Diana

God, are people so predictable as to fall into 2 categories?! That's a shame...but probably the reason not everyone is a physicist. (feeble attempt at humor...sorry)

Feeding someone a cupful of salt will kill them.

meaning they can't move their eyeballs separately to look up, without moving their head as well.

there would be no discussions about anything. In this case, I believe the 'why' is about what makes a person's brain make them want to kill someone, or make them capable of it. It may boil down to chemicals in the brain, diet, experiences stored in memory, or all of the above...it's a combination of factors meeting at the moment of the crime. My thought is that if you want a rational answer, you will not always find one and that's the frustrating part about this type of discussion. Accidental killing, like running someone over in the street, is simply bad luck. I find that the legal definitions can actually hinder the discussions on 'why' they occur...but, to each his own.

I have found that physicists or men of science who have become experts in any field can be perceived as arrogant. I do believe that what is considered arrogance is really their lack of interest in anyone's opinion that might be something they've heard before, they've argued before, or that their knowledge has surpassed eons ago. Maybe they just get a lot of crap from people when they find out what they do for a living, and they're tired of it. Just a thought based on what I've seen.

Murderers who premeditate them don't believe they will be caught. There's a certain arrogance to that. Murderers who kill out of rage lack conflict resolution skills, therefore likely find no other way to express their extreme anger at the time of the killing. Murder is considered by many to be justifiable when the life of something deemed more worthy of life (child, person, animal, whatever) is the victim. Some people value the life of a police officer over a criminal, so it's okay, in most peoples' opinion, to shoot a criminal who has killed or is attempting to kill a police officer. It's all subjective in that case. Just my unprofessional opinions.

To me, the term 'jerk' comes with the assumption that the person being labelled as such intends to be that way, tries to hurt others, doesn't care about others. If a person simply doesn't understand others, that's ignorance not 'jerkism'...for lack of a better term.

Radical Edward summed it up....it would starve. This experiment could not be done in nature.

More of a comment....not a joke, per se: Of all the things they could have made stainless, they picked steel - something I'll never have a shirt made of.

Jerks=people who don't care how they affect other people. I think that if you bump into people throughout your life like a pinball machine, you should perhaps try to think of ways to make your encounters with people somewhat pleasant, or at least not unpleasant. Otherwise, you may be labelled a 'jerk'. To say, however, that antisocial people are automatically jerks, as some might assume, is not giving those people the benefit of the doubt. These types may simply be unaware of their surroundings due to deep introspection or diversion. Just my thoughts.

Dogs can't look up.

I have stumbled across this page quite by accident and am intrigued by the people that might be lurking here. I love brainiacs. Also, I hope to open my mind further in all subjects being discussed here, as a casual observer for the most part.

I've seen highly energetic people who still procrastinate. For some, it's a matter of prioritizing....or should I say, not prioritizing, not having organized minds. They are scatterbrained, for lack of a better term....but they can still seem hyperactive or energetic at the same time. Just an observation.

I know...that's why I found it interesting that people picked up on the original poster's lack of forethought. I was simply commenting on that...now look what you made me do....I responded again. I will stop now.

when you replied. The previous 2 posters did the same thing. Your response was 'blog-esque' as well.

Wow...this is an interesting study in human nature. Canadians say 'eh' at the end of sentences so an implied request for a response is standard. (I am Canadian, too...so, I suppose I do that also.) Funny how the initial post changed into something totally different as the object of people's interest. I love it.

Could it be that procrastinators don't understand that a job well done is its own reward. They aren't giving themselves the internal 'pat on the back' so if no one else is either they may just think most things aren't worth doing at all....everything they do is done only when it absolutely has to be done so they won't get into trouble or lose their job, for example.

Terrific points! That pos-neg idea is so very true....I agree. Also, the test would be to record a person's every thought for, say, a day or two. This would show patterns that would reveal their motivation, etc. I think that's the only way to test for such a thing. (Others may not agree, but that's my theory.)

One of you said that people do something at a time when they will be rewarded for it, so if you put it off until the very last minute but still get it done you feel like you really accomplished some great feat. In some cases, I believe it's a way to cause drama in one's life. People who are used to chaos create drama because it's all they know. Procrastinating can be caused by that need for drama as well, I believe. I am not a procrastinator, nor do I subscribe to their way of thinking, so I find it's all just driven by laziness for the most part. But there are many reasons for it.

What you say to yourself first thing in the morning affects how you feel the rest of the day. You can 'train' your brain to make you depressed if you think negatively. It's better for your heart and mind to send those positive chemicals through your body and I believe that makes you healthier and happier over time.