time, with the lyrics written from the perspective of a young man determined to deflower a Catholic girl.
== Song information ==
The song was inspired by a high school crush of Joel's, Virginia Callahan. The boy/narrator believes that the girl is refusing him because she comes from a religious Catholic family and that she believes premarital sex is sinful. He sings,
Attempts to censor the song only made it more popular...
@ACuriousMind I strongly suggest you quit string theory that has not (and most probably will not) delivered anything, and join stem cell researchers and do something useful to the humanity
Ok, here's a suggestion: if any of you appreciate Batman, and you like Nolan's trilogy, look at "A Serious House on Serious Earth". This was Grant Morrison's debut graphic novel; it's based on the batman storyline but is actually a psychological horror comic