I'm not a religious person in any way, but the headline doesn't support the "science" that was performed.
What was measured they called "altruism", not "meanness". Their definition of altruism is completely retarded. If I give away all of my shit to someone, it's called altruism. They would not factor in the burden I would place on my family to make up for my dumbass decision. In other words, they've used a term with one of the longest philosophical histories with a simple "good/bad" meaning. It didn't occur to them that people might have different concepts of what constitutes altruism.
People in the US have a tendency to think the UK publications are any better. They are not. This headline is direct proof they can't even communicate the basics truthfully.
I cannot even recommend that you wipe your ass with The Guardian or Cell (the Elsevier journal that published it) because they are made of shit.
Children can be mean both by character and due to parenting or peer pressure . Research data can be used in various ways to prove or disprove anything.
[–] Drenki 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I'm not a religious person in any way, but the headline doesn't support the "science" that was performed.
What was measured they called "altruism", not "meanness". Their definition of altruism is completely retarded. If I give away all of my shit to someone, it's called altruism. They would not factor in the burden I would place on my family to make up for my dumbass decision. In other words, they've used a term with one of the longest philosophical histories with a simple "good/bad" meaning. It didn't occur to them that people might have different concepts of what constitutes altruism.
People in the US have a tendency to think the UK publications are any better. They are not. This headline is direct proof they can't even communicate the basics truthfully.
I cannot even recommend that you wipe your ass with The Guardian or Cell (the Elsevier journal that published it) because they are made of shit.