one of my posts as discussion leader for my online psych class

What is the proper extent for which an individual would go to in order to prove his or her point?

That was the exact question that came to mind when I had read the first couple of pages in chapter 5 of the Stanovich text. When I read that Goldberger and his fellow partners ingested sick victims' excretions in order to prove his theory, I nearly fell out of my chair. Okay, maybe not, but it really was quite disgusting. It made me question how dedicated one could be and how rational certain things are to others once they have created an idea in their head. The fact that he thought of that as a way to control an experiment was just beyond me; for I would of never of thought of voluntarily consuming one's feces unless it was a life or death situation, and even then I'd highly consider. It just goes to show you how rational one may seem once they have a set opinion on a topic, the exact definition of the term spurious correlation that was discussed in this chapter. But now that I think about this, the littlest of things have this same basis. Earlier this week I was watching the movie He's Just Not That Into You and realized that men and women act the same exact way when they are exposed to one another in the lover pool. Both turn into psycho-analytic observers when they become slightly involved with another individual, creating “signs” and “meanings” in their minds that would of originally not of been there if they were introduced as “just friends” and the possibility of a relationship was never in question. But maybe these two examples are completely distinct and I myself am making a connection out of nothing, who really knows? Maybe I am just stuck looking at this with a biased point of view? Either way, tell me what you think of the chapter itself, or even your review of the movie.