Asklemmy

45953 readers

2143 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What Pseudoscience do you Believe? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by allo@sh.itjust.works to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

162 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Came across a list of pseudosciences and was fun seeing where im woo woo.

Lunar effect – the belief that the full Moon influences human and animal behavior.

Ley Lines

Accupressure/puncture

Ayurveda

Body Memory

Faith healing

Anyway, list too long to read. I guess Im quite the nonscientific woowoomancer. How about you? What pseudoscience do you believe? Also I believe nearly every stone i find was an ancient indian stone. Also manifesting and or prayer to manipulate via subconscious aligning the future. oh and the ability to subconsciously deeply understand animals, know the future, etc

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SoulWager@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Genes don't have agency either.

[–] chobeat@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

While genetic agency is often appropriated by reactionary politics, it's a quite established scientific perspective.

[–] sleeplessone@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm guessing "agency" in this case is being used in a way that's very specific to that area of research and not exactly how people use it in normal conversation?

[–] chobeat@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

It's obviously an open topic of debate in philosophy, but genes have agency for some definition of agency.

In a cybernetic sense, they have agency in the sense that the information within them transforms the world way more than the world affects their information. They are more players than chessboard.

For people like Dennet, which I'm not necessarily a fan of, you can think of agency (and therefore freedom) as the ability of any unit of matter to prevent its dissolution in the face of threats. Life can be framed as a strategy of DNA to reproduce itself in the face of entropy. That is agency.

[–] SoulWager@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Does a grain of sand have agency? Does it want to be caught by a specific size of classification sieve?

Because that's exactly the level of agency that drives natural selection.

[–] chobeat@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Agency is not will though. For sure genes have no will and neither does sand