vlad321 said:
Kasz216 said:
vlad321 said:
Kasz216 said:
vlad321 said:
Minor in psych and the study seems as legit as anything.
|
So... I've got a Major. So if you want to play the "Degrees game" on that...
I don't know what to tell you.
Well other then if you relied soley on textbooks for your knowledge in pscyhology your better off not having the degree. You'd be surprised how much it gets simplified and outright changed.
Even reading Frued directly compared to what is written about him in a textbook is a trip.
As for Maslow... What Maslow believed was a lot different. One of my teachers was a friend of the guy. Was going to be taught by him directly but he died before then.
But I can breakdown the study without even going in to why non interpersonal happiness ratings are BS. I'll do that in the next post to avoid the massive quote tree.
|
Ninja editted my post, sorry may not have gotten to see it:
If anything it just goes to show that once you remove the financial worries out of people's lives they become happier overall. Even if they pay 75% of their income for those comforts.
|
See the response to why the study sucked... I could go into why Subjective Well Being is a bad statistic in general if you'd like as well.
Also, note even in the metanalysis some socialist countries did rank below the US. A lot actually. Like the UK.
Ones who have a more similar cultural makeup.
The farther away you get from interpersonal studies on happiness the more inaccurate the results get.
|
Quite true I didn;t calculate the actual person per country as a pool. Though in that defense since it is a metastudy they were portioned off a little better than 410 people in the US and 410 people in say, UAE.
@Mafoo
The reason people haven't even bothered setting foot on the Moon is because there's nothing there to do. Up until recently where people realized they could launch rockets far cheaper for there, all it was was a simple rock. So it's more along the lines of "don't really care" over "can't do so."
|
However the studies also had different statistics. Making this kind of Metastudy... honestly completly stupid.
Metastudies aren't meant to go "Hey i'll take a US survey and British suvery a Japanese survey and then compare! We'll get a pretty map."
Metastudies are meant to go "Hey i'll take these 500 studies on the US to try and get a better picture on the real deal."
Combined with the fact that there is still no accepted base for "Subjective Well Being" and that it can mean totally different things from study to study.
The cultural differences.
The language differences... it's just an overall ridiculious study.
