The Lesson Of The Monkeys -- Challenge The Status Quo

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


This is not an experiment demonstrating learning. It is an experiment demonstrating apathy and group think.




posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



Have you ever jumped off a bridge??? If no...why not???

Have you ever stuck a fork in a light socket??? If not...why not???


Yes in both cases, because my parents believed you didn't learn by just following the guy with all the answers, you had to find things out for yourself. And also because I had authority issues.


Have you learned from personal experience to not do these things??? Or have you learned from being told by others???


A little bit of column A and a little bit of column B. Certainly not all one or the other.


Learning is not a bad thing...and this make believe experiment is just claiming that learning is bad....you don't always have to experience something first hand to know it is bad.


No, this study in no way shows that learning is a bad thing. I don't know where you think this was communicated.

The study clearly wanted to give you the information that blindly accepting something as a fact, without having any first hand knowledge is stupid. First hand experience is not always you having to deal with it yourself, it's also witnessing the action/reaction.

If you follow whatever nonsense is presented to you, based on nothing else but you were told by a group of people that this was how it was suppose to be, then you cannot possibly say that you have critical thinking skills.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 



The study clearly wanted to give you the information that blindly accepting something as a fact, without having any first hand knowledge is stupid.


Well first off...let's make it clear that this wasn't a real study...ok? The real study that you source has nothing to do with the pictures you posted...no ladder...no banana...no beating up of other monkeys.

And if it was a real study...why do you assume the monkeys would be accepting it on blind faith...I know humans think animals are dumb and don't communicate...but that really isn't the case.

So...what is wrong with the "fake" study anyway...a group of monkeys LEARNED that something bad happened when a certain action was taken. So they prevent a new member from doing it...now in this "fake" study...they pretend the other monkeys beat the new monkey up...but what if instead we did this "fake" study with humans and they simply explained to the new person that if you climb up that ladder, we all get punished??? Is that wrong???

This fake study is presented in a way to create an emotional response because monkeys are beating up other monkeys to prevent them from doing something. That makes the people hearing this think "well that's just wrong...the monkey didn't know any better"...and then you try to apply it to human society.

So...give me ONE specific example of where something like this occurs in our modern day society.
edit on 8-8-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



Well first off...let's make it clear that this wasn't a real study...ok? The real study that you source has nothing to do with the pictures you posted...no ladder...no banana...no beating up of other monkeys.

And if it was a real study...why do you assume the monkeys would be accepting it on blind faith...I know humans think animals are dumb and don't communicate...but that really isn't the case.


Can you please show me with links, why you claim this to be a 'fake' study? I'll address these comments afterwards.


but what if instead we did this "fake" study with humans and they simply explained to the new person that if you climb up that ladder, we all get punished??? Is that wrong???


It's the same. Monkeys beating each other up doesn't give me some emotional response that dictates my understanding of a study, it's hypothesis and subsequent results.

I'm not anthropomorphizing these monkeys. I don't think the majority of readers do either.

As for asking for an example.

Religion

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


“The cat, having sat upon a hot stove lid, will not sit upon a hot stove lid again. But he won't sit upon a cold stove lid, either.”

~Mark Twain~

And "they" say curiosity killed the cat and why are "they" saying this? Do "they" want us to learn the dangers that come with curiosity?

“Too many facts, too little conceptualizing, too much memorizing, and too little thinking.”

~Paul Hurd~

I don't know anyone personally who has ever even bothered to read the tax code, but "everyone knows" that you got to pay taxes, right? I've seen it time after time in this site, when the question of liability, and the subject of the tax is questioned, where countless people who admit they don't understand the tax code insist that the question of liability is not up for debate and too many who argue that the subject of the tax is irrelevant.

Currently there are several threads in this site where a huge divide between people is chronicled over the gay marriage issue. Very few even want to discuss the dubiousness of any requirement for anyone to obtain a license to be married, gay, straight, or crooked. I enter those threads and insist that marriage is a unalienable right and all people have the right to do it and no one needs permission from the state to do it and an army of people scream, rant and rave, accusing me of "hijacking" the thread, lecturing me on how things are done "right now".

Some will take the time to lecture me on how tax filing privileges and other benefits are unequal and their outrage at me is that I fight for freedom where their only concern is "equal rights". This is what they've learned. Hell, I learned it to. I learned all about victimology and "equal rights" and "civil rights" and only came to learn about unalienable rights after I started thinking. I attempt to use my critical thought and people scream:

"Oh JPZ, go jump off of a bridge!"



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 



Can you please show me with links, why you claim this to be a 'fake' study? I'll address these comments afterwards.


Sure, no problem...you can read the actual study here.

www.scribd.com...

There is no ladder, there is no banana, there is no water hose, and there is no replacement of the monkeys until there is a group of all new monkeys. In fact, the study is only done in pairs and never showed a 100% rate of the "trained" monkey interferring with the "naive" monkey.


So it seems like what we have here, is you doing exactly what your fake study is pointing out...you are presenting this as fact...because it was presented to you as fact...even though you never bothered to read the original study to see that it is an embellished and sensationalized distortion of the original study.


As for your example of Religion...I don't understand your analogy. You are saying that all religious people are just idiots that blindly follow what they are told...that seems very ignorant since there are many religious people that become religious at an older age and from families that were athiests.

I'm not seeing your point of the entire thread.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 





So...give me ONE specific example of where something like this occurs in our modern day society.


You participation in this thread thus far. I find when I read your posts, it becomes emotionally crippling, causing me great concern for your welfare. Your inability to decipher what the analogy is about indicates blindness. You demonstrate the tremendous power of group think.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 





So...give me ONE specific example of where something like this occurs in our modern day society.


You participation in this thread thus far. I find when I read your posts, it becomes emotionally crippling, causing me great concern for your welfare. Your inability to decipher what the analogy is about indicates blindness. You demonstrate the tremendous power of group think.


If you go read the original study, you will see it is only about learning behavior...nothing to do with the OPs premise of doing things without knowing why.

The only display of group think in this thread is all of you taking this "study" to be real and not an embellished distortion of an actual study.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Blame culture and society and the lack of personal initiative.
But living the life of Jonathon Livingston Seagull isn't necessarily healthy either.

And Heaven help us, the so-called "experiment" with the monkeys is nothing more than some scientists doing their best to prove the old story of "Mom, why do you cut off the end of the hambone?"
"Why, I don't know, dear. That is what your grandmother always did to it and why I do it. Let's call her ask why."
Granny: "When your father and I were first married all I had was a small roast pan and a ham wouldn't fit into it so I cut the boney end off so it would fit into the pan. --You do have a large pan don't you, dear?"



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
There are many ways the experiment can be interpreted

Here is mine - Indoctrination passed on through generations - Walking in Dead Mens Shoes.

Typical of Human Animals to attempt to glean some insight into themselves by abusing other animals.

As a child we have a clean slate - but this does not mean we are without Intelligence though our ideas and thoughts may be called childish by adults

What do I mean - Well the world is full of superficiality because of our lack of thinking for ourselves and also our weakness for selfish ways.

Could we live without money, wars, politicians, state education, nations, I say yes but how far have we fallen and how high must we now reach to gain Honour and respect and caring of each other and each other's needs not wants.

Childish sure but Childish is a compliment
edit on 8-8-2012 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-8-2012 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Not a problem really. The flags of discontent will always be flown by some - and eventually one of those monkeys will sucessfully climb that ladder and get the banannas. They group will see there is no danger and follow suite eventually.

I like to think that we are not exactly like monkeys, too.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedParrotHead
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Not a problem really. The flags of discontent will always be flown by some - and eventually one of those monkeys will sucessfully climb that ladder and get the banannas. They group will see there is no danger and follow suite eventually.

I like to think that we are not exactly like monkeys, too.


You can breath easy - No we are not like monkeys
I have never heard of monkeys carrying out experiments on Humans so as to understand the psychology of behavior modification over generations



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 





I have never heard of monkeys carrying out experiments on Humans so as to understand the psychology of behavior modification over generations


You've never read or seen Planet of the Apes? In all seriousness though, this is an interesting link on Ape Genius. What I found interesting is in "cooperation" experiments it was determined that chimps do not cooperate with other chimps to well but seemed to do so with humans and then, almost as an afterthought, it is hypothesized this may be because the chimps knew the humans wouldn't compete with them. Who's running that experiment, I wonder, the humans or the apes?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 


I have never heard of monkeys ambushing and killing a jaguar either, but if they could they would.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Thanks for the link Jean Paul
It made me smile.
I do enjoy nay love when animals confound Humans



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedParrotHead
reply to post by artistpoet
 


I have never heard of monkeys ambushing and killing a jaguar either, but if they could they would.


I have heard of them pulling off wing mirrors and trims from Jaguars at Safari Parks................Oh Wait! You mean Big Cats



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedParrotHead
reply to post by artistpoet
 


I have never heard of monkeys ambushing and killing a jaguar either, but if they could they would.


Maybe not, but jaguars are an endagered species but in the same rainforests where they prowl, monkeys flourish. I've never seen a jaguar laugh nearly as loud as a monkey.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Well would you laugh if some Monkey stole your wheel trims and wing mirrors



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by RomeByFire
 


? 100th Monkey communicating by what means?


It's a bit tricky to explain, but what I meant was that we are "waiting" for the 100th monkey (in context to the story) as in the same idea that we humans are waiting for our 100th monkey in that people will begin to see things for that are and stand up against the oppression and corruption.





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join