Alternatively, you can believe Krugman.

http://advisorperspectives.com/newsletters13/My_Love_Affair_with_Bonds_is_Over.php

Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories
By MAGGIE KOERTH-BAKER
Published: May 21, 2013 234 Comments

Why does there seem to be so many stories about "confirmation bias" and "pre-coceived notions"? It's like when you disagree with a point of view, it's because you're biased? And it's always the other guy, though she does pepper the article from both sides. Maybe the writer(s) has confirmation bias and she doesn't see it. I particularly liked this.

Our access to high-quality information has not, unfortunately, ushered in an age in which disagreements of this sort can easily be solved with a quick Google search. In fact, the Internet has made things worse. Confirmation bias — the tendency to pay more attention to evidence that supports what you already believe — is a well-documented and common human failing. People have been writing about it for centuries. In recent years, though, researchers have found that confirmation bias is not easy to overcome. You can’t just drown it in facts.

I'll post a conspiracy theory: The NY Times is doing almost everything to avoid the current WH scandals. Yesterday, having a Catholic church scandal article was nothing but deflecting attention from the WH to their normal punching bag. And this confirmation bias thing? And the internet making things worse? Does that mean, they don't want us to read the internet, because they don't want us to see the current 'hot' news? I mean, hasn't the WH stated that Drudge isn't news? It's the #1 site on the internet. The WH can't control it, so they want it destroyed. Isn't this sort of typical based on what we are currently learning? Welcome to Chicago.

Quote from: kidcoyote on May 21, 2013, 03:17:30 PM

Quote from: mjg on May 21, 2013, 11:54:31 AM

I don't think writing a paper on the subject is immoral.  Nor do I think it's speaks to the morality of the writer.

Okay. When asked if he thought mate swapping was deviant, Spanier answered, "Deviance is in the eye of the beholder." Look, I'm no saint, but this is moral equivalence, basically as Pat Moynihan stated, "we've defined deviancy down." Outlaw mate swapping? Of course not. But study it, and write on it. Sorry, not the guy I would have as what's essentially a moral leader. How is someone like this to convey dedication, commitment, sacrifice, loyalty? He states that mate swapping is okay, as long as everyone knows about it, not kept secret. I mean, isn't the breakdown of the American family great enough without the stress of adultery? And if not kept secret between spouses, what if children find out? That's okay? I don't agree. Too many problems in the world, not to add a potential other one to what's the most personal thing in a relationship.

By now, everyone knows that I think Spanier is a spineless and useless POS, but I gotta say I don't agree with you on this.

(FTR...  I still fully expect you to mis-interpret what I say and repeat your same statement over and over again regardless)

I agree with Spanier.  "Deviance is in the eye of the beholder."

You can back up 50 years and say the same thing about a homosexual relationship back in the 1960's.  Heck , you could say the same thing about a blow job or the use of oils or other 'toys' back in the 1960's.
-It's immoral.
-It's devient.
-What if the kids find out?
-It's another sign of what's wrong in the world today

I would trade a fine, upstanding, high moral person that stood by while Penn State's reputation burned, for a orgy-happy homo that would have stood up and nipped this whole scandal in the bud.

I don't think Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun were swingers.  FDR and Churchill may have fooled around a bit (not with each other  )Does anyone care?     

Why does everyone think I'm going to misinterpret what they say? In your case with this post, I won't misinterpret it, cause I can't interpret it. I do see you're giving a false dichotomy. A fine upstanding, high moral person is unlikely to stand by, and an orgy happy homo may also be a fine high moral person. I just don't want someone who says 'deviant behavior becomes deviant only when others define it as deviant'. That's moral equivalence, plain and simple. There is black and white; there is right and wrong. It's not in the eyes of the beholder, nor how one defines it. There are codes of acceptable behavior, and adultery ain't one of them. Neither is killing, stealing, lying or cheating. You think those are in the eyes of the beholder?

I brought this up because IMO, Spanier should never had been hired. Anyone who put in print, in 1975, that 'deviant behavior becomes deviant only when others define it as deviant' is not a guy who should run a school. Bad vetting, IMO. I'm not surprised how he acted in the JS affair, because maybe he believed it wasn't really deviant behavior on JS' part. 'I mean, who are we to judge?' type of reaction. Actually, it wasn't bad vetting. This is what higher education has become.  Read the Mansfield link I posted. This is typical of the college campus today.

Quote from: kidcoyote on May 21, 2013, 04:25:15 PM

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01541079#

" This article attempts to illuminate the understanding of swinging, or mate swapping, an increasingly common form of extramarital sexual activity. A theoretical formulation argues that swinging is a form of extramarital sexual activity which serves to define as good and acceptable a behavior that in other forms and in the past has been considered deviant or immoral."  A stratified area probability sample of 579 married adults was drawn from a Midwestern community of 40,000. Areas investigated included community knowledge and perception of swinging, values of respondents with regard to participation in and acceptance of swinging, and the incidence of swinging in the community. Most respondents disapproved of mate swapping as well as other forms of extramarital sex. Over half of the respondents knew about mate swapping, although less than 7% of the sample would consider participating. Swinging was found to exist in the community, but less than 2% of the respondents had ever participated. The data analysis is descriptive and exploratory, focusing on social correlates and characteristics.

When you wrote on racism, did you state that "a theoretical formulation argues that certain forms of racism serves to  define as good and acceptable a behavior that in other forms in the past was considered deviant and immoral?" If you wrote that, couldn't you be viewed as a racist?

I wonder if you're just struggling with the definition of "theoretical formulation".  You seem to think that Graham Spanier is promoting this "theoretical formulation", not that it's being researched in this paper.  If I wrote that the KKK theorizes that interracial marriages are leading to the breakdown of the American family, or that 7% of respondants belief that"Separate but Equal" laws worked, does that mean that I think that interracial marriages are bad or that I agree with racist laws?

But why study 'mate swapping?' How would you feel if a neighbor did a survey in your neighborhood about mate swapping? If you're married, asking your wife, "has she done it?", "would she consider doing it?", "how does she feel about it?"

On the race questions you ask, I'd hope you'd try to discredit the views you mention, and that'd be the point. IMO, Spanier's point is to make it(ms) okay. I'm not going to search for it, but someone posted that he stated, "deviance is in the eye of the beholder" regarding mate swapping, and "it's okay, as long as everyone(spouses I suppose he means) knows about it." Would you say that's true in questions of racism? IMO, nothing but moral equivalence on this matter re Spanier. Some think having Pat Califa support NAMBLA on campus is okay. I don't, and IMO, it shouldn't be tolerated. Read the Mansfield piece I linked. Sex week at Yale has prostitutes, paid by the school, to give lectures on sex acts. Sorry, this is not the mission of schools, IMO.

Quote from: kidcoyote on May 21, 2013, 03:17:30 PM

He states that mate swapping is okay, as long as everyone knows about it, not kept secret. I mean, isn't the breakdown of the American family great enough without the stress of adultery? And if not kept secret between spouses, what if children find out? That's okay? I don't agree. Too many problems in the world, not to add a potential other one to what's the most personal thing in a relationship.

Can I assume that you got this from his paper?  Last I saw, I thought that you still hadn't read it.  Then again, I guess some right-wing blog had an article giving their take on it, so there must not be any reason to read it now.

I wrote a paper on racism once, so I guess I'm a racist.

Re the children, it's my question. He made no comment on the children, I'm asking it. Here's Spanier's abstract from the mate swapping paper.

Quote from: kidcoyote on May 21, 2013, 03:17:30 PM

He states that mate swapping is okay, as long as everyone knows about it, not kept secret. I mean, isn't the breakdown of the American family great enough without the stress of adultery? And if not kept secret between spouses, what if children find out? That's okay? I don't agree. Too many problems in the world, not to add a potential other one to what's the most personal thing in a relationship.

Can I assume that you got this from his paper?  Last I saw, I thought that you still hadn't read it.  Then again, I guess some right-wing blog had an article giving their take on it, so there must not be any reason to read it now.

I wrote a paper on racism once, so I guess I'm a racist.

Re the children, it's my question. He made no comment on the children, I'm asking it. This is from the abstract from his paper. I can only link the abstract, but the first two pages can be viewed, not linked, here.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01541079#

" This article attempts to illuminate the understanding of swinging, or mate swapping, an increasingly common form of extramarital sexual activity. A theoretical formulation argues that swinging is a form of extramarital sexual activity which serves to define as good and acceptable a behavior that in other forms and in the past has been considered deviant or immoral."  A stratified area probability sample of 579 married adults was drawn from a Midwestern community of 40,000. Areas investigated included community knowledge and perception of swinging, values of respondents with regard to participation in and acceptance of swinging, and the incidence of swinging in the community. Most respondents disapproved of mate swapping as well as other forms of extramarital sex. Over half of the respondents knew about mate swapping, although less than 7% of the sample would consider participating. Swinging was found to exist in the community, but less than 2% of the respondents had ever participated. The data analysis is descriptive and exploratory, focusing on social correlates and characteristics.

When you wrote on racism, did you state that "a theoretical formulation argues that certain forms of racism serves to  define as good and acceptable a behavior that in other forms in the past was considered deviant and immoral?" If you wrote that, couldn't you be viewed as a racist?

Quote from: kidcoyote on May 21, 2013, 11:58:57 AM

As many know, I like predictions. I was looking at the Curry watch, and when I predicted Curry being the best shooter since Ray Allen and Reggie Miller, some scoffed. One poster stated, "typical kid, over the top." Okay. Did I miss any big ones? Yes, Lance Stephenson killed the Knicks. Larry Bird called him the Pacers most talented player. My bad. Never thought he'd make it. But his skills have improved, and he's one rough SOB.

Anyway, turning to politics, not much here on current scandal. My prediction: it's going to get uglier and uglier, as more and more comes out. Don't know how true these stories are, but Roger Simon is no wing nut. If this is true? Oh, boy.

http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/05/21/pjm-exclusive-ex-diplomats-report-new-benghazi-whistleblowers-with-info-devastating-to-clinton-and-obama/

And this? This woman will be subpoenaed. Not sure where this all ends up, but the more lying done first, the worse it will be, IMO.

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/20/obama-and-the-irs-the-smoking

Two dunks per game.  Sasa will average double digits scoring.  Just to name two off the top of my head.

Actually, I can picture you as the type of guy who goes to twenty different horse racing web sites and predicts a different Kentucky Derby winner on each.  Then you pound the daylights out of the one site on which you picked the winner.  Do I have that about right?

Two dunks? Yeah, that was dumb, speculative.  Sasa, pretty bad too, but that was paired with Curry. Very speculative, as I hadn't seen him play. I mean, Curry is the best shooter in the league. Some didn't think he'd be drafted. I mean that's just nuts. Curry is outstanding, a franchise maker. Horse races, never go. Really only play poker, and even that's limited. On Lance, much bigger miss, IMO. I never thought he'd make it, and I saw him play up close, twice. He had limited skills, even at Cincinnati. He's quite the bruiser, and I just didn't think that was enough. But it's apparent it might be. He had 25 points and 10 RB's in closeout game. That's pretty dominating.

As many know, I like predictions. I was looking at the Curry watch, and when I predicted Curry being the best shooter since Ray Allen and Reggie Miller, some scoffed. One poster stated, "typical kid, over the top." Okay. Did I miss any big ones? Yes, Lance Stephenson killed the Knicks. Larry Bird called him the Pacers most talented player. My bad. Never thought he'd make it. But his skills have improved, and he's one rough SOB.

Anyway, turning to politics, not much here on current scandal. My prediction: it's going to get uglier and uglier, as more and more comes out. Don't know how true these stories are, but Roger Simon is no wing nut. If this is true? Oh, boy.

http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/05/21/pjm-exclusive-ex-diplomats-report-new-benghazi-whistleblowers-with-info-devastating-to-clinton-and-obama/

And this? This woman will be subpoenaed. Not sure where this all ends up, but the more lying done first, the worse it will be, IMO.

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/20/obama-and-the-irs-the-smoking