Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Psychological Science February 2012 vol. 23 no. 2 187-195

    Gordon Hodson, Department of Psychology, Brock University, 500 Glenridge Ave., St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1 E-mail: [email protected]

    Gordon Hodson, Ph.D. is a professor at Brock University. He specializes in understanding stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, with a particular focus on individual differences and ideology, dehumanization, and emotions (e.g., disgust; empathy).


    These are usually strong predictors of utter ********.

    …aaand, I was right: http://wmbriggs.com/post/5118/

    You shouldn't believe every piece of crap that you read on the internet, even if it looks like it's coming from a peer-reviewed journal (ahem, Swedish gender ********).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    No. The others are applied because they create benefits for society in the future (fines can provide the cost of rebuilding, imprisonment protects society, all act as a deterrent etc). None of these benefits are provided by removing the right to vote. When the parent neglects the child, the parent has shown themselves to be incapable of making decisions which do not harm the child. This is not the case with prisoners and voting.
    Disfranchisement protects the society in a different way—a way that you're unwilling to recognise. It's an entirely subjective matter.

    While we're throwing around 'widely accepted truth', no. The widely accepted truth is that the right succeed by deluding voters based on their lies about how economics works and through anti-immigration populism while the left have their views based in sound philosophy and economics.
    Then isn't it interesting that no economy under prolonged lefty control ever managed to grow?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    In principal i completely agree with the idea.

    In practice we see Corbyn.

    It's yet another Nay.
    IE 'democracy is good except when I don't like the outcome'.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I think we should introduce compulsory voting, but i dont think I'd like forcing ever 16 year old to vote so its another reason I'm voting nay.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cBay)
    As people have brought up votes for people under the age of 16, perhaps we should introduce Demeny Voting
    What that basically says is "if you have minors you get a second vote"
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What that basically says is "if you have minors you get a second vote"
    And if you have more than you can afford or take care of, you are rewarded with even more votes!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    So, the age on which on paper you become an adult is a line in the sand, but the age at which you can do many of the things associated with adulthood isn't? Ok:rolleyes:



    Agreed, but they still have an effect: you're probably not going to get into university to do maths if you have A-levels in DT, French and art history.

    A non-self-employed adult's continued employment requires the consent of their employer. Does that mean they are any less capable of making an informed decision of whether they want to continue in their job or not? Of course not.

    Didn't say you couldn't work or pay tax under 16, there are just significant restrictions which mean that 16 is the first age at which you can, in theory, both get a full-time job and pay most varieties of tax.



    Not sure why you're not supporting this then given that 16-year-olds can do all of those things.
    1. Purposefully deploying a person under 18 into a war zone is illegal under international law
    2. In general, most people don't pay income tax until they have a steady job, and it's very rare that anyone under 18 has one
    3. If you're not deemed old enough to decide for yourself if you can drink or smoke, why should you be able to influence the leadership of the country?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What that basically says is "if you have minors you get a second vote"
    Pretty much yes, congratulations for having basic comprehension skills. You seem to be insinuating it is a bad thing, can you explain why? Do minors not deserve representation?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cBay)
    Pretty much yes, congratulations for having basic comprehension skills. You seem to be insinuating it is a bad thing, can you explain why? Do minors not deserve representation?
    It isn't giving them representation though, it's giving their parents extra representation.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by KomradeKorbyn)
    IE 'democracy is good except when I don't like the outcome'.
    Not to such an extent (i chose not vote for Miliband but found most of his stuff quite reasonable if misguided) but yeah, after seeing the rise of Corbyn, the Greens and Ukip i've been completely put off the view that democracy should be purified. The referendum confirms that more each day.

    But hey, i'm a Tory and i act in what i perceive as my self interest. Go figure.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    By that logic every person would be granted the right to vote, including prisoners and babies. It's a nonsense argument

    Neuroscience tells us that the brains of 16 year olds are not fully developed and are prone to irrational and short-term decision-making. They are also more easily influenced and swayed. Add to that they have limited life experience.

    This a cynical attempt to win votes. No more, no less.
    (Original post by Aph)
    Point of order, prisoners are allowed to vote on TSR.
    What Aph said.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by KomradeKorbyn)
    IE 'democracy is good except when I don't like the outcome'.
    I find direct democracy rather unappealing. Consultative democracy on the other hand....
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Psychological Science February 2012 vol. 23 no. 2 187-195

    Gordon Hodson, Department of Psychology, Brock University, 500 Glenridge Ave., St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1 E-mail: [email protected]

    Gordon Hodson, Ph.D. is a professor at Brock University. He specializes in understanding stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, with a particular focus on individual differences and ideology, dehumanization, and emotions (e.g., disgust; empathy).


    These are usually strong predictors of utter ********.

    …aaand, I was right: http://wmbriggs.com/post/5118/

    You shouldn't believe every piece of crap that you read on the internet, even if it looks like it's coming from a peer-reviewed journal (ahem, Swedish gender ********).
    That's a pretty unconvincing criticism - but I guess if a guy blogged about it, it must be true.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    That's a pretty unconvincing criticism - but I guess if a guy blogged about it, it must be true.
    Seriously? Look at “that guy's” credentials. PhD. in statistics from Cornell and Adjunct Professor of Statistical Science, also at Cornell, i.e. a lot more qualified than you jokers will ever be combined. :laugh: (Also definitely more qualified than those silly ‘prejudice & discrimination’ authors.)
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Seriously? Look at “that guy's” credentials. PhD. in statistics from Cornell and Adjunct Professor of Statistical Science, also at Cornell, i.e. a lot more qualified than you jokers will ever be combined. :laugh:
    Criticising another PhD. So? I don't need to take any Cornell professor's blog as gospel.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Wellzi)
    1. Purposefully deploying a person under 18 into a war zone is illegal under international law
    2. In general, most people don't pay income tax until they have a steady job, and it's very rare that anyone under 18 has one
    3. If you're not deemed old enough to decide for yourself if you can drink or smoke, why should you be able to influence the leadership of the country?
    1. Yes, but we take 16 year olds into the army anyway.
    2. Yes, but that doesn't mean you can't pay income tax at 16.
    3. *Deemed* old enough. Hmmm.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Criticising another PhD. So? I don't need to take any Cornell professor's blog as gospel.
    LOL, I guess it also makes him equal to those clowns with a PhD. in women's studies, right? You should probably listen to him if you want to learn something but I know you guys wouldn't be impressed even if Fisher, Pearson and Gosset rose from the dead and said you were wrong so this is where I'm done. You obviously don't know a thing about statistics beyond first year undergraduate humanities level if you think that their methods are solid and his criticism ‘pretty unconvincing’.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    LOL, I guess it also makes him equal to those clowns with a PhD. in women's studies, right? You should probably listen to him if you want to learn something but I know you guys wouldn't be impressed even if Fisher, Pearson and Gosset rose from the dead and said you were wrong so this is where I'm done. You obviously don't know a thing about statistics beyond first year undergraduate humanities level if you think that their methods are solid and his criticism ‘pretty unconvincing’.
    He's criticising an experimental process that can't be perfected but hasn't identified any deliberate bias or misinterpretation of the results. As solid as the author claims his credentials are, he's not a psychologist and his criticisms read as if he isn't. One can't, for example criticise the questions for potentially not representing conservative ideology because it's impossible to construct perfect questions. All you can say is that the research indicates A based on XYZ premise.

    I don't give a damn about the original research so this has nothing to do with my 'being wrong'. You're the one with a dog in this fight - hence you're being overly pleased that you found a blog post that disagrees with a controversial study in a peer reviewed journal.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    This is in cessation
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    Division! Clear the Lobbies!
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 21, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.