Right? What kind of person teases us like that and then doesn’t share the method :|

Why?

Rather Disorganized attachment style. Sounds like he has a desire for closeness, is prone to regrets and shows behavior symptomatic of both anxious and avoidant attachment style

ethical capitalism

:D

Lemes 👈

That’s the girl with the head bobbing video on tiktok

Obsidian. Hands down the best note-taking and writing app.

The story turns out to be an act of revenge by the co-author, who donated 10 million pound to Cameron’s party in hopes of being given a cabinet position. After Cameron refused to give him such, Ashcroft co-wrote an unauthorized “biography” of Cameron.

With this in mind, I wouldn’t give this story any second thought other than the realization that Ashcroft is an utter tool.

Austria, Sweden, Italy and Romania actually drop in test scores for higher household income. That’s really interesting.

What you are citing, that willpower is being used up over the day by decisions, is called ego depletion and it is wrong! There are experiments where two groups were either told that this is a thing or the opposite, that willpower is strengthened by every decision instead, and it turns out, that both groups had different willpower self assessments at the end of the trial in accordance with the theory of willpower they were told in the beginning, meaning it’s just a placebo in the end. Neither ego depletion nor the opposite exist, but people feel as strong in willpower in accordance with their belief of how willpower works.

Why?

Inventors of those patents are Robert L. Sweet and Alan B. Densky. Those names mean anything? I don’t know them and I don’t get the point you are trying to make…

3. After WW1 and the Ottomans were defeated, it passed onto the Turkish (Islamic).

4. After WW2 the Turkish were defeated and they lost it to Britain. In the same war the surviving Jews were displaced worldwide and had no country to live, so the League of Nations (U.S, Britain, Canada, France mainly) decided to give Jews a new home and call this new place the State of Israel. They put Israel right in the middle of the British controlled Palestine, which no Islamic nation could object to because they were all defeated in war.

Turkey never fought in ww2. Turkey was already after ww1 completely stripped of territory in the Levant. There also was no league of nations after ww2 anymore, but the UN was founded. No Arabic nations were defeated in ww2. Some of 4. happened after ww1 not 2. The creation of Israel was heavily objected by the neighboring Arabic nations, see 6-Day-War.

They are talking about dark matter not dark energy.

No, nobody can be fired for whatever gender, sexual orientation, religion or beliefs they have. The focus on LGBTQ+ or certain religious beliefs is due to the media focus and because of the countless instances where such terminations, both legal or illegally, have taken place. These legislations give these groups the same rights everybody else already enjoys, and are usually formulated in such a way that any discrimination in regards to gender, etc. are forbidden, this includes white, straight cis-men.

What an amazing and terrifying read. Thanks for the link. It helped to understand some of the jargon, but now the post reads like office gossip. What does this have to do with the link you provided?

Probably just a jargon issue, but this assortment of words, both in the title and your post, makes no sense to me. Can you explain what you are even talking about?

What kind of researcher posts a five-question-questionnaire on Lemmy?

Who are you and who employs you? What is your agenda?

Is this an undergraduate thesis?

Where else did you post your questionnaire? Are you accounting for selection bias?

Why do you not use a questionnaire service like survey monkey?

These are all yes/no questions and no questions regarding background, sex, age, income, etc. What kind of conclusions do you think you will be able to draw from that?

As a non-native speaker I have never heard of nuance in the context of sociological research. Google mostly redirects to this exact paper or references about it. I figure it has something to do with precision of description. Could someone enlighten me?

Since Marx we have made tremendous strides in technology and have wealth gaps reminiscent of the industrial revolution. It is now easier than ever to imagine a world of corporate states (think Cyberpunk) with totalitarian control over their indentured workforce. With a large indentured workforce at hand, I find it unreasonable to dismiss the idea, that such corporations would not create a command based internal economy, because starving and de-stratifying their own workforce would play into the Marxian prophecy of capitalism’s downfall (a workforce too poor to consume their employers products, thus rendering capital worthless).

Do you think, that the Marxian dialectic of class struggle would still hold up in such a scenario, meaning that the upper class controlling these corporations/corporate states would still be overthrown by the lower class due to an inherent trait of their power base?

Or do you think this is more akin to a return to a pre-capitalist mode of production in form of a slave-owning system?