[ SECRET POST #2718 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2718 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.
[Mayim Bialik]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.
[Pacific Rim]











Notes:

Might be another 12 am day. Response time will be slow, sorry.

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 016 secrets from Secret Submission Post #388.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - this is getting spammy now ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fauxkaren]

I mean, I think critical thinking should be a requirement for graduate programs, yes.

And if someone has critical thinking skills and is able to evaluate studies (which lmao a graduate student in the sciences needs to be able to do), then they should see how the anti-vax arguments are bullshit.

[(Anonymous)]

I'll go one further and say critical thinking should be a requirement for life. Think how much Facebook feeds would improve if one's friends, family and high school classmates would quit posting crap they could've looked up on snopes.com...

[(Anonymous)]

Just to play devil's advocate- critical thinking is about coming up with your own opinions by looking at a source from different angles, so your argument (that she should have a different opinion by virtue of developing critical thinking skills) doesn't make sense.

[(Anonymous)]

Er, it's not just about looking at something "from different angles", though. It's the "critical" part that's missing here. Thinking outside the box =/= critical thinking. Questioning, researching and using credible sources to support your opinions is.

[crunchysunrises]

I would assume that (if she's anti-vaccine, which I've not heard before) it has nothing to do with a "lack of critical thinking skills" and ability "to evaluate studies" and everything to do with religion.

But I'm LMAO at the idea that everyone above a certain level of education has to have a certain set of beliefs. Because no. People believe - or don't believe - in a shocking variety of things, and it rarely seems to have anything to do with education level or SCIENCE.

[(Anonymous)]

I would assume that (if she's anti-vaccine, which I've not heard before) it has nothing to do with a "lack of critical thinking skills" and ability "to evaluate studies" and everything to do with religion./

Sorry to burst your bubble but no, absolutely not. The Orthodox Jewish community is like pretty much all Jewish communities: what the doctor says is gold (literally every commandment we have can be broken for medical reasons). My friends at school were all vaccinated, horrified that I wasn't, and I even knew a few kids who had parents that were doctors that would just bring the vaccine home and inoculate the kids there. So yeah, religious fundamentalists, yes, anti-vaxxers, not in the least.

[(Anonymous)]

Depends on the religion - but most aren't against vaccines.

But yeah, expecting everyone to share a set of beliefs - regardless of education, religion, or any other single factor - is a bit silly.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd agree with OP, but not because of what you're suggesting, that does sound utterly ridiculous. I'd think that anyone with a PhD. in neuroscience knows enough about what the anti-vaccine movement is saying (because a lot of it is neuroscience, which they should know about) to know that it's wrong.

[ariakas]

Worldviews based on scientific rationalism are not "beliefs", though - I'm not sure why you keep using that word.

Unless you think that the whole earth is round and orbits the sun thing is a "belief", in which case, yes, I agree with fauxkaren - everyone above a certain level of education should hold the same "beliefs".

[mechanosapience]

Thank you. The false equivalency was bugging the shit out of me.

[duaedesigns]

This was bugging me too. Beliefs are inherently something that can't be definitively tested. I can believe in ghosts, even though there's no real test for ghosts. But gravity is a scientific theory, and I would expect most people working at NASA to acknowledge the existence of gravity.

[(Anonymous)]

There is so much stupid bad science promoted by the anti-vaccine movement that I think, hell yes, if you know anything about science at all you should know better.

[(Anonymous)]

Exactly.

Well...

[nyxelestia]

Values? No. Understanding of science and research principles? Yes.

The alleged causation between vaccines and autism has been disproven multiple times, and even the original study alleging it in the first place has been retracted. The cons of vaccines are vastly outweighed by the pros, and the best way to protect the few who can't take vaccines is to make sure everyone around them is vaccinated.

But the more people go un-vaccinated, the less effective herd immunity is. Being against all vaccines is spitting in the face of over a century of scientific advancement and research.

Re: Well...

[(Anonymous)]

I particularly like the argument "Well, x disease isn't a problem any more so why should I get my kid vaccinated against it?"

X disease isn't a problem *because* people are getting vaccinated against it.

Re: Well...

[diet_poison]

Yes...and many such "X diseases" are making a comeback now that people are vaccinating less.

Can't people connect the dots? x.x

Re: Well...

[nyxelestia]

What most people don't realize is that a lot of those diseases are still around - we just don't see them because people are vaccinated against them.

That said, I remember reading an article a while back about how certain diseases that were effectively wiped out years ago are making such a resurgence in some areas that old doctors are either being asked to continue working more or are even being consulted/pulled out of retirement, because younger doctors have no experience with them and little to no training for disease that were, up until recently, classified as rare diseases...because of the vaccines. -_-

Re: Well...

[funyarinpainahat]

There's another, deeper societal issue brought up by the "vaccines cause autism" argument.

It implies that the person saying it would risk their children catching a dangerous disease and possibly dying from it rather than increase their chances of having autism.

And that is disgusting.

Re: Well...

[(Anonymous)]

Not just the dying thing, with measles there were yes, 1,000 deaths a year in Britain, but many more children were left blind or deaf or with learning difficulties. So it is extraordinary that parents happily risk that. My feeling is that they are the ultimately selfish types who decide that they will rely on others and herd immunity, which of course hasn't worked because measles has returned.

[(Anonymous)]

This isn't a matter of values, this is a matter of basic scientific fact. Vaccines save lives, and they certainly don't cause autism. That whole scare was started by ONE researcher with ulterior motives conducting ONE flawed study. He has since been barred from medicine, and his study has been discredited through and through.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh FFS, stop pretending this is about 'values' and 'beliefs' and some sort of cultural bullying. It makes you sound both pretentious and dim-witted.

Or perhaps you are A-OK about kids dying or being permanently harmed by avoidable diseases? In which case, frankly, you suck.

[(Anonymous)]

Dude. Stella. Anons aren't all the same people.