Full moon - people going nuts.

[Raider5678]

You have to be more specific. I made several different points. To which do you disagree, and for what reason do you disagree with them?

All of them.

Because they contradict modern psychology is so many ways.

[quickquestion]

All of them.

Because they contradict modern psychology is so many ways.

That in of itself is a logical fallacy, since you are using a "argument ad authority" fallacy.

 

Modern psychology is the authority you use to assess my claims.

It's like saying I'm wrong because a corrupt politician says so.

You are litterally saying I'm wrong because I don't agree with the resident crackpot who happens to be in authority.

Wasn't it 10 years ago that your beloved modern psychology was giving electro-shock therapy to transsexuals?

In the DSM 5 they say coffee intoxication is a mental illness.

There is so much wrong with modern psychology I don't even know where to begin.

So let me clue you in...it's a political agenda to breed a docile population.

If you are an angry person who breaks walls, they call you "mentally ill."

They even made up an illness saying people who resist authority are "mentally ill".

[jimmydasaint]

The myth may have stemmed from pre-street lamp days, when there was little or zero ambient night light, and hence less activity from people. On full moon nights there may have been more activity because people could see better and, hence, more trouble may have occurred.

I'd go with this hypothesis qq. People go wild every Friday and Saturday in the UK - it's called binge drinking - irrelevant of the presence, or absence, of a full moon. Driving home late on a Friday, I am often faced with mad idiotic driving by people desperate to get home to start the weekend. The full moon has nothing to do with this phenomenon - it is more likely due to the increasing availability of cheap alcohol and happy hours.

[Manticore]

If there's one thing I know about humans, it's that they love avoiding taking responsibility for their actions.

 

Have you ever actually met any?

[quickquestion]

Have you ever actually met any?

I've met plenty of people who avoid responsibility.

For example, people who believe in the legal system, and religious, for example.

Religious folk love to avoid responsibility for a human world.

People who believe in the legal system also love avoiding responsibility. Let me give you an example.

 

Lets say I am talking to some guy who believes in the legal system. And I say..."If someone killed your best friend, would you bash him on the head with a rock, or press charges on him?"

They always say "I'd press charges. It's wrong to hit him on the head with a rock."

"Why is it wrong?"

"Because he needs to get the help that he needs."

"How is locking someone in a cage for 100 years helping them?"

"It's not my choice. He made that choice by breaking the laws."

"But you made the choice to press charges."

"No, he made that choice by breaking the laws".

"Ok. So you hired a cop by proxy, to arrest him. Then you pressed charges to be read by a proxy, to convict him. Then you used a judge and jury, as a third proxy, to convict him. Then you got a lawyer as fourth proxy. And then you stand on the witness stand to accuse and convict him. Finally, a fifth cop, as your fifth proxy, locks him away. And you tell me you were not responsible for him going to jail?? Ok.

 

It would be like, imagine a world with no rules. People wouldn't hurt me because they knew I'd mean business. So if someone seriously hurts me, and then I chop their head off with a chainsaw, and I say "Oh, I didn't chop their head off with a chainsaw, because I didn't build the chainsaw, someone else built it, the gasoline in the motor actually chopped off their head, I didn't invent gasoline or the chainsaw system, I had no responsibility because they made the choice to hurt me and already knew of the possible consequences..." It would be totally ridiculous.

Edited April 15, 2017 by quickquestion

[Raider5678]

I've met plenty of people who avoid responsibility.

For example, people who believe in the legal system, and religious, for example.

Religious folk love to avoid responsibility for a human world.

People who believe in the legal system also love avoiding responsibility. Let me give you an example.

 

Lets say I am talking to some guy who believes in the legal system. And I say..."If someone killed your best friend, would you bash him on the head with a rock, or press charges on him?"

They always say "I'd press charges. It's wrong to hit him on the head with a rock."

"Why is it wrong?"

"Because he needs to get the help that he needs."

"How is locking someone in a cage for 100 years helping them?"

"It's not my choice. He made that choice by breaking the laws."

"But you made the choice to press charges."

"No, he made that choice by breaking the laws".

"Ok. So you hired a cop by proxy, to arrest him. Then you pressed charges to be read by a proxy, to convict him. Then you used a judge and jury, as a third proxy, to convict him. Then you got a lawyer as fourth proxy. And then you stand on the witness stand to accuse and convict him. Finally, a fifth cop, as your fifth proxy, locks him away. And you tell me you were not responsible for him going to jail?? Ok.

 

It would be like, imagine a world with no rules. People wouldn't hurt me because they knew I'd mean business. So if someone seriously hurts me, and then I chop their head off with a chainsaw, and I say "Oh, I didn't chop their head off with a chainsaw, because I didn't build the chainsaw, someone else built it, the gasoline in the motor actually chopped off their head, I didn't invent gasoline or the chainsaw system, I had no responsibility because they made the choice to hurt me and already knew of the possible consequences..." It would be totally ridiculous.

What?

[koti]

What?

 

This used to be my harmless, borderline crackpot thread.

[Manticore]

People wouldn't hurt me because they knew I'd mean business.

No, they'd just get a whole bunch of their friends to help them.

[quickquestion]

No, they'd just get a whole bunch of their friends to help them.

The more they bring, the merrier for me.

[Manticore]

So you claim to be invulnerable?

[quickquestion]

So you claim to be invulnerable?

Not completely invulnerable.

[Strange]

That in of itself is a logical fallacy, since you are using a "argument ad authority" fallacy.

 

 

No he isn't. You are very fond of accusing people of logical fallacies. (And you use quite a few yourself.)

[quickquestion]

 

 

No he isn't. You are very fond of accusing people of logical fallacies. (And you use quite a few yourself.)

His argument was that I was wrong, because what I said contradicted modern psychology.

His argument relies on a priori truth, that the resident authority, modern psychology, is the truth, and thus anyone who contradicts it, is therefore not the truth.

Edited April 18, 2017 by quickquestion

[andrewcellini]

His argument was that I was wrong, because what I said contradicted modern psychology.

His argument relies on a priori truth, that the resident authority, modern psychology, is the truth, and thus anyone who contradicts it, is therefore not the truth.

That's not an argument from authority at all actually. Raider did not allude to any specific expert in psychology in his claim that you are wrong - if he did then he'd have been in argument from authority territory - but rather (what I presume he meant is) the set of knowledge that has been accrued by psychology. Though he didn't substantiate his claim with anything specific, neither did you. You told a nice story though.

 

Put into the form of a rhetorical question: when did psychology become a person?

Edited April 19, 2017 by andrewcellini

[Strange]

His argument was that I was wrong, because what I said contradicted modern psychology.

His argument relies on a priori truth, that the resident authority, modern psychology, is the truth, and thus anyone who contradicts it, is therefore not the truth.

 

 

The findings of modern psychology are based on evidence. He claimed that what you say is contradicted by that evidence. This is not an argument from authority.

[MarieTharpRocks]

I think we can all agree that there is a lot of "weirdness" that gets attributed to celestial phenomena.

Not too long ago people used to think that comets were harbingers of godly doom. ( even in the freaking 90's with those Nike shoe wearing Heaven's Gate peeps).

There is a definite crossover between superstition, religion, and pyschology.

Meaning, we have this superstition of the big bad full moon.

We then, have people that do ritualistic things during a full moon,

We then, have psychologists that try to help all these people.

 

The gravitational pull of the moon does effect our tides.

This much we know as fact.

Further than that?

Nothing has been proven empirically that the moon effects our brain chemistry.

 

Because that's what our brains are.

Chemical machines.

For something to "mess with them" , it would have to be something directly attributable to our neurological chemistry.

Drugs do this, genetics do this, as can certain environmental factors.

 

But thus far, we haven't been able to equate the slight gravitational pull of the moon, into real chemical fluctuations in our minds.

We know gravity can affect our bodies , but it has to be of a certain force for it to do so.

 

The full moon wives tale , is a bit of self-fulfilling prophecy and a bunch of other possible sociological, spiritualistic, and psychological scenarios that cause us to make mountains out of nothing.

[MonDie]

These celestial cycles probably do affect our circadian rhythms, which would result in biochemical changes. Cortisol peaks in the morning during the "cortisol awakening response" and then cortisol gradually drops over the course of the day. Whereas cortisol has a diurnal cycle, testosterone has a semidiurnal cycle. The cortisol cycle takes a few days to adjust to a disrupted sleep schedule, but renin-aldosterone activity is intimately tied to sleep phases with aldosterone dropping during REM sleep and rising during non-REM sleep. The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis are both related to mental disorders and perhaps bipolar disorder particularly. Don't forget that we probably aren't the only organisms with these internal cycles. We are immersed in and dependent upon the entire ecosystem.

Of course our modern world provides more ways to block out these natural cycles, but not everybody takes advantage of this. Those noisy rascles nextdoor might start waking you up sooner when the sun starts rising sooner. The seasonal cycles have more obvious effects that could explain the popularity of "sun-sign" astrology, which uses the month of your birth, but I wouldn't entirely discount the moon phases. People might prefer to stay out late at the beach when there is a giant night-light in the sky creating giant waves. On the other hand, they might prefer the new moon so that they will not be seen. It was thought that womens' menstrual cycles were tied to the moon phases, but this effect, if it were ever real at all, might be weakening as women utilize the power of birth control.

But I repeat. Astrology relies on much, much more than the seasons and moon phases, most of which could not be accounted for by modern astrophysics.

Edited April 19, 2017 by MonDie

[quickquestion]

 

 

The findings of modern psychology are based on evidence. He claimed that what you say is contradicted by that evidence. This is not an argument from authority.

Quacks also use evidence to support their claims. Modern psychology is a modern form of quackery.

 

Also, I don't even see how anything I said contradicted modern psychology in the first place. He didn't even bother to make an argument or point out what he disagreed with.

[Raider5678]

Quacks also use evidence to support their claims. Modern psychology is a modern form of quackery.

 

Also, I don't even see how anything I said contradicted modern psychology in the first place. He didn't even bother to make an argument or point out what he disagreed with.

Alright alright fine.

I'll point out what I disagree with.

1. Basically, the human being is a pent-up collection of pent-up continually repressed natures and instincts.

2. It regulates itself due to social norms and fear of social exclusions.

3. Give it any excuse to go wild, and it will.

 

4. That's one of the reasons humans drink booze...booze gives it "permission" to act wild.

5. If there's one thing I know about humans, it's that they love avoiding taking responsibility for their actions.

 

6. So the "full-moon" legends allow people to see the full-moon, giving them a subliminal slip of restraint, letting themselves go wild.

7. So then when they sober they can avoid responsibility, and say the full-moon did it...and not acknowledge the real reason, is that society restricts and regulates most of their animal desires and instincts, and they are so repressed and pent up that even the slightest thing could let them go wild.

1. No it isn't. The human mind has the cognitive ability to repress instinct in many different ways. The most common one with through logic. They logically know that they should stop at a road and look both ways. But that doesn't pent up their repressed instinct to just keep walking while looking. Now obviously, not everyone stops, but it's a vague example.

2. What regulates itself? And what about all those people who could care less about social norms?

 

4. Humans drink booze because they like the feeling of being drunk, do it because the people around them are doing it, or simply to take away their pain. Not so that they can go wild without a reason. You're still responsible if you damage something whether you're drunk or not.

5. No argument there.

 

6. There is no evidence of a subliminal slip in restraint. Please show me some.

7. "Acknowledge"(FTFY) I've never heard someone try to get out of trouble by claiming the full moon did it. And if I went to my parents claiming the full moon did it, I'd receive a swift kick to the rear.

 

Now, what are some of these animal instincts that are supposedly being suppressed?

To run around naked and bang on your chest?

[quickquestion]

Alright alright fine.

I'll point out what I disagree with.

1. No it isn't. The human mind has the cognitive ability to repress instinct in many different ways. The most common one with through logic. They logically know that they should stop at a road and look both ways. But that doesn't pent up their repressed instinct to just keep walking while looking. Now obviously, not everyone stops, but it's a vague example.

2. What regulates itself? And what about all those people who could care less about social norms?

 

4. Humans drink booze because they like the feeling of being drunk, do it because the people around them are doing it, or simply to take away their pain. Not so that they can go wild without a reason. You're still responsible if you damage something whether you're drunk or not.

5. No argument there.

 

6. There is no evidence of a subliminal slip in restraint. Please show me some.

7. "Acknowledge"(FTFY) I've never heard someone try to get out of trouble by claiming the full moon did it. And if I went to my parents claiming the full moon did it, I'd receive a swift kick to the rear.

 

Now, what are some of these animal instincts that are supposedly being suppressed?

To run around naked and bang on your chest?

 

2. By social norms I mean also to avoid punishment by society and that is why they obey social norms. This fear of society is embedded them in an early age like religion.

4. I never said it was the only reason i said it was one reason. And people do stupid things when they are drunk like drive drunk. And you cant honestly tell me that they dont know that drunk driving isnt against the rules.

 

6. the folk lore legend subliminally implants on them.

7. By the time they sober up they are too sober to confidently say to alpha-male authorities that the moon made them do it. But before they did the crime they thought it might work as an excuse. When around authorities human feel submissive and less concerned about their own problems. For instance someone could be starving and rob a store, but when surrounded by News and media they feel shame because they feel submissive to the alpha-male authority. And the submissive role is to support the Alpha and focus less on their own problems. And so they dont have the courage to forge an excuse to their behavior, since they are in submissive/supportive mode.

Edited April 22, 2017 by quickquestion

[Raider5678]

 

2. By social norms I mean also to avoid punishment by society and that is why they obey social norms. This fear of society is embedded them in an early age like religion.

4. I never said it was the only reason i said it was one reason. And people do stupid things when they are drunk like drive drunk. And you cant honestly tell me that they dont know that drunk driving isnt against the rules.

 

6. the folk lore legend subliminally implants on them.

7. By the time they sober up they are too sober to confidently say to alpha-male authorities that the moon made them do it. But before they did the crime they thought it might work as an excuse. When around authorities human feel submissive and less concerned about their own problems. For instance someone could be starving and rob a store, but when surrounded by News and media they feel shame because they feel submissive to the alpha-male authority. And the submissive role is to support the Alpha and focus less on their own problems. And so they dont have the courage to forge an excuse to their behavior, since they are in submissive/supportive mode.

You didn't answer all my points. Just a select few. Answer the rest.

[quickquestion]

You didn't answer all my points. Just a select few. Answer the rest.

I answered the majority of your points.

 

To answer your last point, one thing that is being repressed is to punch people who irritate you.

[Raider5678]

I answered the majority of your points.

 

To answer your last point, one thing that is being repressed is to punch people who irritate you.

Most people get through their whole lives having never beaten the crap out of someone.

According to your theory, they should all start becoming murderous idiots whenever the full moon comes out or they drink alcohol.

 

2. By social norms I mean also to avoid punishment by society and that is why they obey social norms. This fear of society is embedded them in an early age like religion.

4. I never said it was the only reason i said it was one reason. And people do stupid things when they are drunk like drive drunk. And you cant honestly tell me that they dont know that drunk driving isnt against the rules.

 

6. the folk lore legend subliminally implants on them.

7. By the time they sober up they are too sober to confidently say to alpha-male authorities that the moon made them do it. But before they did the crime they thought it might work as an excuse. When around authorities human feel submissive and less concerned about their own problems. For instance someone could be starving and rob a store, but when surrounded by News and media they feel shame because they feel submissive to the alpha-male authority. And the submissive role is to support the Alpha and focus less on their own problems. And so they dont have the courage to forge an excuse to their behavior, since they are in submissive/supportive mode.

You know what?

I consent.

You're correct and right 100% absolutely.

Just let me out of this argument.

[quickquestion]

Most people get through their whole lives having never beaten the crap out of someone.

According to your theory, they should all start becoming murderous idiots whenever the full moon comes out or they drink alcohol.

My theory implied no such thing. My intent was to imply that the moon only caused a subtle subliminal effect.

[Raider5678]

My theory implied no such thing. My intent was to imply that the moon only caused a subtle subliminal effect.

Your theory is wrong.