FA+
Shop
No wrong think here, move along!
Category All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 800 x 450px
File Size 96.1 kB
You wouldn't believe how many times on twitter/protests I've seen such stupid shit.
"OH MY GOD -- YOU GUYS ARE FROM LIKE [Insert Overhyped Novel Antagonist Faction]. FUCK OFF!"
"WERE LIKE -- [Insert Overhyped Novel Protagonist Faction]. WERE GONNA SAVE THE DAY."
And it's always Harry Potter, Game of Thrones, Star Wars (because they had to fuck up the last two) -- and now all I have left is my Lord of the Rings.
"OH MY GOD -- YOU GUYS ARE FROM LIKE [Insert Overhyped Novel Antagonist Faction]. FUCK OFF!"
"WERE LIKE -- [Insert Overhyped Novel Protagonist Faction]. WERE GONNA SAVE THE DAY."
And it's always Harry Potter, Game of Thrones, Star Wars (because they had to fuck up the last two) -- and now all I have left is my Lord of the Rings.
No, that's not it at all. This is the definition - 'Someone using no critical thought or reasoning skills.Simply regurgitating a set of arguments and non-sequiturs bequeathed to them by someone else.' It's not about the majority of popular people. It's about ideologues. Here, go read more on it so that at the very least you'll be able to form an informed rebuttal to it - https://www.urbandictionary.com/def.....e.php?term=NPC
Thank you.
Regardless of what side of the aisle you stand, you're not skull-fuckingly retarded. I really needed to read something that reminded me that was possible; literally just about every other post in this thread made me want to go find an exit bag.
It's not even depression. It was just an awful moment of fixation on the fact that people are so frequently the author of their own problems and far too vacuous or self-assured to acknowledge that fact; it's something about the irony of people bitching, particularly about this sort of theme, when they might as well be describing themselves.
Urgg, just, way to much anxiety for a shitty meme. Hearts practically trying to hammer its way out of my chest, but at least I'm thinking again instead of just staring, trapped and appalled, at the screen.
So, seriously, thanks you.
Regardless of what side of the aisle you stand, you're not skull-fuckingly retarded. I really needed to read something that reminded me that was possible; literally just about every other post in this thread made me want to go find an exit bag.
It's not even depression. It was just an awful moment of fixation on the fact that people are so frequently the author of their own problems and far too vacuous or self-assured to acknowledge that fact; it's something about the irony of people bitching, particularly about this sort of theme, when they might as well be describing themselves.
Urgg, just, way to much anxiety for a shitty meme. Hearts practically trying to hammer its way out of my chest, but at least I'm thinking again instead of just staring, trapped and appalled, at the screen.
So, seriously, thanks you.
Oh my lord its become an endless loop, with each side calling the other NPC's. Over and over and over again. Using the excuse "Oh look your just parroting what everyone else says"... its almost like both sides have a large group of NPC's because while we may divide ourselves among party lines. We are all human and every group falls victim to humanities flaws.
I mean it's gotten to the point where actual scientific experts, mildly dissenting opinions, and evidence is being dismissed because "muh NPCs" (including by Jason himself), and /pol/ has a track record of being the containment board for antisocial dipshits, so forgive me for thinking that y'all might be taking it a little more seriously yourselves than you let on.
When it's being used to disregard science it shouldn't be ignored. People tend to stare and laugh at dumb things, but when it has a very real impact on their lives, there's pushback. Most of the people posting the NPC meme are teens. They're still in education. The idea that you can disregard inconvenient truths because you disagree with the person presenting them and nothing more is bad for education, which is a field I have a vested interest in. They might grow out of it, who knows, but there should be people who make them question themselves in the moment.
You can attempt to hurt my feelings and I will even root for you but I don't see it happening. You can try to claim my intentions and make my arguments on my behalf so you can claim victory. But what you can't do is try to bully me into a position I don't believe or make vague insults without me responding in a way that hopefully makes you cry like the little bitch you are...
But I also don't take this shit too serious and if we get into it here, it's meant to be entertaining to just me.. I'm not going to let anyone rent space in my head and I certainly don't expect to spend any time in anyone else's. This shit is supposed to be fun... even if it gets dirty
But I also don't take this shit too serious and if we get into it here, it's meant to be entertaining to just me.. I'm not going to let anyone rent space in my head and I certainly don't expect to spend any time in anyone else's. This shit is supposed to be fun... even if it gets dirty
Here's a video explanation of the research that lead to the meme.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lki2FlXX64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lki2FlXX64
While I'm sure everyone would like to think that it's simply inaccurate. The actual study and its subsequent "misinterpretation" is what fueled the idea of IRL NPCs today. Regardless, both the NPCs and Russian Bots in this fandom can watch the "ENTIRE" video and look up the research for themselves. I guarantee it's not what any of you think.
How very NPC of you. Very well I'll do your thinking for you.
It was a 2008 study involving 30 college students who were asked to write about different experiences at specific times over the course of several weeks. The result was that a given percentage routinely didn't experience a phenomena known as internal monologue, that little voice in your head narrating your thoughts (if you have one). Some also claimed that they never experienced a secondary phenomena known as internal scene, the ability to imagine something described to them. The results asserted that roughly a third of the human population are incapable of internal phenomena linked to deep thinking. The problem the video brings up is that these were very specific times and that anyone at any given time may not experience deep thought. The example is someone randomly asking, "whatcha thinking about" and your response "nothing". It's something everyone experiences and it doesn't mean that we never experience these internal phenomena.
However, a 2011 Psychology Today article doubled down on this assertion that a third of the population is incapable of internalizing or deep thought and merely parrots what they've been taught to say. Then sometime after the Trump election a reddit user reffered to the Psychology Today article and compared it to how the left is incapable of anything but group think and behaved similarly to video game ads known as Non Player Characters and used a grey faced Wojack character imagery. The left's redundant use of slurs, communist rhetoric, childish talking points, and even violence at the command of leftist political figures are the actions of NPCs.
Honestly, I'm disappointed someone who knows what solipsism means couldn't even muster the effort to learn this for themselves. Unless of course you don't know what it means and you're merely parroting someone else...
It was a 2008 study involving 30 college students who were asked to write about different experiences at specific times over the course of several weeks. The result was that a given percentage routinely didn't experience a phenomena known as internal monologue, that little voice in your head narrating your thoughts (if you have one). Some also claimed that they never experienced a secondary phenomena known as internal scene, the ability to imagine something described to them. The results asserted that roughly a third of the human population are incapable of internal phenomena linked to deep thinking. The problem the video brings up is that these were very specific times and that anyone at any given time may not experience deep thought. The example is someone randomly asking, "whatcha thinking about" and your response "nothing". It's something everyone experiences and it doesn't mean that we never experience these internal phenomena.
However, a 2011 Psychology Today article doubled down on this assertion that a third of the population is incapable of internalizing or deep thought and merely parrots what they've been taught to say. Then sometime after the Trump election a reddit user reffered to the Psychology Today article and compared it to how the left is incapable of anything but group think and behaved similarly to video game ads known as Non Player Characters and used a grey faced Wojack character imagery. The left's redundant use of slurs, communist rhetoric, childish talking points, and even violence at the command of leftist political figures are the actions of NPCs.
Honestly, I'm disappointed someone who knows what solipsism means couldn't even muster the effort to learn this for themselves. Unless of course you don't know what it means and you're merely parroting someone else...
TLDR; the NPC meme is based on the gross missinterpretation of an old study, with a number of flaws and limitations, that does not mean anything like what people are claiming.
The first half of the video was a slog and I can't really fault people for not wanting to sit down and spend nearly half an hour watching a video some random internet person told them to, so it's always nice to give a summary; let people decide if it's something they care enough about to invest the time, or present the information in a format that's more practical; if you're accurate and can minimise the filter of your own biases, it's hardly thinking for them any more than the video if thinking for you. That said, no need for anyone to be a dick.
Now, the question is, did the meme actually originate from this, or was it dug up after the ball started rolling? And if it did, is that even still relevant, or has it taken on entirely new meaning(or twenty) as the meme is constantly reinterpreted and reexperianced in different contexts, with little care or knowledge of how or why it began? How much of it is people literially claiming that the other group are unthinking subhuman automations, and how much is it just the latest Normie or Sheeple, or just a generic insult, or a silly meme?
The first half of the video was a slog and I can't really fault people for not wanting to sit down and spend nearly half an hour watching a video some random internet person told them to, so it's always nice to give a summary; let people decide if it's something they care enough about to invest the time, or present the information in a format that's more practical; if you're accurate and can minimise the filter of your own biases, it's hardly thinking for them any more than the video if thinking for you. That said, no need for anyone to be a dick.
Now, the question is, did the meme actually originate from this, or was it dug up after the ball started rolling? And if it did, is that even still relevant, or has it taken on entirely new meaning(or twenty) as the meme is constantly reinterpreted and reexperianced in different contexts, with little care or knowledge of how or why it began? How much of it is people literially claiming that the other group are unthinking subhuman automations, and how much is it just the latest Normie or Sheeple, or just a generic insult, or a silly meme?
If it's something people are invested enough into to get butt hurt over then I can fault them for not taking the time to investigate the subject for themselves. And I fully expected any summary on my part to be too long for the immature to read (TLDR) hence providing the video to explain it better. Furthermore, you can simply play the video in the background and listen to it which is as easy a format as it's going to get. If that is still too hard or you are so averse to thinking for yourself how else should I describe it? So yes, if you're such a dick that you can't be bothered to get out of your own way it's acceptable for people to be a dick to you.
In regards to to the origins, since the 4chan and Reddit threads referenced the Psychology Today article in the creation of the of meme then yes it's relevant. If not and all things are pliable or free for new interpretations (misinterpretations) then why not interpret it in a way that doesn't matter so you can get on with your life?
Either way I'm sure even this response will be too much for some people and somehow I'll still be a dick for explaining things in simple terms. Thanks for the reply at least and good luck with the mental gymnastics.
In regards to to the origins, since the 4chan and Reddit threads referenced the Psychology Today article in the creation of the of meme then yes it's relevant. If not and all things are pliable or free for new interpretations (misinterpretations) then why not interpret it in a way that doesn't matter so you can get on with your life?
Either way I'm sure even this response will be too much for some people and somehow I'll still be a dick for explaining things in simple terms. Thanks for the reply at least and good luck with the mental gymnastics.
Not bothering to check that the academic paper is open to the public, http://hurlburt.faculty.unlv.edu/he.....lburt-2008.pdf , makes you an NPC.
And if my behavior in response to shitty behavior on that part of your fellow NPCs makes me a massive tool then that would make you a fucking parasite.
And if my behavior in response to shitty behavior on that part of your fellow NPCs makes me a massive tool then that would make you a fucking parasite.
As always, the special snowflake that resorts to blocking is the genius screaming butthurt at shadows.🙄
In order:
Oddly enough, linking a video made by a failed academic interpreting the work of another, being generous here, mediocre academic operating out of the ass end of the US's state universities, isn't actually a super credible source. Even ignoring the fact that Aydin Paladin is a total knob who couldn't be trusted to interpret the damn weather, the source material is just absolute goddamn garbage. Since I'm getting the impression that you've very keen to espouse you deep and nuanced understanding of the statistical and scientific methods you'd need to access the quality of this paper, however, I'm more than happy to have a conversation on the subject.
To be clear, that links almost certainly illegal; the author does not own the right to publish that paper. Consciousness and Cognition no longer has open access to the material, it sells it through Elsevier and ScienceDirect. Naturally, I've sent them a notice about the infringement, as the authors provisional use for education and research generally expressly forbids public posting. You really did your guy a solid there champ.
In order:
Oddly enough, linking a video made by a failed academic interpreting the work of another, being generous here, mediocre academic operating out of the ass end of the US's state universities, isn't actually a super credible source. Even ignoring the fact that Aydin Paladin is a total knob who couldn't be trusted to interpret the damn weather, the source material is just absolute goddamn garbage. Since I'm getting the impression that you've very keen to espouse you deep and nuanced understanding of the statistical and scientific methods you'd need to access the quality of this paper, however, I'm more than happy to have a conversation on the subject.
To be clear, that links almost certainly illegal; the author does not own the right to publish that paper. Consciousness and Cognition no longer has open access to the material, it sells it through Elsevier and ScienceDirect. Naturally, I've sent them a notice about the infringement, as the authors provisional use for education and research generally expressly forbids public posting. You really did your guy a solid there champ.
Me a snowflake? That's rich. No I've blocked you because you're clearly a coward using a secondary account. Created 2009, no journals, no submissions, favorites, and only 72 page visits? Yeah I'm not talking to your backup account. And yet here you are still commenting, guess we know who the real butt hurt troll is.
As for Aydin Paladin's video you clearly lack a spine or any real academic background so you result to character attacks and a pathetic attempt to discredit her review by simply calling it garbage. Where exactly is your rebuttal, your YouTube channel, how about your primary account for that matter?
Finally, the paper. As you've pointed out the rights to the paper is sold through Elsevier and ScienceDirect which strangely enough clearly states:
"Some titles contain content that is available at no charge through Elsevier’s Open Access policies. Please verify that this content is not already available free of charge before placing your order."
So feel free to submit a notice of infringement, hell I'll send one too just for kicks, but we both know "generally" doesn't mean always. Combined with the fact that both University of Nevada Las Vegas library and Elsevier have open access (public posting) I'm pretty sure I already know how far it's going to get.
Congratulations on showing your ass with chickenshit tactics and empty threats on catching a University with infringing it's own study.
As for Aydin Paladin's video you clearly lack a spine or any real academic background so you result to character attacks and a pathetic attempt to discredit her review by simply calling it garbage. Where exactly is your rebuttal, your YouTube channel, how about your primary account for that matter?
Finally, the paper. As you've pointed out the rights to the paper is sold through Elsevier and ScienceDirect which strangely enough clearly states:
"Some titles contain content that is available at no charge through Elsevier’s Open Access policies. Please verify that this content is not already available free of charge before placing your order."
So feel free to submit a notice of infringement, hell I'll send one too just for kicks, but we both know "generally" doesn't mean always. Combined with the fact that both University of Nevada Las Vegas library and Elsevier have open access (public posting) I'm pretty sure I already know how far it's going to get.
Congratulations on showing your ass with chickenshit tactics and empty threats on catching a University with infringing it's own study.
Again, in order:
Or, you know, I just don't interact with people in comments much, given that they generally only serve to invoke intense antipathy. Trust me, you're stellar self awareness and queen whit have certainly won me over, though. Clearly I've been missing out.
Aydin is a failed academic; it's hardly a secret at this point that she was asked to leave her institution. My talent, or lack thereof, as an entertainer has fuck all to do with my ability to interpret papers. Your inability to mount any defence other than an appeal to groupthink youtube authority is noted however. Hypocrisy is a great look on you.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien.....97276513001299
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien.....53810008000032
You will notice something very special about these two links, you vapid tool; one of them is open access and can consequently be downloaded for free, while one of them isn't and can't.
Your belief that universities are publishers is, frankly, simultaneously embarrassing and hilarious. Your deep engagement with the academic community remains apparent 🙄 .
I honestly hope you're intelligent and self aware enough to realize how pathetic it is to see some vapid tool label strangers "NPC's" for failing to educate themselves with paywalled papers, and yet be to ignorant to even understand how open access works; given the evidence at hand however, I'm not holding my breath.
Or, you know, I just don't interact with people in comments much, given that they generally only serve to invoke intense antipathy. Trust me, you're stellar self awareness and queen whit have certainly won me over, though. Clearly I've been missing out.
Aydin is a failed academic; it's hardly a secret at this point that she was asked to leave her institution. My talent, or lack thereof, as an entertainer has fuck all to do with my ability to interpret papers. Your inability to mount any defence other than an appeal to groupthink youtube authority is noted however. Hypocrisy is a great look on you.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien.....97276513001299
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien.....53810008000032
You will notice something very special about these two links, you vapid tool; one of them is open access and can consequently be downloaded for free, while one of them isn't and can't.
Your belief that universities are publishers is, frankly, simultaneously embarrassing and hilarious. Your deep engagement with the academic community remains apparent 🙄 .
I honestly hope you're intelligent and self aware enough to realize how pathetic it is to see some vapid tool label strangers "NPC's" for failing to educate themselves with paywalled papers, and yet be to ignorant to even understand how open access works; given the evidence at hand however, I'm not holding my breath.
I've already messaged the University of Nevada Las Vegas, Professor Hulburt, and Elsevier about this supposed claim of illegal publication because I doubt a coward using a backup account is capable of anything but bluffing. Your death grip on this ridiculous notion that a company that sells the paper and the rights to use it is somehow the one true god when it comes to public access just isn't funny anymore. Additionally, your social aversions to comments doesn't explain the entire lack of any content on your account for 9 years. You also don't need to be an entertainer to use YouTube, or any other platform for that matter, to provide any real counter discussion. Which you still haven't done. Calling someone a massive vapid tool like some smarmy cunt is not a substantive discussion. Nor is your claim to be the only one who can effectively interpret research papers because "muh muh unfair paywalls" (seriously how pathetic can you get) and that anyone you don't like is a failed academic.
Which leads to my next question, what makes Aydin Paladin a failed academic? She was kicked out of her college job for drama with other faculty which has nothing to do with her performance as a student, her degree, or her ability to form a better rational argument than you. Let's dig a little deeper shall we. What's the drama surrounding Aydin Paladin anyways? Could it be the antisemitic remarks against her heritage while simultaneously accusing her of being a Holocaust denier for supporting Trump? Honestly, at this point I wouldn't be surprised if you yourself are some Nazi-fur that got their primary account banned and your now forced to use your back up stalker account that you made to harass anyone that blocks you. Your personal attacks, lack of substance, and this narcissist belief in your superiority over anyone else certainly supports it.
Seriously kid, you're pathetic, your attacks are weak, and your white knighting for those too lazy to do any real critical thinking is a better example of a massive tool then any I could ever provide.
PS: it's "keen wit" not "queen whit" you raging incompetent child.
Which leads to my next question, what makes Aydin Paladin a failed academic? She was kicked out of her college job for drama with other faculty which has nothing to do with her performance as a student, her degree, or her ability to form a better rational argument than you. Let's dig a little deeper shall we. What's the drama surrounding Aydin Paladin anyways? Could it be the antisemitic remarks against her heritage while simultaneously accusing her of being a Holocaust denier for supporting Trump? Honestly, at this point I wouldn't be surprised if you yourself are some Nazi-fur that got their primary account banned and your now forced to use your back up stalker account that you made to harass anyone that blocks you. Your personal attacks, lack of substance, and this narcissist belief in your superiority over anyone else certainly supports it.
Seriously kid, you're pathetic, your attacks are weak, and your white knighting for those too lazy to do any real critical thinking is a better example of a massive tool then any I could ever provide.
PS: it's "keen wit" not "queen whit" you raging incompetent child.
In order:
You behaved like a total prick unnecessarily, claiming someone was an NPC because they didn't read a paper or take some random youtube personalities word as gospel. I pointed out that the lack of public access on the readily available sources, i.e. the official publishers' site (and the first several google hits), meant that all credible sources on the issue where largely unavailable to the public. In response, you scrambled to find an online source, and have been desperately trying to avoid any hint of error or weakness since. At this point, it ain't my hill your dying on, it's yours. You've earned it.
Oddly enough, your position on what qualifies as a reasonable amount of community integration does not guide my actions; somehow, I think you'll get over what must be the terrifying fresh experience of being unimportant and ignored.
I've not claimed that my interpretation of the paper is the sole reason that it's shit; I've claimed that getting published in a shit journal and proceeding to largely accrue citations from articles in similarly shit publications is telling. This is not personal opinion, but rather general consensus among academics; while publications do occasionally ship through the cracks, and get denied the attention they deserve, it is very rarely the case that a publication receives the due attention, and then is discarded out of turn.
Getting kicked out of your Phd program literally makes you a failed academic; it's pretty much right in the wording. If you'd like to argue that Aydin Paladin is a source of equal quality to peer reviewed papers, and beyond that the current state of the science, you can do that; I, and I believe I can safely speak for the academic world at large here, will continue to ignore the caterwauling of random armchair psychologist.
I see we've reached the point of Godwin's law. Truly, this is the , oh, how I am wounded.
You've spent what has to be non-trivial amounts of time coming back to check comments that aren't replying to you, you're so scared of losing this argument. Experience would dictate that you're probably an insecure man-child, and who've certainly plenty of reason to be; I'd recommend you consider the classic "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, then to speak and remove all doubt".
We're probably past the point of no return this time, but, you know, food for thought.
PS: When your best point is about a typo, might be time to stop digging your hole.
PPS: What is with your obsession with calling others cowards? 'Cause its almost looks like a fixation with your own thin skin flaring up, bud.
You behaved like a total prick unnecessarily, claiming someone was an NPC because they didn't read a paper or take some random youtube personalities word as gospel. I pointed out that the lack of public access on the readily available sources, i.e. the official publishers' site (and the first several google hits), meant that all credible sources on the issue where largely unavailable to the public. In response, you scrambled to find an online source, and have been desperately trying to avoid any hint of error or weakness since. At this point, it ain't my hill your dying on, it's yours. You've earned it.
Oddly enough, your position on what qualifies as a reasonable amount of community integration does not guide my actions; somehow, I think you'll get over what must be the terrifying fresh experience of being unimportant and ignored.
I've not claimed that my interpretation of the paper is the sole reason that it's shit; I've claimed that getting published in a shit journal and proceeding to largely accrue citations from articles in similarly shit publications is telling. This is not personal opinion, but rather general consensus among academics; while publications do occasionally ship through the cracks, and get denied the attention they deserve, it is very rarely the case that a publication receives the due attention, and then is discarded out of turn.
Getting kicked out of your Phd program literally makes you a failed academic; it's pretty much right in the wording. If you'd like to argue that Aydin Paladin is a source of equal quality to peer reviewed papers, and beyond that the current state of the science, you can do that; I, and I believe I can safely speak for the academic world at large here, will continue to ignore the caterwauling of random armchair psychologist.
I see we've reached the point of Godwin's law. Truly, this is the , oh, how I am wounded.
You've spent what has to be non-trivial amounts of time coming back to check comments that aren't replying to you, you're so scared of losing this argument. Experience would dictate that you're probably an insecure man-child, and who've certainly plenty of reason to be; I'd recommend you consider the classic "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, then to speak and remove all doubt".
We're probably past the point of no return this time, but, you know, food for thought.
PS: When your best point is about a typo, might be time to stop digging your hole.
PPS: What is with your obsession with calling others cowards? 'Cause its almost looks like a fixation with your own thin skin flaring up, bud.
It's bizarre that you trust these studies and memes that affirm your own beliefs wholeheartedly, while discounting dodgy methodology and the fact that academic journals will publish anything for cash (one even published a study saying the earth was flat, which is much more settled science than many psychological concepts). You call the entirety of the left NPCs, but your own side is flawless free-thinkers whose ideas are entirely original. I'm not going to turn the meme back around on you, but I do wonder why you take to heart whatever the right-wing feeds you online without ever digging into the root of the left's history and deciding for yourself what to believe. It's a very childish thought process to not even bother entertaining your opponent's ideas or even simply self-criticizing on your own side. Instead of doing the heavy lifting of actual research, it's easier to call your opponents subhuman. Even assuming the idea of "NPCs" being 100% indisputable truth, what does it say about a person who boldly declares themselves a "PC" but only blindly agrees with whatever makes the other guy look the worst? As part of my career path, I HAVE to indulge in opposing ideas, but you don't even seem to want to acknowledge the flaws in your own thought process. If you can't do that, how can you properly engage with people who may disagree without doing the exact thing you accuse "NPCs" of?
I'll humor you by talking about the study itself. You assert that, based on the study, a huge percentage of the world (anyone who disagrees with you, which is a lot of people) have no internal thought and are thus NPCs. You treat this like objective, settled science because of one fairly apolitical study. Even the people conducting the study acknowledge that there is data that's missing. See, the study never asked "do you ever have an internal monologue" or "do you have internal vision". The study asked "what sort of internal experience do you feel in response to this particular stimulus". Every participant experienced some sort of internal thought, the study was looking at WHAT TYPE of internal thoughts they had. Some people may fluctuate between having an internal monologue and simply visualizing their thoughts and even experiencing both. The focus on the first two types of internal thought also ignores the other three in the study entirely.
FINALLY! You read the damn research for yourself!
Unfortunately, you still failed to even read what I've stated from the very beginning of this damn thread or even listen to the video discussion as we've all stated the exact same fucking thing! So if I have to keep belittling you by calling you an NPC, which is clearly a big trigger for you, in order to gouge you out of your intellectual turtle shell so be it. If that makes me a child then what exactly does that make someone like you who despite your "career path" couldn't be bothered to listen to someone who literally debunked the research and those who misused it to create the meme in the first place? A toddler? An infant? In either case I've made progress by getting you to actually understand the flawed logic of it all.
As Aydin Paladin in her video and I have been saying the research IS NOT objective settled science and completely overlooks several rational explanations as to why the participants did not experience very specific cognitive phenomena at very specific times. The human mind being extremely dynamic and responds to different stimuli in equally different ways. This means just because someone doesn't experience very specific cognitive phenomena in a very specific instance is not substantial evidence that they never experience those phenomena at all.
I'm honestly relieved and a little excited that you're starting to come around. The others in this thread that tried and failed to come to your defense however I'm not hoping for much out of them. As for my political stances I don't entirely agree with the Republican party or even the right wing. I just agree with them more than I agree with Democrats or left wing. At best you could say I'm a right of center moderate.
Unfortunately, you still failed to even read what I've stated from the very beginning of this damn thread or even listen to the video discussion as we've all stated the exact same fucking thing! So if I have to keep belittling you by calling you an NPC, which is clearly a big trigger for you, in order to gouge you out of your intellectual turtle shell so be it. If that makes me a child then what exactly does that make someone like you who despite your "career path" couldn't be bothered to listen to someone who literally debunked the research and those who misused it to create the meme in the first place? A toddler? An infant? In either case I've made progress by getting you to actually understand the flawed logic of it all.
As Aydin Paladin in her video and I have been saying the research IS NOT objective settled science and completely overlooks several rational explanations as to why the participants did not experience very specific cognitive phenomena at very specific times. The human mind being extremely dynamic and responds to different stimuli in equally different ways. This means just because someone doesn't experience very specific cognitive phenomena in a very specific instance is not substantial evidence that they never experience those phenomena at all.
I'm honestly relieved and a little excited that you're starting to come around. The others in this thread that tried and failed to come to your defense however I'm not hoping for much out of them. As for my political stances I don't entirely agree with the Republican party or even the right wing. I just agree with them more than I agree with Democrats or left wing. At best you could say I'm a right of center moderate.
I'm not going to bother watching whatever Paladin person's video because I don't have time to bother with someone who isn't an expert on the subject trying to tell me about it, especially since it's a video which eats up considerably more time. So, if the research is mostly irrelevant to whether or not people actually HAVE internal thoughts, why use the meme and then justify it with that research? And then spread the meme in a way that dismisses any and all opposing viewpoints, even if they have strong scientific backing. I don't care about your personal political stances, I'm wondering why you all hinge so many of your arguments now on calling people "NPCs", instead of tackling the actual arguments. I see only two real explanations. Either you're not really interested in debate and just want to bother people you have a personal grudge with, or you're just academically unequipped to argue for your own points, in which case I can definitely reccommend some influential center-right academics if you really want to make arguments beyond "NPC".
You don't have time to bother with someone who isn't an expert (which you don't know) and yet you have all the time in the world to discuss it in the comment section of a furry porn/ art site. Your dismissive avoidance tactic is obvious and really explains a lot about you. And if you don't care about my political stances why overgeneralize me with the people who use the meme or even accuse me of being right in the first place?
The reason the research is used to justify it because a Psychology Today article also referenced the research but did not accurately present it. This was because either the author of article didn't understand the research or intentionally misrepresented it. Then when Reddit and 4chan users picked up on the article they either didn't bother to read research for themselves or again misinterpreted it when they made the NPC meme.
Now the reason it's so effective is people like you react so sharply to it, which you should. The NPC meme is in direct retaliation to not so much the left but to people like you who actively dismiss or attempt to shut down any discussion that YOU don't agree with. Any effort on the right to debate is met with derision and dismissed because you refuse to accept empirical data, you don't acknowledge them as either experts or not academic enough for you, and any time your told where you can find things out for yourself you avoid it because anything contrary to your own assertions is simply beneath you. Everyone who doesn't think the way you do is inconsequential, dehumanized, written off as backwards thinking incompetents, or simply ignored. The only reason why people like you have gotten away with it for so long is because you've been winning socially and politically for several years. But now the right is growing in popularity and it's starting to use the same tactics which galls you for some peculiar reason.
So really this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
The reason the research is used to justify it because a Psychology Today article also referenced the research but did not accurately present it. This was because either the author of article didn't understand the research or intentionally misrepresented it. Then when Reddit and 4chan users picked up on the article they either didn't bother to read research for themselves or again misinterpreted it when they made the NPC meme.
Now the reason it's so effective is people like you react so sharply to it, which you should. The NPC meme is in direct retaliation to not so much the left but to people like you who actively dismiss or attempt to shut down any discussion that YOU don't agree with. Any effort on the right to debate is met with derision and dismissed because you refuse to accept empirical data, you don't acknowledge them as either experts or not academic enough for you, and any time your told where you can find things out for yourself you avoid it because anything contrary to your own assertions is simply beneath you. Everyone who doesn't think the way you do is inconsequential, dehumanized, written off as backwards thinking incompetents, or simply ignored. The only reason why people like you have gotten away with it for so long is because you've been winning socially and politically for several years. But now the right is growing in popularity and it's starting to use the same tactics which galls you for some peculiar reason.
So really this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
You don't see the left debating the right because you don't look hard enough. You take a cursory glance at the news and that's all you see. Why not look into academics and writers like Noam Chomsky or Nathan J. Robinson? Of course the right dismissing any leftists with the NPC meme is galling, it just shows that they don't actually care about academics and would rather live in an echo chamber where the only research that matters is research that agrees with their points. Why do so many popular right-wing pundits shrink away from leftist academics when they offer to debate. At least Sam Harris actually went toe-to-toe with Noam Chomsky. The right has always been winning in America, it's just mostly been the center-right. This "triumphant victory" narrative is just an excuse to use bad arguments and present the right as repressed underdogs, when they've had a vice grip on US politics for decades.
Again you're making assumptions about me especially if you don't think I know of Noam Chomsky, who openly agreed that he wasn't an expert in his debate with William Buckley back in the 60's. He's an academic in regards to being a linguistics professor but merely engages in social/ political criticism. Having listened to him a few times I can say he indulges in logical fallacies to a ridiculous degree and has an even more irrational moral compass. Speaking of, he's an excellent example of how the left not only dehumanizes but demonizes anyone that's not with them. Seriously, the Republican party is a greater threat to humanity than ISIS, Al-Qaeda, or Hitler ever was? Those who kill civilians and military indiscriminately are morally superior to those who make an effort to avoid or minimize civilian casualties? If that's the kind of "academic" or "expert" that you personally deem worth your time then the rights dehumanizing of you and those that think like you is warranted.
Admittedly, I haven't heard of Nathan J. Robinson before so I'll be looking into him. Do you have any recommendations of his work that I should focus on first?
Admittedly, I haven't heard of Nathan J. Robinson before so I'll be looking into him. Do you have any recommendations of his work that I should focus on first?
The 'NPC' meme you're referring to here is actually conceived of by the GOP to increase voter turnout for the midterms. They introduced it in time for Trump but it's only recently gaining traction.
The idea this meme is meant to plant in your head is that if a large group of people have a consistent argument with a set group of talking points that they all agree on, mutual literature, and a same foggy ballpark of belief shaped by their life experience, they cannot be trusted. The idea you're expected to take away is that dissent equates to critical thinking, that taking a stance with flaws and made up bits and pieces you just never filled in is the more 'organic' and 'alive' thing to do. In short- it's a meme to keep people from doing their research and understanding the view of the 'NPCs' to galvanize voters into the classic cycle of running to the polls and voting Republican just to prove they're a 'player character'. It's literally the same as Nixon-era propaganda that pot caused brain damage and that hippies, who smoked pot and protested things Nixon liked (like war, were therefore less of people. Dehumanizing the opposition is a very common authoritarian tactic on both sides.
In short, instead of calling them 'NPCs', really think about them as a person. Talk to them. Figure out what 'went wrong' in their life to give them a view that is different from yours, or why they're taking a positive cultural trend and going so far as to be toxic about it. 'Just an NPC' is an easy copout for lazy people who don't -want- to understand; that's why it was introduced. That's the ENTIRE voter base for the right; people who will vote on pure tribalism, who don't want to vote independent because their vote 'won't count' (they're too lazy to look at more than two options) but definitely don't want the DEMS to win because they'll pass funding for Planned Parenthood to give out more free condoms.
Don't be lazy. Think for yourself, instead of falling into the voter 'inspiration' cycle. See this 'funny wrongthink meme' for what it is- pendulum system propaganda, to keep you seperated and emotional instead of trying to find a mutual path forward. Not a right wing meme- an establishment meme, to keep you isolated- like every PC truly is, in the end.
/fin
The idea this meme is meant to plant in your head is that if a large group of people have a consistent argument with a set group of talking points that they all agree on, mutual literature, and a same foggy ballpark of belief shaped by their life experience, they cannot be trusted. The idea you're expected to take away is that dissent equates to critical thinking, that taking a stance with flaws and made up bits and pieces you just never filled in is the more 'organic' and 'alive' thing to do. In short- it's a meme to keep people from doing their research and understanding the view of the 'NPCs' to galvanize voters into the classic cycle of running to the polls and voting Republican just to prove they're a 'player character'. It's literally the same as Nixon-era propaganda that pot caused brain damage and that hippies, who smoked pot and protested things Nixon liked (like war, were therefore less of people. Dehumanizing the opposition is a very common authoritarian tactic on both sides.
In short, instead of calling them 'NPCs', really think about them as a person. Talk to them. Figure out what 'went wrong' in their life to give them a view that is different from yours, or why they're taking a positive cultural trend and going so far as to be toxic about it. 'Just an NPC' is an easy copout for lazy people who don't -want- to understand; that's why it was introduced. That's the ENTIRE voter base for the right; people who will vote on pure tribalism, who don't want to vote independent because their vote 'won't count' (they're too lazy to look at more than two options) but definitely don't want the DEMS to win because they'll pass funding for Planned Parenthood to give out more free condoms.
Don't be lazy. Think for yourself, instead of falling into the voter 'inspiration' cycle. See this 'funny wrongthink meme' for what it is- pendulum system propaganda, to keep you seperated and emotional instead of trying to find a mutual path forward. Not a right wing meme- an establishment meme, to keep you isolated- like every PC truly is, in the end.
/fin
You might think so, but a LOT of young adults are buying into it, even as just a frustration vent. As seen here. And the study that 'sparked' the meme was GOP-funded. (The study basically tried to posit, with little evidence, that up to 30% of people or some dumb shit don't have an internal cognitive world, and strongly implied that's why democrats 'groupthink'.) It's dangerous because it accomplishes the authoritarian ideal- simplifying and dehumanizing opposition- in a way that makes you laugh on the surface and gets stuck in your head as a 'joke that kinda makes sense', like the infamous 'white people can't dance' meme of last generation.
You, me, need to chat sometime. You know how hard it is to find people like you? Everything you've said so far has been exactly what I've been thinking. I didnt know about the studies. But ive watched both sides scream back at each other with the same arguments and its just a freakin circus to watch.
Propaganda doesn't really have such a dominant role anymore; it's kind of reliant on you having control of the distribution of content and a host of other factors that just really aren't in it's favour anymore. It's also just a matter of scale; you are never going to be able to afford even a fraction of the man hours that crowdsourcing can leverage at this point.
Even in the professional world, it's been pretty obvious for a while that the only real way of producing broadly effective advertisement/propaganda at this point is something that's essentially indistinguishable from a meme; you just can't buy the sort of engagement/exposure that popular memes enjoy.
Also, memes are essentially free and are self propagating. That's not something a traditional campaign is going to manage.
Even in the professional world, it's been pretty obvious for a while that the only real way of producing broadly effective advertisement/propaganda at this point is something that's essentially indistinguishable from a meme; you just can't buy the sort of engagement/exposure that popular memes enjoy.
Also, memes are essentially free and are self propagating. That's not something a traditional campaign is going to manage.
I appreciate the in depth analysis but what you fail to understand is that this is simply a joke. As with all jokes there is a kernel of truth to this but its up to the individual to feel offended or not by a silly joke. The fact that all these people mostly on th left getting offended shows that this joke questions there own world view and can encourage discussions on the topic of groupd think as this thread for example.
True there are NCPS on all political sides that just regerdatate information but it seems to be more commom on the left than on the right. For example you go to any protest rally and those on the left will just chant, yell, blow whistles or just make noise when you try to engage in dialogue but the right will actully talk to you, most of the time anyway. As far the meme being dehumanizing that only is possible if you let it. If a simple thing as a meme can offend you so much to where you feel dehumanized perhaps you are the problem and not the picture.
The whole study being sited is not the orgin of this meme. It stems from a 4Chan Theory post about how a there a finite number of souls in the world and that human growth exced the amount that was available through reincarnation. The poster therorised this as to why there are so many people in the world that don't have the capacity to or cannot comprehend critical thought. This theory is simliar to one where it is believed that we are living in a simulation as well kinda like the Matrix movies more or less.
True there are NCPS on all political sides that just regerdatate information but it seems to be more commom on the left than on the right. For example you go to any protest rally and those on the left will just chant, yell, blow whistles or just make noise when you try to engage in dialogue but the right will actully talk to you, most of the time anyway. As far the meme being dehumanizing that only is possible if you let it. If a simple thing as a meme can offend you so much to where you feel dehumanized perhaps you are the problem and not the picture.
The whole study being sited is not the orgin of this meme. It stems from a 4Chan Theory post about how a there a finite number of souls in the world and that human growth exced the amount that was available through reincarnation. The poster therorised this as to why there are so many people in the world that don't have the capacity to or cannot comprehend critical thought. This theory is simliar to one where it is believed that we are living in a simulation as well kinda like the Matrix movies more or less.
...
I'm curious if you actually came up with this yourself, or if you're cribbing a certain amount of it from an academic background.
If you aren't, you're probably fixating a little much on the solipsism and giving the GOP a little too much credit; the whole "what is truth but perception" bait is old hat for shitty leaders, and Trump's probably trying to emulate Putins relationship with the media. There's people who actually specialize in this stuff, and consequently don't have a six year olds understanding and eloquence, who really dig into these ideas. Uh, only Anne Applebaum really comes to mind at the moment? Sorry, I'm CS and CMMB so this is all interest and not work for me.
Reading Russian news, preferentially from the source, but translated if that's not an option, also makes some very awkward parallels obvious. It's funny, but mostly because I live in Canada and lie to myself about it not being my problem.
I'm curious if you actually came up with this yourself, or if you're cribbing a certain amount of it from an academic background.
If you aren't, you're probably fixating a little much on the solipsism and giving the GOP a little too much credit; the whole "what is truth but perception" bait is old hat for shitty leaders, and Trump's probably trying to emulate Putins relationship with the media. There's people who actually specialize in this stuff, and consequently don't have a six year olds understanding and eloquence, who really dig into these ideas. Uh, only Anne Applebaum really comes to mind at the moment? Sorry, I'm CS and CMMB so this is all interest and not work for me.
Reading Russian news, preferentially from the source, but translated if that's not an option, also makes some very awkward parallels obvious. It's funny, but mostly because I live in Canada and lie to myself about it not being my problem.
I wrote this after waking up in the middle of the day having analyzed the metaphorical implications of the 'meme', the fact that conservative news rags associated with the alt-right have been spewing it, and the so-called 'study' that sparked it. I'm currently a total NEET who has never stepped foot onto a campus, and I come from a strongly conservative upbringing. And I'm not saying 'Trump made the meme to get at the world', to be clear. Some 20-something little shit somewhere in the right noticed that when people are fighting and 'facts aren't facts', their political views are waaaaaay easier to push. The NPC meme was made by a memester, probably with the vague idea that it'd make people fight and bash liberals, but the actual implementation has way nastier consequences by undermining the ideal of a general and reasoned consensus.
As for the 'Russian Bots' thing, don't get me started. CNN is staffed by establishment fire-stokers and tech-illiterate willowbrains. Nobody with a brain is legitimately saying 'Trump was voted into office by Russian bots'. There are, however, confirmed Russian bot incidents, though the term 'Russian bot' more refers to alt-right news reposting account based in Russia, run by an algorithm. Which does really happen! Not necessarily because the Kremlin wants to get in on our politics, but because Russia doesn't give a shit what you host in their country as long as you're fucking over someone who isn't Russia. Hackers, asshats in it 'for the lulz', and everyone with the spare cash, a shady motive, and a contact overseas hosts or proxies through Russia or one of any number of smaller countries in the general vicinity. 'Russian Bots' is a fun buzzword, but there really are bot accounts and spambots based in Russia because it's REALLY CONVENIENT to base them there.
/fin
As for the 'Russian Bots' thing, don't get me started. CNN is staffed by establishment fire-stokers and tech-illiterate willowbrains. Nobody with a brain is legitimately saying 'Trump was voted into office by Russian bots'. There are, however, confirmed Russian bot incidents, though the term 'Russian bot' more refers to alt-right news reposting account based in Russia, run by an algorithm. Which does really happen! Not necessarily because the Kremlin wants to get in on our politics, but because Russia doesn't give a shit what you host in their country as long as you're fucking over someone who isn't Russia. Hackers, asshats in it 'for the lulz', and everyone with the spare cash, a shady motive, and a contact overseas hosts or proxies through Russia or one of any number of smaller countries in the general vicinity. 'Russian Bots' is a fun buzzword, but there really are bot accounts and spambots based in Russia because it's REALLY CONVENIENT to base them there.
/fin
"There's people who actually specialize in this stuff, and consequently don't have a six year olds understanding and eloquence, who really dig into these ideas. Uh, only Anne Applebaum really comes to mind at the moment? Sorry, I'm CS and CMMB so this is all interest and not work for me."
I'm talking about myself here, not you, when I reference a six year olds understanding; I can see how this might have not been clear, but the reason I talk about my specialty right after is to make it clear that it isn't related to any of this, to explain my lack of nuance. I'm legitimately recommending you seek out some of the professionals that have tackled the subject, as with most serious thinkers they aren't inflammatory enough to be super popular, but nevertheless have a lot to offer.
I'd agree with you on the subject of the bots existing, although I doubt it's as hands off as you seem to believe; it's proven far to potent a tool for them to ignore it at this point, given how much internal conflict the situation has caused. While arguments could be made as to at what point anyone that really mattered from Russia got involved, it's unreasonable to ignore the fact that Russia is a competing foreign power, whose economic decline has increasingly relegated them to this sort of position.
I'm talking about myself here, not you, when I reference a six year olds understanding; I can see how this might have not been clear, but the reason I talk about my specialty right after is to make it clear that it isn't related to any of this, to explain my lack of nuance. I'm legitimately recommending you seek out some of the professionals that have tackled the subject, as with most serious thinkers they aren't inflammatory enough to be super popular, but nevertheless have a lot to offer.
I'd agree with you on the subject of the bots existing, although I doubt it's as hands off as you seem to believe; it's proven far to potent a tool for them to ignore it at this point, given how much internal conflict the situation has caused. While arguments could be made as to at what point anyone that really mattered from Russia got involved, it's unreasonable to ignore the fact that Russia is a competing foreign power, whose economic decline has increasingly relegated them to this sort of position.
There's been a ton of bans on Facebook and Twitter regarding that NPC meme. Good thing I turned my back on them when I did, because people get offended at a funny meme like the NPC one. However, they think that calling their opposition Russian Bots is okay. Thank you for posting this meme.
Comments