And I wouldn't disagree with any of that, what it comes down to is what a person really wants. But like I said at the beginning, it's worth it to know ANY of those thing so you can make those accommodations in the first place. I'm saying that this kind of research can help give your decision some context. For example,…

"Basing your life decisions on population statistics is not science, Misery."

Thank you, this is the reasonableness I was trying to convey. It's a way to give your decision context and better information, not delineate between the tiny idiosyncrasies of your particular situation.

No no, I do not mean to confuse—I agree 100% a person isn't doing science when they are making decisions based on science. I'm saying the science in question is science in the first place. Yes that wasn't confusing :) And I missed the part where I said anyone was ignorant? "wrong opinion" def =/= ignorant, just a tad…

lol k, you can have that wrong opinion. The rest of us "non-scientists" will be doing our thang, i.e., forming testable hypotheses and testing them. Y'know, ~science~

"Should I get married at 20?" is the first example I can think of off the top of my head that science has a sound answer to—not if you don't want a higher chance of getting a divorce. There are many others, e.g., "Will I ruin my kid if I put him/her in daycare?" It's astounding how many people have opinions to these…

I beg to differ. Consulting scientific research on such matters is the correct recognition that you are not a special unique snowflake. If anything more people should be examining research to get some insights.

Thanks for this. I thought I was the only one who felt lost in the incredibly sad situation rather than taking a pitchfork to either side. The other issue is that I am a memory researcher and am intimately aware of how false memory is *so* prevalent, especially in children, and especially regardless of one's…