L
Normalfags always like to commit the moralistic fallacy.
When you inform them about something unpleasant that happens in nature they will refuse to acknowledge its existence. That's why they hate on evolutionary psychology. They accuse researchers in that field to make a naturalistic fallacy (deriving morals from nature) while nothing could be further away from the truth. The evolutionary psychologist merely describes nature as it is and the normalfag (sometimes) refuses to see the unpleasant stuff due to moral reasons and commits a moralistic fallacy while doing so.
The normalfag romanticizes nature; this is due to documentaries and other stuff where nature gets presented in a favorable light while nothing could be further away from the truth. Nature doesn't think at all, stop thinking that it's some caring entity and throw away pantheistic thoughts. All the unpleasant stuff is just less marketable for hip pop-scientists that want to sell their media products. This sickness (only seeing positive things) is seen when you compare the resonance of evolutionary psychology with the resonance of gender studies: Gender studies is praised by normalfags while evolutionary psychology is seen as pseudo-science solely based on the fact that evolutionary psychology shines light on the stuff they don't want to think about (e.g. the fact that maybe humans aren't so different from animals).
Also if you describe nature as it is you don't (automatically) say that the state of things there is favorable in any way or that someone should strive towards such things. But the normalfag is incapable of even recognizing the existence of things he doesn't want to exist due to negative emotions - that's why he likes to shoot the messenger.
The normalfag likes to worship science as his god and act enlightened in order to look down on religious people, but as soon as it says something they disagree with they lose their minds. They spit on religious people because they see humans as made in the image of god, but at the same time they refuse to hear the fact that we are also only a product of evolution when this could be associated with negative stuff/pose a threat towards their illusion of total control.
For them only extremes exist (either total freedom and no biological constraints; total slavery towards basal desires and no free will), so if you believe that humans are still not completely free of nature they will accuse you of being a complete determinist that thinks that no free will exists although you never said anything like that. And then they will argue against that straw-man with ease and deem it as a win.
When you inform them about something unpleasant that happens in nature they will refuse to acknowledge its existence. That's why they hate on evolutionary psychology. They accuse researchers in that field to make a naturalistic fallacy (deriving morals from nature) while nothing could be further away from the truth. The evolutionary psychologist merely describes nature as it is and the normalfag (sometimes) refuses to see the unpleasant stuff due to moral reasons and commits a moralistic fallacy while doing so.
The normalfag romanticizes nature; this is due to documentaries and other stuff where nature gets presented in a favorable light while nothing could be further away from the truth. Nature doesn't think at all, stop thinking that it's some caring entity and throw away pantheistic thoughts. All the unpleasant stuff is just less marketable for hip pop-scientists that want to sell their media products. This sickness (only seeing positive things) is seen when you compare the resonance of evolutionary psychology with the resonance of gender studies: Gender studies is praised by normalfags while evolutionary psychology is seen as pseudo-science solely based on the fact that evolutionary psychology shines light on the stuff they don't want to think about (e.g. the fact that maybe humans aren't so different from animals).
Also if you describe nature as it is you don't (automatically) say that the state of things there is favorable in any way or that someone should strive towards such things. But the normalfag is incapable of even recognizing the existence of things he doesn't want to exist due to negative emotions - that's why he likes to shoot the messenger.
The normalfag likes to worship science as his god and act enlightened in order to look down on religious people, but as soon as it says something they disagree with they lose their minds. They spit on religious people because they see humans as made in the image of god, but at the same time they refuse to hear the fact that we are also only a product of evolution when this could be associated with negative stuff/pose a threat towards their illusion of total control.
For them only extremes exist (either total freedom and no biological constraints; total slavery towards basal desires and no free will), so if you believe that humans are still not completely free of nature they will accuse you of being a complete determinist that thinks that no free will exists although you never said anything like that. And then they will argue against that straw-man with ease and deem it as a win.
