Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Liberals Are More Likely To Be MALADJUSTED Wet Blankets; Here’s The PROOF: Eddie Scarry" video.

@databoys9877 Why do all the secular countries in Europe have the best social programs and the strongest support for mothers and children, including nursery school, with meals, paid in full for all? Whereas we have clergy scandals galore . . .
3
These are different people.
3
This book is a classic grift. Look at the smirk on his face.
2
Another grift.
1
This author appears ignorant of basic facts of social psychology. For example, you will never get at the truth concerning whether a person is happy; what you will find out is whether their social group values the assertion that they are happy, or considers claiming to be discontented a signal of greater depth, intelligence, higher ethical standards, and so forth. It also depends on whether a group considers candor imperative -- whether you owe it to everyone to answer a survey truthfully, or whether you can build yourself up a little -- and whether it is considered immoral, or even sinful, not to express happiness, which is a sign of gratitude toward God. So . . . A researcher has to use various indirect methods to find out who is truly happy. Do any of the people on Fox look happy to you? They are railing against someone or something at least as much as the clown show that is The View. Both are fact-challenged for some reason. The View may be worse, but the difference is small. That's the current media market.
1
@KonigGustavAdolph I think it's more superficial. You can never measure directly whether someone is happy. You can only find out whether their social group approves of saying you are happy, or has higher regard for someone who says he is not happy. (Remember John Stuart Mill? "I would rather be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.") Sometimes devout people consider it sinful to express unhappiness as it is a sign of ingratitude toward God. Then there's all the pop psychology that says you have to pretend to be happy or else you'll die sooner or look older or something. Or not get hired. 🤣
1
@daryleheard9011 I know. Good thing those people in Highland Park went to heaven. I'm not going to worry. /s
1
Why do you think he wrote it? There's a market for it. 💰
1
Those who know basic facts of social psychology know how specious this is. For example, you will never get at the truth of whether a person is happy; what you will find out is whether their social group values making the assertion that they are happy, or considers claiming to be discontented a signal of greater depth, intelligence, higher ethical standards, and so forth. It also depends on whether a group considers candor imperative -- you owe it to everyone to answer a survey truthfully -- and whether it is considered immoral, or even sinful, not to express happiness, which is a sign of gratitude toward God. So . . . A researcher has to use various indirect methods to find out who is truly happy. Do any of the people on Fox look happy to you? They are railing against someone at least as much as The View.
1
@AbdullahMikalRodriguez Sure, because religious people believe you should SAY that you are happy, as a way to show gratitude to the Creator. Are all the ones caught up in abusing children happy? Get a grip, will you. This isn't reality, it's pop psychology nonsense. It sells. That's the sad part.
1
You mean Olayemi?
1
This dude, whatever his name is, is ignorant of basic facts of social psychology. For example, you will never get at the truth of whether a person is happy; what you will find out is whether their social group valorizes the assertion that they are happy, or considers claiming to be discontented a signal of greater depth, intelligence, higher ethical standards, and so forth. It also depends on whether a group considers candor imperative -- you owe it to everyone to answer a survey truthfully -- and whether it is considered immoral, or even sinful, not to express happiness, which is a sign of gratitude toward God. So . . . A researcher has to use various indirect methods to find out who is truly happy. Do any of the people on Fox look happy to you? They are railing against someone at least as much as The View.
1
She was slated to cohost for one week, from the start.
1
@oluwatosin221 Okay, if you don't see though this cheap grift, the next recession is going to be a doozy. Just watch your wallet. This guy is barely literate.
1
@MP-tj5xv All of those countries are secular. You confuse ceremony with zealotry. Religions have actual political sway only in Ireland and Poland, and regionally in a few other countries such as Italy and Greece, usually in the least developed regions. France is so secular most people haven't had a church wedding in generations. Germany is secular. Spain is anticlerical. In Sweden, Fanny and Alexander had a made-for-television version about 40 years ago. No one flaunts religiousity or demands religion be interjected into politics. In Italy and a few other Mediterranean countries, most men regard religion as a feminine thing, and we should protect devout women from atheist harrassment (describes my agnostic, anticlerical father to a T, and to his death).
1
@MP-tj5xv Check the percentage of out-of-wedlock births in those countries, by the way. In France, it's 60%. Only the Muslim community brings it down. In many of the Scandinavian countries you mentioned, around 50%, higher in a few, including Denmark.
1
@MP-tj5xv Actually, of the major nations, UK is the least secular, has a group of ardent, well-known proponents of atheism (figures), and fewer solid social programs for mothers and children than do France, Germany, etc. Figures.
1
@MP-tj5xv Wait a second -- no state school in France EVER inculcates religion. What they call "secular teaching of religious facts" was introduced as a multiculturalist agenda about five years ago. The effort is in part to moderate the taste for Charlie Hebdo-style offensiveness. They still ban overt symbols of religiosity in school. France teaches philosophy in the final year of lycee, not religion. There's a reason for that.
1
🤣🤣🤣🤣 The FIRST thing he talks about in response to Ryan is how miserable he was because of BLM, and exaggerated it of course. All the rich neolibs are perfectly fine. They don't know or care about anyone else. Most of the rest, the non-rich ones, are mad because they don't have Pelosi's money.
1
No kidding. This guy sounds ignorant of basic facts of social psychology research. For example, you will never get at the truth of whether a person is happy; what you will find out is whether their social group valorizes the assertion that they are happy, or considers claiming to be discontented a signal of greater depth, intelligence, higher ethical standards, and so forth. It also depends on whether a group considers candor imperative -- you owe it to everyone to answer a survey truthfully -- or whether it's fine to build up your life a little. It also matters whether it is considered immoral, or even sinful, not to express happiness, which is a sign of gratitude toward God. So . . . A real researcher has to use indirect methods to find out who is truly happy. The people on Fox don't look happy to me. They are railing against someone at least as much as The View and other awful programs. I wouldn't be happy making a living like they do, though I could appreciate the paycheck for a few years. I could retire and be so happy!
1