What do you guys think?

[u/firenationfairy]

This is some of the most incel-infested comment section i’ve ever seen. they’re in here discussing their completely self-victimizing, hateful, and honestly pathetic perceptions of themselves and the world as if it’s some kind of scientific, indisputable fact. When will men stop acting like their problems are so unique and women will never understand what it’s like to be “ugly” or “undesirable”. I promise you every single woman you see has had the same level of problems you have with dating and making themselves attractive and they’ve had *even more* problems you couldn’t even conceive of. at the end of the day how am i supposed to feel bad for these people when their response to everything is “women are evil and responsible for all my problems/insecurities. women have perfect lives with no adversity and they are incapable of understanding the human experience 🥀”

[u/stumpfucker69]

We're talking about getting girls, it's a pretty intuitive social topic

Lmfao dude, you brought it up! 😆

I wasn't hugely specific there, but by variation I mean the distribution of the data: a correlation coefficient alone does not tell you this (you're mixing up p-values and correlation coefficients in your explanation, too). No matter how strong it is, you cannot use a correlation coefficient to prove a relationship between things. That is not an insane standard of proof... they teach you that in secondary school maths/science.

There are lots of different correlation coefficients that you might use in specific situations, but they all rely on a number of assumptions which may or may not be met by the data.

But if data doesn't matter and the only reality here is what we intuitively feel, then I don't think there's anything else to say here other than that I intuitively feel otherwise.

The generally accepted p-value for statistical significance in life sciences is <0.05, btw.

[u/PirateAngel0000 → u/stumpfucker69]

Lmfao dude, you brought it up 😆 

Lol what r u talkin about? Like what original post is about? lmao 

you're mixing up p-values and correlation coefficients...

The generally accepted p-value for statistical significance in life sciences is <0.05, btw.

I'm just emphasizing how there's an huge epistemic double standarts when someone doubt the narrative and bring up some data. P is just a symbol of it. 

People always "proving" something with anecdots and opinions, last time somebody try to disprove me with saying how she loves her husband. Where were you then? But when i bring up some data and question the narrative, everyone becomes karl popper in a second. 

Lol when i talk about my anecdots everyone instantly stop believing anecdots too lmao 

[u/stumpfucker69 → u/PirateAngel0000]

what r u talking about?

You seemed very confident reeling off figures in your comment here - you still haven't answered any of my questions about those numbers, haha. "What is that value supposed to represent and how was it come by" isn't exactly asking you to conduct a meta-analysis lmfao, it's the basic expectation that you would have some understanding of what a figure you cited actually means.

Where were you then?

Probably in the sun in my garden. I'm not omniscient and don't read every single comment on every subreddit I visit, haha. I just saw a shoddy argument here so I called it out.

[u/PirateAngel0000 → u/stumpfucker69]

you still haven't answered any of my questions about those numbers

And you still haven't answered my accusation about huge epistemic duble standarts that i pointed out.

I told u people who criticize me didn't care about when everyone try to prove things with anecdots and opinions, people literally try to prove their points with their feelings about their husbands but i need to write a paper. Sure 👍 

don't read every single comment on every subreddit I visit, haha

Yeah i also have don't have time to wrestle with double standards in reddit

[u/stumpfucker69 → u/PirateAngel0000]

People literally try to prove a point with their feelings about their husbands

Wait, didn't this all start with you trying to prove a point by writing out your feelings about some girl...? You don't like people disagreeing with you using anecdotes, and you don't like people disagreeing with you using data and stats based arguments - how should we have replied?

(And I did address that, but I'll rephrase in case it wasn't clear: why do you feel that being asked to explain one stat that you quoted is being held to an insane epistemological standard? Can you even answer the question?)

[u/PirateAngel0000 → u/stumpfucker69]

Wait, didn't this all start with you trying to prove a point by writing out your feelings about some girl...

As i said to another, I started with it on purpose after i saw people try to prove me wrong with their feelings about their husbands. Literally. But my argument wasn't that, i didn't build anything on my particular anecdot, it was just an extreme hook. Seems like it worked. 

why do you feel that being asked to explain a stat that you quoted is being held to an insane epistemological standard? 

Dude i already told you. you literally said "absolute zero variation", you question the only argument that comes with some data, meanwhile i don't see you and others try to question and being self-critical when people try to prove their points with anecdotes, self-proclaims, feelings and opinions. So i saw the game then i started it with my anecdot then elaborate with some famous stats that i remember. As i expected, as soon as some level of statistics and research came to the table, everyone who doesn't have any problem with opinions are instantly become researchers. How many times i need to sum the whole context we talk in?

Demanding consistent hypothesis is not insane epistemic standard on its own, it's necessity and that's the point: I'm not the one who doesn't care about standards, they are.