Page 1 of 15
Posted on May 7 at 11:17 a.m.
"This egotistical statement alone should give pause to all voters in SB."
Not intelligent ones.
"This is so far from the truth it is not even laughable."
"This Sheriff is despised by most who work for him."
On Sergeant Sandra Brown Looks to Unseat Sheriff Bill Brown
Posted on April 11 at 11:30 a.m.
"I`m as Chumash as the next Chumash person"
Fallacious argument from authority.
"@ Bimbo...Why so hostile?"
It's your over-the-top defensiveness here that is hostile.
"Why must I "Get real"...Am I not "real" enough simply by participating in this discussion?"
You can choose to be unreal and ignore the point made by bimboteskie and billclausen, but it will do harm to your credibility and the persuasiveness of your arguments.
On Coastal Commission to Fine Bacara
Posted on April 11 at 11:24 a.m.
"How would you like it if you buy your house for $1million and you can't do anything to your backyard because the community has decided it needs to be preserved? "
If I bought it with that condition in place, as Bacara did, I would do so liking it just fine, or I would be a fool (like the person who asked the question). If I bought it with that condition in place with the intention of ignoring the condition, I would be a criminal and a sociopath (like ...).
Posted on April 11 at 11:20 a.m.
"Now, since the property was sold to private development, the state shouldn't have a say in what they can or cannot do on the property."
So Muggy doesn't believe in contracts.
Muggy, the other comments here are intelligent ... yours are completely lacking in that quality.
Posted on April 11 at 11:18 a.m.
Unlike the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that the founders mentioned, there are NO PROPERTY RIGHTS IN NATURE. Property rights are entirely the creation of human governments and legal structures. Best not to bite the hand that feeds you, Muggy.
Posted on February 28 at 1:45 a.m.
Funny how readily a liberal like Ken can become a libertarian when it's not his ox being gored (to invert phrase).
On Relief for Bikers in Romero Canyon
Posted on November 15 at 7:23 p.m.
This article is simply about Marborg being allowed to *make a proposal*. That does not at all translate into a monopoly. Do you suggest that the government choose poorer, more costly proposals in order to avoid monopolies? How can it even be a monopoly when it's a contract with the government? There's a reason to object to monopolies, but it doesn't apply here.
On Recycling Rope-a-Dope
Posted on November 15 at 11:42 a.m.
One last comment: it's remarkable how this botched article invented a negative final note when the tone of the researcher quoted by the press release was the opposite:
"The human tendencies to care about how a person treats others and to protest bad treatment are not simply a thin veneer of cultural norms atop a cold and calculating core. Rather, they represent fundamental features of a universal human social nature."
On Trusting Strangers
Posted on November 15 at 11:26 a.m.
Back to at_large's question about how the study actually supports Social Exchange Theory, completely contrary to what one might expect from this horribly botched Indy article. From the press release:
"If our minds are designed to seek out the benefits of cooperative relationships with others, then participants should have preferred to trust those likely to cooperate with them in particular. On the other hand, if our reputational psychology is designed to support group-wide cohesion and cooperation, the participants should have resisted cooperating with those who defected on other group members."
Since the study showed people trusting those who treated *them* well, even if they were known to have screwed others, it supports Social Exchange Theory over Group Cooperation Theory.
Posted on November 15 at 11:19 a.m.
Also, what is this drivel? " Unfortunately, empirical data suggests that our kindness is ultimately motivated by selfishness."
ALL behavior is "ultimately motivated" by self-**interest**, at either the personal or the genetic level. There is nothing at all "unfortunate" about this; it is to be rationally expected and is at the core of sciences like psychology and sociology. If the Indy is going to write about sociology and other sciences, it should find someone who understands science and doesn't inject such silly woo woo value judgments.
Previous Month | Next Month