I didn't like that mix - nothing original on it at all. That kind of trance is basically dead, and it has been since around 2005. Everyone is just recycling each other's ideas now.
OK, cool, I'll check them out. I've heard the Couleurs Involver mix, and I agree that is indeed trance (you always have to list the remix you're talking about when you post a song, otherwise I won't know what track you mean).
Placebo effect is tested for in any well-designed study. Most decent peer-reviewed journals won't publish a paper that doesn't account for placebo effect. It's the entire reason for a control group.
As for free will, if you agree that it doesn't necessarily exist out in "reality" than you probably agree with me: that it is an illusion produced by our brains, and we operate on a daily basis as if we do, in fact, have free will. This illusion has an obvious evolutionary advantage - it allows us to punish and reward the behaviour of others (since we infer that they too have "free will"), which is essentially required for societies to exist.
Looks awesome. I'd go. It seems like it's got a trance room, a house room, and probably a jungle/dubstep room (since I know none of the names, and it's called "Bassrush" I suspect it's jungle/dubstep). It's a nice mix of big names and unknowns.
I am indeed a fan of your number 1 choice (among others). Friendly Fires is a lot of fun, and plus they're one of the only bands my 14-year-old sister and I agree on. I haven't listened to any of their tracks anywhere near 21 times though.
You're missing the point: EVERY pseudoscience produces stories of absolute wonders that don't hold up empirically. Testimonials are useless as scientific evidence, because the placebo effect is truly powerful. Also note that if 1000 people use a treatment, and 20 get better, that's a really poor treatment, but that's also 20 testimonials of people who will swear by it curing them (even though similar numbers of people would have just spontaneously recovered anyway: which happens fairly often). These 20 stories will sound really impressive...until you compare them to stories of people cured by known placebos, and look at the actual percentage of people who were helped by something compared to people who would have remitted anyway. The healing power of the human mind (and body) really is amazing, you're quite correct. And that is all these testimonials show.
When one of these alternative ideas holds up empirically, it is usually adopted by the mainstream medical community. IE: a large percentage of the medicines we use today are just plants or parts of plants, acupuncture is used as a second-line treatment for a variety of ailments (mainly pain), meditation is going through serious examination by psychology researchers as a possible treatment for certain disorders, and so on.
If that doesn't work again, just punch this into Google:
"Effects of reiki in clinical practice: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials" and click the first page that appears.
BTW, there is a lot of research being done on the placebo effect, and I think we're getting fairly close to a consensus explanation - there are a number of fairly good theories out there right now, which you can easily find on google. It really is quite amazing - one doesn't need to invoke ideas like magick and reiki energy to explain those testimonials.
What do string theory, M-theory, zero point energy, and tachyon energy have to do with this anyway? These ideas are completely unrelated to psychology and medicine.
I don't see any evidence that rationality was being discarded in any of that research. I suggest performing a literature review on the subject if you're unconvinced. "The fallibility of science in general" is not a reasonable argument against a finding. Instead, look at some of the studies, and tell me methodological problems with them and alternative interpretations of the data - in other words, point the fallacy out to me, don't just tell me you think there is one (because you don't like the conclusion). I personally don't see any major ones, but if you find any, that would convince me that there is a problem here, and that further research is needed before any conclusions can be made. Perhaps in such a case, those conclusions would not be the ones that the research is currently leaning towards, but I don't see nothing unreasonable about them right now.
Also, please explain to me how free will could possibly work? I know you think it's "decisions that can't be accounted for by some factor", but a)that isn't an explanation, that's literally just stating that there is no explanation; and b)that's just throwing your hands up and saying human behaviour can't be explained rationally (which psychology, biology, and neuroscience have shown us time and time again to by anything but the case). I don't see how free will is anything but another "god of the gaps."* We can't explain a behaviour, therefore it must be free will causing it - never mind the multitude of behaviours we've already explained rationally that we used to pin on free will. Because there's no evidence for free will: people just seem to automatically invoke it any time they can't explain a behaviour, much like "God" is (sadly "is", not "was") invoked any time we can't explain some natural phenomenon. (I'm obviously not referring to scientists doing this: this is generally only done by people outside the scientific community).
Actually, italo-disco has some "street cred" because it really was innovative: the first genre of dance music to be purely electronic.
Still, I've never been able to get into it. I intend to at some point, I just have trouble getting past its tinny sound quality.
I didn't like that mix - nothing original on it at all. That kind of trance is basically dead, and it has been since around 2005. Everyone is just recycling each other's ideas now.
OK, cool, I'll check them out. I've heard the Couleurs Involver mix, and I agree that is indeed trance (you always have to list the remix you're talking about when you post a song, otherwise I won't know what track you mean).
Cool. Nice songs. Not my favorites, but a nice list nonetheless.
Placebo effect is tested for in any well-designed study. Most decent peer-reviewed journals won't publish a paper that doesn't account for placebo effect. It's the entire reason for a control group.
As for free will, if you agree that it doesn't necessarily exist out in "reality" than you probably agree with me: that it is an illusion produced by our brains, and we operate on a daily basis as if we do, in fact, have free will. This illusion has an obvious evolutionary advantage - it allows us to punish and reward the behaviour of others (since we infer that they too have "free will"), which is essentially required for societies to exist.
Haha, looks like it considering the line-up. You'll have an awesome time.
Looks awesome. I'd go. It seems like it's got a trance room, a house room, and probably a jungle/dubstep room (since I know none of the names, and it's called "Bassrush" I suspect it's jungle/dubstep). It's a nice mix of big names and unknowns.
Have fun!
Yep, very good. +1 point.
I'm not a fan, but it's not THAT bad.
I love both Fleet Foxes and Air France. I'll check the other 2 out for sure.
This is good to see. I'm likely moving to Halifax next year, and it's nice to know there are decent places to eat there.
How is it for things to do in general, BTW?
Cool, thanks.
Yes, it was a pretty nice list.
Cool, good tracks.
I am indeed a fan of your number 1 choice (among others). Friendly Fires is a lot of fun, and plus they're one of the only bands my 14-year-old sister and I agree on. I haven't listened to any of their tracks anywhere near 21 times though.
You're missing the point: EVERY pseudoscience produces stories of absolute wonders that don't hold up empirically. Testimonials are useless as scientific evidence, because the placebo effect is truly powerful. Also note that if 1000 people use a treatment, and 20 get better, that's a really poor treatment, but that's also 20 testimonials of people who will swear by it curing them (even though similar numbers of people would have just spontaneously recovered anyway: which happens fairly often). These 20 stories will sound really impressive...until you compare them to stories of people cured by known placebos, and look at the actual percentage of people who were helped by something compared to people who would have remitted anyway. The healing power of the human mind (and body) really is amazing, you're quite correct. And that is all these testimonials show.
When one of these alternative ideas holds up empirically, it is usually adopted by the mainstream medical community. IE: a large percentage of the medicines we use today are just plants or parts of plants, acupuncture is used as a second-line treatment for a variety of ailments (mainly pain), meditation is going through serious examination by psychology researchers as a possible treatment for certain disorders, and so on.
Here's the Reiki study again:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119418316/abstract?CRETRY=1&S...
If that doesn't work again, just punch this into Google:
"Effects of reiki in clinical practice: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials" and click the first page that appears.
BTW, there is a lot of research being done on the placebo effect, and I think we're getting fairly close to a consensus explanation - there are a number of fairly good theories out there right now, which you can easily find on google. It really is quite amazing - one doesn't need to invoke ideas like magick and reiki energy to explain those testimonials.
What do string theory, M-theory, zero point energy, and tachyon energy have to do with this anyway? These ideas are completely unrelated to psychology and medicine.
I don't see any evidence that rationality was being discarded in any of that research. I suggest performing a literature review on the subject if you're unconvinced. "The fallibility of science in general" is not a reasonable argument against a finding. Instead, look at some of the studies, and tell me methodological problems with them and alternative interpretations of the data - in other words, point the fallacy out to me, don't just tell me you think there is one (because you don't like the conclusion). I personally don't see any major ones, but if you find any, that would convince me that there is a problem here, and that further research is needed before any conclusions can be made. Perhaps in such a case, those conclusions would not be the ones that the research is currently leaning towards, but I don't see nothing unreasonable about them right now.
Also, please explain to me how free will could possibly work? I know you think it's "decisions that can't be accounted for by some factor", but a)that isn't an explanation, that's literally just stating that there is no explanation; and b)that's just throwing your hands up and saying human behaviour can't be explained rationally (which psychology, biology, and neuroscience have shown us time and time again to by anything but the case). I don't see how free will is anything but another "god of the gaps."* We can't explain a behaviour, therefore it must be free will causing it - never mind the multitude of behaviours we've already explained rationally that we used to pin on free will. Because there's no evidence for free will: people just seem to automatically invoke it any time they can't explain a behaviour, much like "God" is (sadly "is", not "was") invoked any time we can't explain some natural phenomenon. (I'm obviously not referring to scientists doing this: this is generally only done by people outside the scientific community).