What were the philosophical implications of mouse utopia experiment? How would a philosopher fix the experiment to prevent the same outcome?
What were the philosophical implications of mouse utopia experiment?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Give the mice literally anything to do other than eating and fucking?
People ignore this because they crave doom and despair.
This experiment was repeated several times. If the rats get literally any form of stimulation that isn't food or fucking their society doesn't collapse
Link to subsequent tests? Be interested in reading.
This. If anything it proves that a lack of stimulation causes the mice to become dull and violent even though their physiological needs were being met
what sort of stimulation?
just wheels? toys? leaving the tv on?
Everything from little screens to rat playgrounds to brightly colored balls and little play pens and mazes with cheese buttons at the end. No matter what, if they have sufficient stimulation (ie more than one activity), they don't go insane. Even one activity makes them perfectly functional but they do get bored.
so if the goyim are being provided with enough entertainment while they lay in their pods, they won't lose their minds while the enlightened ones prepare for the end of days?
The end of days will never come as long as there are men to bear witness to tomorrow
>the mice won't go insane if they have literally anything engaging to occupy themselves instead of just eating, fucking and sleeping? must be the israelites
>What were the philosophical implications of mouse utopia experiment?
Nothing? Scientific experiments don't influence philosophy. The scientific method only exists in order to rigorously categorize observable natural phenome. It was never necessary to perform an experiment to understand, philosophically, that utopia breeds degeneration and threads of that knowledge have been present since fucking Plato.
>How would a philosopher fix the experiment to prevent the same outcome?
Its not philosophers' jobs to create or alter scientific experiments to achieve utopia. That's not how any of this works. That's the realm of political theorists, and political theorists who imagine themselves to be philosophers; i.e. those who pursue foundational axioms of knowledge, is how you wind up with flat retards like Marx.
To answer your (idiotic) question, every philosopher would apply his or her own interpretations of foundational knowledge to the experiment and the results would be largely meaningless because philosophy doesn't exist to, or claim to, provide mice with utopian living conditions.
>observable natural phenome
Are you retarded? The question of utopia and its effects on people have been a topic in philosophy for a long time.
Wow, no shit retard, its almost like I stated exactly that in my post. Maybe you acquire basic literacy skills before your parents let you use the internet? Would be a better future for us all.
>there is literally nothing wrong with the question
Except that it has nothing whatsoever to do with philosophy. Its a stupid fucking question. Not that you can't ask stupid questions, but you're going to get stupid answers. Anyone who responds to a question on the level of, "how would economists alter the testing of the higgs boson?" without derision is either
A: a retarded pseudointellectual who doesn't see the glaring problems with the question on the surface level
B: a sophist whose genuine interest is in propagating a narrative and/or sheer disinformation by lying to the gullible
And I don't see much indication that OP's question is being asked in irony, before you try that defense.
how is behavior changing over generations not philosophical, and why are you butthurt over the idea that the mouse utopia can be philosophical
>how is behavior changing over generations not philosophical
I didn't say it was. Scientific experiments are not philosophical.
>why are you butthurt over the idea that the mouse utopia can be philosophical
gonna blow your mind
the mice experiment showed behavior changing over generations, and it was scientific, and philosophical
>the mice experiment showed behavior changing over generations
>and it was scientific
Philosophy isn't Natural Science. It's philosophy. Natural Science is applied philosophy; it requires axiomatic principles about what knowledge even is in order to understand the scientific process. Understanding that which precedes from axioms is not knowledge of those axioms.
You're actually out here slinging around 'philosophical' as a term of authority to try and validate the importance of things you like.
youre not white
Nobody on his is white.
I am. and BOOM. I knew it. I can smell you monkeys
You're obviously not.
>posts meaningless paper with no context.
youre not human and you cant do science. I can smell Subsaharan African attempts at reason from 10k away
>is too dumb to read
no I read your paper, just doesnt have any context, and europeans (specifically nordics) are the definition of white so your argument means nothing if I follow what youre saying
Well done jidf
ah jeez bud im just some guy in his living room (who happens to be nordic as fuck). I've noticed a trend with the browns (subhumans) that whenever their browness is pointed out they accuse you of being a israelite. strange how nordic supremacy and our beliefs have trickled down to you. of course you cant keep the white supremacy part cause youre clearly not white, but you keep the "critical Semitic theory" as it is called. we hate semites in part cause they try to make us be around you people so its all really quite ironic
oh sweet we're not using words anymore. GN my dear negro (or some such I suspect)
would be an improvement for you most likely
there is literally nothing wrong with the question. The only question that should be asked in relation to the experiment is "Does this have parallels to a human society?" as in what can we infer from these mice about humans.
You're ignoring the whole point of the study to discuss how relevant science is to philosophers. The experiment should be criticized because mice and humans have totally different reproductive strategies, humans being K-selected and mice R-selected. They treat their young totally differently
Seems like one hell of extrapolation from 8 mice to humanity as a whole.
the implications are that cities and civilization is the direct cause of homosexuality and rabid violence, due to overpopulation.
ancient greece was 1. gayer and 2. more violent and 3. had less cities and 4. had smaller cities
>had less cities
>had smaller cities
which only proves that "civilization" is a problem from the very get go, that it doesn't need to even get to the point of modern day mega-cities for it to start showing signs of overpopulation.
Thanks for proving my point, it's so rare to have allies online.
that does not explain why rome which had bigger cities and more cities but was less gay and violent
>the implications are that cities and civilization is the direct cause of homosexuality and rabid violence, due to overpopulation
There are some parallels with modern society generally fucking with our emotional state, but this was obvious beforehand. The mouse experiment is just one experiment with a species far removed from ourselves, it doesn't actually tell us much.
Trying to meme it as some kind of apotheosis is silly, you are better off looking at chimpanzee troops and social experiments with humans.
We didn’t evolve to just be given things for free. Suffering and fighting is natural and healthy
Humans are not mice
>humans are not animals.
>mice are animals.
>there is absolutely NO OVERLAP between one type of animal and humans.
>fish can breath underwater
>fish are animals
>humans are animals
>ERGO humans can breath underwater
>because all animals are necessarily more similar than they are dissimilar
By god anon you've cracked the fucking code
>t. doesn't understand why scientists test products ultimately meant for human use on animals.
I know you're trying to refute me, and desperately want to win, but you're doomed to lose this argument. No one is saying that humans are mice, but EVERYONE knows that scientists test products on animals before it reaches the human market.
It's implicitly understood that there's enough similarities between humans and animals that we can learn about humans via testing on animals.
and here i thought this was a LULZ thread.
just because Rome had stricter laws for homosexuality than Greece did, doesn't mean that homosexuals didn't exist. It just means that gays stayed in the closet more. (whoa, what a novel concept!)
Cities are cancer and not "natural". Just as in the mouse experiment, the body instinctually knows when it's living in overpopulated areas, and produces chemicals that result in gay children down the line, to help reduce overpopulation.
It's why you'll always find more gays in a city than in the rural areas (even accounting for population ratios)
so are you a loser in real life to or only on LULZ?
>doesn't even attempt to refute anything i said.
>now only attempts to insult with non sequiturs
thank you for admitting i'm right. 🙂
>only things to do were eat or fuck
>mice go insane
It’s almost like animals need varied stimuli/things to do in order to remain sane
>it started with 4 males and 4 females
>the colony peaked at 2,200
Maybe try it with a few hundred unrelated founding members so there isn't so much mouse incest leading the over-expression of harmful recessive traits.
Give them weed.
Spiteful Mutant Theory
The implications are that if you put people in a cell with only food and water forever, they'll die a slow death inside until they actually die of old age, presuming they don't anhero.
The implication is you'll die of peak oil in 6mo.
His will ignore this, act retarded and so forth.