Report comment

Report comment

Depending on how you spin or frame the issue, you could say that the top 1% was left behind for much of the 20th century and just caught up.

You could, but saying the top 1% were “left behind” in any meaningful sense is, um, doubtful.

Report comment

Report comment

I especially desire for our leaders to believe it, because it matters to how they act.

I agree that the current American political vocabulary lacks the terms to handle this properly, but I don’t think that’s an excuse. 9/11 was over 13 years ago. I can remember claims that “Islam is a religion of peace” ringing hollow even back then, and the fallout from the Arab Spring and just about everything else since then hasn’t buttressed the claim any. There has been more than enough time for our leaders to adapt to reality.

When our leaders only repeat all the louder that the Islamic State and similar groups have nothing to do with Islam, they’re inflating a bubble that will be all the uglier when it pops.

Report comment

Report comment

Many Protestant reformers were not insane iconoclasts who wanted to impose crazy fanatical religious rules on everybody. When Luther heard that some of his followers were smashing up churches, he basically told them “stop being dicks you guys, images in churches are harmless,” and sanctioned a lot of other aspects of everyday worship. He also encouraged people to stop worrying so much about sin, abandon asceticism and enjoy getting married, having sex, drinking beer, and eating meat during Lent. So, viewing his version of the Reformation as liberalizing and liberating is quite reasonable. There certainly were Reformers who took a different perspective, but it’s wrong to conflate Luther and Calvin.

Similarly, the Wahabbis had a liberal parallel– the 19th century Egyptian Salafi movement led by Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Ridda, who wanted to create a pared-down, science-compliant, modernity-minded Islamic jurisprudence. Of course, their descendants are easy to ignore because they mostly became boring secularists.

tl;dr: Religious efforts to “return to roots” are complicated, and get used for lots of different sorts of aims. It’s useful to keep that in mind before lionizing or demonizing them.

Report comment

http://theawesomer.com/ken-m-the-trolls-troll/193220/

Report comment

The interaction term was then
entered into separate equations (i.e., one interaction term at a time for each parenting measure and for each outcome separately) to
determine whether the effect sizes were different. The results of these analyses revealed only two significant differences (which is about what would be expected by chance alone)

and nevertheless blithely concluded that the non-significance was real and not an effect of an underpowered study. I would really like to see someone do this study design with a larger sample size and/or more powerful tests.

Also I just realized that it’s Great Lent and I told myself I’d refrain from commenting on SSC during the season. So. I should probably stop writing.

Report comment

Report comment