Evolution theory turns colleges into hellholes of depression

[Shadow Wolf]

With evolution theory you are creating a study environment in which any knowledge about how things are chosen in the universe is discarded, and with that any subjectivity about what made the decisions turn out the way they do is discarded as well. No room is provided for subjectivity at all, hence students become depressed.

Do yourself a favor, and learn what subjectivity means. And also realize that correlation does not mean causation, and there is zero correlation between evolution and depression. Also realize you do not have to be an atheist to accept evolution; Many theists even accept evolution. Myself, I am in college, I do accept evolution, but I am not an atheist and college and evolution are not causing my depression.
You may want to also actually read the article, as it clearly states the cause for this increase in depression is an increased demand of having to compete on a global market. As for the study itself, I assume it was done in America, were we are indeed far too competitive. It would be interesting to compare this to a country that doesn't rigidly promote competition and having to get money to get things.

 

[Sapiens]

I asked my son about depression amongst his classmates. His observation is that it is a very difficult transition to go from being one of the smartest kids in your high school to being average at your college, if you're lucky and you work hard.

 

[Shad]

The reliance of the OP on subjectivity and common sense should be a lesson to all. This is how primitive man thought for centuries and why we progressed so slowly. His ramblings about modern education is just a display of a person that still holds to these primitives idea refusing to educate himself on more reliable concepts. No more than ramblings of a mad man claiming everyone else is wrong while have no idea what they are talking about. Common discourse is a discussion about concept which people hold in common. However it is those that oppose the OP that have this discourse not the OP. Rather he holds a competing discourse

 

[outhouse]

The reliance of the OP on subjectivity and common sense should be a lesson to all. This is how primitive man thought for centuries and why we progressed so slowly. His ramblings about modern education is just a display of a person that still holds to these primitives idea refusing to educate himself on more reliable concepts. No more than ramblings of a mad man claiming everyone else is wrong while have no idea what they are talking about. Common discourse is a discussion about concept which people hold in common. However it is those that oppose the OP that have this discourse not the OP. Rather he holds a competing discourse

Its probably a more polite response to say this is a good example of fanaticism and fundamentalism in action.

 

[Shad]

Its probably a more polite response to say this is a good example of fanaticism and fundamentalism in action.

I return politeness in turn. I have had previous interactions with the poster. When I even asked for clarification for his views he went off on a tangent about university and evolution rather than provide any clarification. Further interaction has done nothing to convince me he posts anything sophistry and layman thinking(primitive) when it comes to his views or those that challenge him.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I've been trying to wrap my head around this and think I finally got it.


Your deduction is (1) depression involved emotions and all emotions are unique, thus subjective. (2) Subjectivity results in different decisions, answers, explanations and opinions. (3) Evolution is a single explanation. So teaching evolution excludes other explanations -- like creationism. Thus, problems of depression in evolutionist universities are caused by teaching evolution.

This conclusion: teaching evolution is responsible for depression is caused by (1) a fallacious generalization that all evolutionists are Atheists -- with whom you disagree -- giving you a bias; (2) a false cause argument arising from your opinion that the absence of an option for creationist teachings in public universities -- which you've termed "subjectivity" -- is (dogmatically) wrong; and, (3) an ad hominem fallacy of avoiding objecting to the merits of evolution by attacking evolutionists (which you've generalized as Atheists).

Masking the true intent to argue for religious teaching (creationism) in public universities is an insincere rhetorical strategy. Also, attempting to refute the evidenced reasons in the articles by claiming that the "common sense" reason is more obvious (and correct) suggests you do not accept that the most evidenced reason is the "common sense" reason. If you are not willing to concede at least that axiom, you will confront many obstacles in your academic discourse and you will continue to be criticized for your irrationality by many on this forum.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?”-Sam Harris

That was all over the place.

It is clear you don't understand how subjectivity works, which means all your ideas about people's emotions, depression, are baseless.

 

[Nietzsche]

That was all over the place.

It is clear you don't understand how subjectivity works, which means all your ideas about people's emotions, depression, are baseless.

"I don't understand it therefore it is wrong", says the man who refuses to clarify to others despite repeated attempts by at least twelve different people all who struggle to figure out your Byzantine word usage and poor grasp of conversational skills.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Do yourself a favor, and learn what subjectivity means. And also realize that correlation does not mean causation, and there is zero correlation between evolution and depression. Also realize you do not have to be an atheist to accept evolution; Many theists even accept evolution. Myself, I am in college, I do accept evolution, but I am not an atheist and college and evolution are not causing my depression.
You may want to also actually read the article, as it clearly states the cause for this increase in depression is an increased demand of having to compete on a global market. As for the study itself, I assume it was done in America, were we are indeed far too competitive. It would be interesting to compare this to a country that doesn't rigidly promote competition and having to get money to get things.

The article is just throwing up suggestions for possible causes.

I explained how subjectivity works in post no 62.

" The root of all subjectivity is the issue of what it is that makes a decision turn out the way it does. With decisions there are always several results possible, so then there are no laws of nature which determine the result, so there are no facts on the issue. But that is no problem because you can just use subjectivity, expression of emotion, with free will, to choose an answer, form an opinion.

So we can see that opinion has a rightful place besides fact, opinions are about what it is that makes a decision turn out the way it does, and facts are about the resulting decisions. There is a world of difference when you attend a college where opinion is acknowledged as having a rightful place, and a college in which facts are competed against opinion, to the destruction of all opinioin, as it is in evolutionist colleges."

IMO it's a fundamental failiure of education that you don't understand how subjectivity works. A failure of education, that you don't know anything about how things are chosen in the universe.

It is just common sense that if a college accepts subjectivity is valid, and teaches about how things are chosen in the universe, that this would provide a general atmosphere in the college in which the human spirit, and friendship, is appreciated, reducing depression.

 

[Kirran]

Mohammed, honestly, I don't think subjectivity is the correct word to use here. It doesn't make sense in that context. Trying to help you be clearer.

I don't know the correct word IS for what you're trying to say, but certainly it's not that. Subjectivity refers to how someone's judgement is shaped by personal feelings and opinions as opposed to outside influences. And everybody experiences subjectivity by this definition, I feel.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Mohammed, honestly, I don't think subjectivity is the correct word to use here. It doesn't make sense in that context. Trying to help you be clearer.

I don't know the correct word IS for what you're trying to say, but certainly it's not that. Subjectivity refers to how someone's judgement is shaped by personal feelings and opinions as opposed to outside influences. And everybody experiences subjectivity by this definition, I feel.

You are just another oracle.

You don't do investigation of common discourse how such a statement like "the earth is beautiful" is arrived at.

 

[Kirran]

You are just another oracle.

You don't do investigation of common discourse how such a statement like "the earth is beautiful" is arrived at.

I wasn't even contradicting anything you were saying, I was just trying help you be a little clearer - what I put up was the definition of subjectivity.

I am not saying random things as a result of smelling the gases from my own body.

 

[Kirran]

You don't do investigation of common discourse how such a statement like "the earth is beautiful" is arrived at.

Some people think the Earth is beautiful, some don't. It's subjective. What more do you want?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Some people think the Earth is beautiful, some don't. It's subjective. What more do you want?

That you investigate how common discourse works instead of fantasizing stuff yourself.

 

[te_lanus]

I wasn't even contradicting anything you were saying, I was just trying help you be a little clearer - what I put up was the definition of subjectivity.

Think he's using Google Translate thus no clue that he's not making any sense

fantasizing stuff yourself.

The problem that you seem to miss is that you are charging others with fantasizing, yet your whole point in this thread is about a fantasy that you made up without any it being based on reality.

Your point (i Presume) is to prove that Allah Created the world, which He couldn't as it was created as THe Babylonian Gods did it first

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Think he's using Google Translate thus no clue that he's not making any sense
The problem that you seem to miss is that you are charging others with fantasizing, yet your whole point in this thread is about a fantasy that you made up without any it being based on reality.

Your point (i Presume) is to prove that Allah Created the world, which He couldn't as it was created as THe Babylonian Gods did it first

It's just whatever, there is no reasonable discussion possible with any evolutionist. They are same as atheists, nazi's, communists, that they reject freedom is real, and reject subjectivity. They are crafty intellectual warriors against affirming the validity of subjectivity, and against affirming the reality of freedom.

 

[Kirran]

That you investigate how common discourse works instead of fantasizing stuff yourself.

What I just did was look up what the standard definition of subjectivity was. Is this not investigating common discourse?

What's more, it did not match what you were saying, hence I suggest you take another look at what you're saying and choose a more appropriate word.

Think he's using Google Translate thus no clue that he's not making any sense.

Maybe so.

Mohammed, are you using Google Translate, or some other online translator?

 

[Kirran]

It's just whatever, there is no reasonable discussion possible with any evolutionist. They are same as atheists, nazi's, communists, that they reject freedom is real, and reject subjectivity. They are crafty intellectual warriors against affirming the validity of subjectivity, and against affirming the reality of freedom.

Evolutionists are the same as Nazis? Really?

Also, I posted a common definition of subjectivity, NOT one I made up myself, and it is NOT something which is rejected by evolutionists, atheists, Nazis or communists.

 

[te_lanus]

It's just whatever, there is no reasonable discussion possible with any creationist. They are same as Christians, Islamist, that they reject freedom is real, and reject subjectivity. They are crafty intellectual warriors against affirming the validity of subjectivity, and against affirming the reality of freedom.

See I fixed it for you since Neither Christianity nor Islam is really geared towards personal freedom

 

[Nietzsche]

Ofcourse yours is exactly the definition a nazi would use, and likely they did say exactly that. A nazi would say a jew says x is beautiful, an aryan says x is ugly.

You define subjectivity according to different people, instead of reaching the conclusion by choosing the answer.

Different people, or alternative answers which are chosen. What does common discourse say?

How do you feel about the old Mufti of Jerusalem?

 

[Kirran]

Ofcourse yours is exactly the definition a nazi would use, and likely they did say exactly that. A nazi would say a jew says x is beautiful, an aryan says x is ugly.

You define subjectivity according to different people, instead of reaching the conclusion by choosing the answer.

Different people, or alternative answers which are chosen. What does common discourse say?

I choose an answer.