this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
364 points (94.4% liked)

Science Memes

11441 readers
811 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
364
Slap a "quantum" on it = Instant flux capacitor (mander.xyz)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If you mean that we make cities and culture and science with our minds, then yes.

If you mean we control reality by squeezing our butt cheeks real hard and wishing for parking spaces, then no.

Most of the time I hear this, it's stupid people promoting the second.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I believe the more nuanced argument is that even though you think you have free will and are making choices such as "let's build a hospital" or "I will write a song", due to the nature of all effects needing causes, in a chain - there is no such thing as free will as there is no cause without effect.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Agreed. So far the only things we know of that don't seem to have detectable causes are virtual particles and maybe radioactive decay, I think?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

True (I guess anyway!) but consciousness still alters the physical world. What's driving consciousness, that's the real question IMO.

[–] chitak166 -3 points 1 year ago

my balls

[–] FlickOfTheBean 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That second one... Isn't that manifestation? Hard agree with you there, usually people promoting manifestation are simultaneously saying "you can imagine anything and make it real" and in the same breath are trying to sell you something that you evidently aren't able to imagine into your reality for free.

On the other side, technically, even breathing is enough to satisfy the goal of "changing the universe". That bunch of molecules would not be moving through the universe like that if it weren't for your consciousness (but few appreciate sentience at that atomic of a mechanical level lol. I just think it's a massive glazed over step in going from mind to city/culture/science)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A byproduct of self help hokum. Most people who have difficulties in life relating to their "success" are told to visualize their goals, and magically they'll achieve themselves somehow. They never actually say how to summon the executive function necessary in order to perform the tasks to achieve the goals. That would result in too many middle class people.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I've also heard it described by the Puzzle in a Thunderstorm gang as someone being so blind and unwilling to acknowledge their privilege that they claim everything good that happens to them is literal magic. Their problems can be solved by social safety nets and coincidence, but get attributed to their "positive thinking" altering the fabric of reality to benefit them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I was just thinking of more "high level" stuff that's easier to disassociate from simple physical mechanics of cells and stuff. Trying to avoid the low hanging fruit in my examples, and all that.

[–] FlickOfTheBean 2 points 1 year ago

Oh yeah, I just wanted to complete the picture for those who might not be able to assume all the steps, it's by no means a fault in anything you said. I'm just adding on because I don't mind the low hanging fruit discussions, personally. By all means, feel free to skip it, that's what people with interests like mine are here to fill for! Don't waste your time being stuck in boring explanations on the internet when it's virtually guaranteed someone else will think it's fun!

[–] chitak166 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_attraction_(New_Thought)

I think this can be interpreted in different ways. One can be that we sort of go in the direction we're looking, and there's evidence to back that up. You don't just magically become a nuclear scientist just like you don't magically become an actor. It usually takes years of dedication and focus.

Another is that if we just 'will' it into being, then it will be so. I don't think this is really accurate of reality.

[–] FlickOfTheBean 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, I'm coming from a background sceptical of the law of attraction because it's just repackaging having goals to sell self help books. How do you become a nuclear scientist? Step 1) step 2) step 3) etc.

The law of attraction is new speak used to sell known principles to people, in my opinion. Manifestation, in my opinion, is the same thing but coming at it from a crystals vibe rather than the self help vibe of the law of attraction.

I don't mean to be a jerk about it, hence all the in my opinions, but as I said, I am very skeptical of the usage and utilization of the concept of manifestation.

All that said, you're not wrong. The principle is valid and it does work, but it's mustering the discipline to stick to those goals, that's the secret that everyone is looking for. Idk I feel like I'm starting to ramble, do you have any points/counter points to any of this?

[–] chitak166 3 points 1 year ago

Absolutely, I totally agree with you.

I don't really subscribe to it either. I just think it's a fine example of something that can be interpreted multiple ways and different people will get different things from those interpretations.

:)