>If a person shows a type of behavior toward small things

>>38375377
>This is something a lot of /r9k/ agrees upon

>actually making claims about the opinions of users on an anonymous board!

Literally what does that even mean

I do, but stop posting obese women as ops. It's disgusting.

>>38375416
I see arguments and opinions indicating this very often.

>>38375425
>A person who's mean to waiters is probably inclined to be mean to other people as well
>A friend that doesn't have your back in a small altercation probably won't have your back when shit gets real
>A woman who easily gives into a kiss with a rando guy probably gives into getting cummed on/in pretty easily as well and a woman like that will probably be more likely to cheat
Things like that.

>>38375599
>I see arguments and opinions indicating this very often.

>some people in specific threads on a topic state they agree on something
>this means the majority of r9k agree

>>38375377
Well yeah I believe that, it sounds like common sense to me, but there will be exceptions.

For example, I murder bugs with a passion, but I love my dog and family and would never hurt them.
So it obviously can't be generalized.

>>38375702
>majority = one person's subjective definition of "a lot"
Wrong.

I try to be deliberate with my word choices for this reason but I guess I need to be even more careful?

>>38375745
>So it obviously can't be generalized.
Not totally but even small behaviors like that can probably show up in much bigger scenarios.

A person like you described yourself would probably submit to committing atrocities against dehumanized people pretty easily if you were a soldier, "interrogator", gestapo or whatever else during World War II for example. You humanize your family and your dog to an extent but you don't humanize the bugs so it's no issue for you to kill them indiscriminately.

>>38375853
I guess that's true, I would probably kill Muslims like I kill bugs if I was a soldier in the Middle-East.

>>38375599
>A person who's mean to waiters is probably inclined to be mean to other people as well
I'm still not tipping that wagecuck

File: 4e9a47ecbe5349a4cc24259bbadf894a[1].jpg (43KB, 600x449px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 600x449px

>>38376335
15.99 + treat, please

>>38375377
>Pizza is my favorite food
>Feel very hungry one day
>Order XL pizza for myself
>Can't eat it all
>Save some for tomorrow
>Can't finish it
>By third day, the remaining pizza is dry, hard, and tastes stale
>Disgusted by flavor
>Throw final slices in the trash
>Feel guilty for wasting food and money
>Get hungry for pizza a few weeks later
>Order a medium
>Every last bite is delicious
>Finish the whole thing
>Never order XL again

Bigger/more isn't always better. You need to consider what's appropriate for your situation.

File: tmp_8951-1499727595821707494730.jpg (573KB, 1638x916px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 1638x916px

>>38375439
Perhaps this a little more your speed?

>>38377359
What I'm trying to say would be more like taking the fact that you got an XL pizza when you were hungry and applying that behavior to different situations. The apparent behavior might be that you tend to overestimate. So if you were a teacher you might congratulate your students for doing well by buying them XL pizzas but then you'd run into the same problem where there's too much pizza and you/the students have to take slices home, potentially wasting a good chunk of money.

The premise of my thread is basically asking if that's likely, that, for example, since you bought too much pizza for yourself you might exhibit the over estimation behavior in situations of a grander scale where the stakes are that much higher. Beyond just pizza, of course.

>>38376335
More like an almscuck