there are MUCH better drugs to get high on than shitty antidepressants.
there are MUCH better drugs to get high on than shitty antidepressants.
This is not a gender problem, this is a people problem.
THIS, as in this particular case, it is primarily obvious mobbing performed on her by the WIFE of one of the founders of GitHub.
Sure, there are other issues, like the other employee who came out of nowhere professing his love and then started to bully her passive aggressively for "rejecting him".
Though she was already in "a committed relationship" with another employee of GitHub.
But this is primarily mobbing, plain and simple. Done by the proverbial "bosses wife".
FFS - founder who's wife had issues with Horvath demanded her boyfriend to resign cause it was ",bad judgement' to date coworkers".
I.e. She was pressured by "the wife", while her boyfriend was pressured by "the husband".
That's NOT SEXISM. They clearly took precautions so it would not be seen as sexism.
Founder and his wife were MOBBING their employees.
That is not how Facebook started, hence the end of the Facebook "as a community" era.
One, that is a fallacy.
By that logic any growth that company or technology may achieve is anomalous instead of say... a part of the plan to expand or even natural growth and development.
Two, Facebook never was "a community" any more than "the Internet" ever was one.
It was always a service ON WHICH communities were created and where they grew. And where they keep being created today.
Again... The author is babbling nonsense, pushed onward by confirmation bias.
Whether or not you were indoctrinated in religion when you were young and impressionable, if you haven't experienced God the only rational choice is that the question doesn't matter.
As to indoctrination, I think you're putting way too much weight on that. One fellow I drink with sometimes was brought up in a strict Baptist family in Kentucky, yet he is absolutely convinced that God can't possibly exist. Another guy I knew was brought up by atheists, and had a religious experience when he was strung out and homeless.
As to "why Jesus" it's because of what he taught (The Buddha was certainly full of wisdom, I learned a lot about Buddhists when stationed in Thailand). Basically, love everybody. Treat folks like you want to be treated. Don't judge.
I don't think Jesus and Buddha would have had much to argue about except that reincarnation thing, and maybe karma.
Also, whoever wrote that does not realize that Facebook is not a site or social space but a service.
So that argument could just as well be used against a telephone, postal service, roads... with equal relevance and correctness.
Placebos are more effective than prescribed antidepressants.
You are misinterpreting what you probably heard somewhere.
A review of 177 studies involving more than 24,000 depressed patients found placebos alleviated symptoms in 38 percent, while antidepressants reduced them in 46 percent. Psychotherapy alone reduced symptoms in 47 percent, about the same as antidepressants but usually at higher cost. Best of all was combining antidepressants and psychotherapy, with a 52 percent success rate.
A review of 96 studies published from 1980 to 2005 concluded the placebo effect was likely responsible for 68 percent of the improvement seen in patients taking antidepressants. Another review pegged it at 84 percent. What's more, the placebo effect appears to be growing over time.
Some research says there's no medicinal benefit. A European study of "active placebos" (where the placebo mimicked the drug's side effects) found no significant difference between placebos and antidepressants. The latter were just particularly persuasive fakes.
The fact that the placebo effect is increasing the more they keep prescribing them is most likely due to overprescription of antidepressants to misdiagnosed patients.
When you treat everything with an antidepressant of course it will eventually show the same (or even lesser) effect as placebo - CAUSE YOU'RE NOT TREATING THOSE ACTUALLY DEPRESSED.
Same thing would happen if they started putting people's arms and legs in casts for every single bruise.
It would show that in most cases, immobilization via plaster cast is no better than placebo as a treatment for healing injured arms and legs.
The fact that they are achieving similar results with psychotherapy alone indicates that those are not people with chemical or hormonal issues.
They are probably just "sad" and not clinically depressed at all. OR... looking for a "high".
They go to a psych, fill out a questionnaire and answer "yes" when asked if they are depressed.
Or answer a question. Same thing.
Same method is used to determine if those pills worked - they fill out a questionnaire and answer "yes".
If they used that method for diagnosing cancer, everyone who ever went to a doctor would be diagnosed with cancer.
And there'd be some AMAZING results regarding all the things that completely cure cancer. From foot-rubs to lava lamps.
You can't reason your way into religion, it has to touch you personally. Someone in 1700 Europe would not be able to reason his way into belief that such things as elephants existed. He's have had to visit Asia or Africa to believe.
God is only invisible to those who choose to ignore him.
Not to invoke an argument, but the TFA talks about listening to sermons and reading the bible.
No. Here is what it says.
"Harold G. Koenig, director of the Center for Spirituality, Theology, and Health at Duke University and a professor of psychiatry"... author of "The Healing Power of Faith", "Faith and Mental Health"... "Listening to sermons and reading religious works like the Bible may also invoke a cognitive benefit, Koenig said."
I.e. Faith guy says maybe faith good for brain.
Also, that Discovery article is crap.
That "One recent study, published in December of 2013 in JAMA Psychiatry" - no it wasn't.
And which study does this sentence refer to? The supposed December 2013 JAMA one (actually published in February 2014) or the 2011 one?
And while a 2011 study found a shrinking of the hippocampus among people of certain religions, Koenig, a co-author of the study, points out that no one has replicated that work yet.
Cause, it either says that Koenig is a co-author of the JAMA study (which he isn't, but which is no made clear anywhere in the article which doesn't even name the study it discusses) and he disagrees with the data from the 2011 study...
OR, he is a co-author of 2011 study (which he was) which says that certain religious people have a shrinking hippocampus.
With which he disagrees as well, pointing out "no one has replicated that work yet".
Koenig is essentially saying "Fuck my study which shows how religion may actually be bad for your brain. Don't look at it. Nothing to see there. Not replicated. Bad study. Bad!"
Also, everything Koenig and that other guy who had nothing to do with the study (he apparently has not even read it) but they asked him to comment on it anyway, Dr. Majid Fotuhi, said about the social effect... pure bullshit.
From the actual study:
Importance of religion or spirituality, but not frequency of attendance, was associated with thicker cortices in the left and right parietal and occipital regions, the mesial frontal lobe of the right hemisphere, and the cuneus and precuneus in the left hemisphere, independent of familial risk.
Going to church does not matter. How much you THINK that religion or spirituality matter to you matters.
I believe you're confusing Vogons with wizards. Too much pipeweed, Gandalf?
Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that tracing family lineage is essential for special religious ceremonies that seal family units together for eternity. According to Mormons, this fulfills a Biblical prophecy stating that the prophet Elijah would return to "turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers."
They are actively fulfilling a Biblical prophecy ONLY by determining genealogical lineage AND then baptizing the dead.
Simply baptizing them just makes them Mormon. In the minds of the LDS followers.
Only the genealogically backed baptism, fulfills the prophecy of The Second ComingTM.
Kinda like those Texans and Israelis who are breeding red heifers in order to bring about the end of the world.
That's right! Both these groups are jerking off to the idea of Armageddon!
And yet nobody is rounding them up into prisons and concentration camps under suspicion of conspiracy to kill everyone on the planet!
I know! Insane!
The BYU team has no interest in it from a religious perspective.
So... Are you saying that they are NOT Mormons or are you questioning their faith and calling them bad Mormons?
Being that BYU stands for Brigham Young University which is owned and operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
It is owned and operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), and, excluding online students, is the largest religious university and one of the largest private universities in the U.S., with 34,000 on-campus students.
Approximately 98% of the university's 34,000 students are members of the LDS Church, and one-third of its American students come from within the state of Utah. BYU students are required to follow an honor code, which mandates behavior in line with LDS teachings (e.g., academic honesty, adherence to dress and grooming standards, and abstinence from extramarital sex and from the consumption of drugs and alcohol). Many students (78% of men, 10% of women) take a two-year hiatus from their studies at some point to serve as Mormon missionaries.
And being that it is first and foremost a religious institution.
BYU is thus considered by its leaders to be at heart a religious institution, wherein, ideally, religious and secular education are interwoven in a way that encourages the highest standards in both areas. This weaving of the secular and the religious aspects of a religious university goes back as far as Brigham Young himself, who told Karl G. Maeser when the Church purchased the school: "I want you to remember that you ought not to teach even the alphabet or the multiplication tables without the Spirit of God."
All a smith needs is coal, steel or iron, wind, and water. The only tool he would have a hard time building himself would be the anvil, those are usually cast. The forge isn't all that hard to construct (maybe the fan or bellows) and all the other tools are trivial to make.
The only real cost is steel and fuel unless you have your own mine.
I took a blacksmithing workshop in college and one of the things the 74 year old instructor stressed most was that a blacksmith who doesn't make his own tools isn't much of a blacksmith. He taught us how to make all sorts of tools.
Who makes hammers and tongs? The blacksmith. Who writes compilers? Programmers. Maybe I'm getting old but a programmer who can't write a compiler or interpreter isn't much of a programmer (I wrote an interpreter once, years ago).
The last thing one knows in constructing a work is what to put first. -- Blaise Pascal