User:DolyaIskrina

Hi,

if you are like me, you probably came to my user page because you were upset by something I did. It's "the F is this person?" click. I get it. I've been there. So let me start with "sorry". I really try to edit in good faith. I'm also working on my tone.

I believe in collaboration, and I am willing to edit pages on topics in which I don't have much technical knowledge. I like to function as a bright novice. If your prose confuses me, I'm going to try to fix it. Because you may know a ton more than I do about the topic, but this is an encyclopedia for the general population, and I know a thing or two about impenetrable verbiage.

I live on the West Coast of the US. I have a BA in Philosophy and work in the entertainment industry.

Areas of interest
Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Mind, Philosophy of Psychology, Philosophy of Story, Conspiracy Mindset, Physics, Neurology, Evolutionary Psychology, Hypnosis, Meditation, Religion, Skepticism, Pseudo-medicine

Active development
These are articles for which I'm semi-actively editing or researching.


 * Philosophical Zombie, Conceivability Argument
 * Barber and Calverley
 * Hypnosis
 * Meditation
 * Anthropic principle
 * Problem of induction
 * Wim Hof

Pages I've made
Pages I've made:
 * Adam Becker
 * Theodore X. Barber
 * Keith Frankish
 * Science Vs
 * Philip Goff (Philosopher)
 * Desperate Remedies: Psychiatry's Turbulent Quest to Cure Mental Illness

Future projects

 * VIP Syndrome
 * Willoughby Britton
 * Cheetah House
 * Janet Levin (Philosopher)
 * Porn Addiction
 * Rubik Haratounian
 * Amber Ross (Philosopher)
 * Mediocrity Principle
 * German Tank Problem
 * Boltzmann Brains
 * Panpsychism
 * Anthropic Reasoning
 * Forensic Science
 * Brain in a vat
 * Meditation
 * Vladimir Propp
 * Effective Altruism
 * Hygiene Hypothesis
 * Mary's Room
 * Modal Logic
 * Mewing
 * William J. Perry
 * Éva Izsák, Lakatos
 * Satanic Panic
 * Satanic Ritual Abuse

Possible biases
Let's start with the pretty obvious fact that all of us are biased despite our best efforts. It's only through things like conversation, non-selected unavoidable relationships (like family, society), and the scientific method that we can slowly creep towards a best approximation of truth. Why do we need to go through the hassle of double blind randomized studies? Not because we are prone to try to cheat each other (though many of us are), but because we are so good at cheating ourselves. Okay, with that said....

If you've used the phrase reductionist materialist, you and I will probably disagree on a lot of things, but hopefully we can disagree in a way that makes Wikipedia better. That's what I love about this Encyclopedia. It's an experiment in rationality, our only hope.

Namaste, Cheers, Shalom, Poka-poka.

Tools and Resources

 * reftalk
 * cite podcast
 * re
 * rp page number
 * author-link=
 * User:
 * tq
 * od
 * cat main
 * tl
 * category redirect
 * single-purpose account
 * Unsigned
 * DISPLAYTITLE
 * diff2
 * In use
 * Open access
 * Cfd notice
 * Not a ballot
 * Unsigned IP
 * atop; abot
 * Commons category-inline
 * Special pages:
 * Special:Diff
 * Special:PermaLink
 * Earwig's copyvio tool
 * Citation Bot

=== Bolding Template === ajdjasdf;ljdsf;lhgd;lkhhds

POLICY
"A common argument in a dispute about reliable sources is that one source is biased and so another source should be given preference. Some editors argue that biased sources should not be used because they introduce improper POV to an article. However, biased sources are not inherently disallowed based on bias alone, although other aspects of the source may make it invalid. Neutral point of view should be achieved by balancing the bias in sources based on the weight of the opinion in reliable sources and not by excluding sources that do not conform to the editor's point of view. This does not mean any biased source must be used; it may well serve an article better to exclude the material altogether."
 * WP:NOTEVERYTHING
 * WP:BALANCE
 * WP:SPS self published
 * WP:NPOV

GUIDELINES

 * WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY
 * WP:ANYBIO dictionaries
 * WP:NOTONLYFREE
 * WP:PARITY
 * WP:ELNO

ESSAYS

 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Frequently_misinterpreted_sourcing_policy#Wikipedia_over-focuses_on_publisher_instead_of_author_reputability
 * WP:NPOVS
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)/FAQ
 * WP:MAINSTREAM]
 * Yes we are biased.

Essays I intend to write

 * Punished for caring
 * Your honor my client is a liar

MOS

 * WP:ISATERMFOR
 * MOS:OVERLINK
 * Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles
 * WP:ASTONISH