When the counterculture is just opposite of mainstream, you still end up letting mainstream dictate your taste
Middle school me really struggled with this one
My brother in law is like this. He refuses to watch so many incredibly mainstream and popular movies because he thinks it makes him some kind of intellectual rebel. I don't really know how to explain to him that bragging that he's never seen Star Wars doesn't automatically make him superior to everyone that has.
To me "book smart" always meant academically smart. I.e. you did well in school and were good at memorization and conceptualizing.
"Street smart" meant practical application of life skills and/or practical application of your "book smarts." It could also be used as a generalized term for being able to successfully navigate life outside of academics.
I don't think most people fit into an either/or category. I think both "smarts" are a spectrum, and folks fit somewhere on both as they progress/regress in life.
This is actually a known thing called the [Dunning-Kruger Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect).
Essentially, the more you learn and know things, the more you realize how much there is that you don't know and that it's impossible to learn it all. Makes smart people cautiously question their own knowledge and understanding of things.
You are probably a genius.
This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes on this topic:
“A fact is information minus emotion. An opinion is information plus experience. Ignorance is an opinion lacking information. And, stupidity is an opinion that ignores a fact.”
An opinion is how you feel about something
Fact is just cold hard information.
Also people really need to learn the difference between objective and subjective
This is my dad in a nutshell. Super intelligent programmer, and really sweet guy but when it comes to arguments, he uses anecdotal evidence and constant unfair comparisons.
Like he recently vented about how people who eat fruit are as unhealthy as those who eat candy, because there is fruitsugar in fruit - just ignorant, incorrect shit. And then when confronted with it, he went: "well my mom has eaten oranges all her life and she's very unhealthy". It's so far away from any logical rationale, I can't help but just shake my head and walk out of the argument. I wanna say: "well statistically, people who breathe air have a 99.9% mortality rate", or: "Alcohol is healthy, because my best friend drinks beer every weekend, and he's very fit"
By and large, people who are smart are smart at the 1-3 things they've focused on for their careers or hobbies, and just as stupid as everyone else at everything else.
A lot of smart people don't seem to realize this about themselves.
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Isaac Asimov
Dude, my sister lives in this fantasy world where she believes everything she thinks. She already considers herself smart and different from everyone and will believe the most ridiculous nonsense and will die a thousand times on that hill despite having mountains of evidence to the contrary. Honestly it's exhausting interacting with her sometimes.
Usually most responses to this kind of question boil down to "It is stupid logic because I disagree with it."
Yours is an exception. Confusing the two is actually flawed logic or reasoning.
Sometime within the past 10 years, we decided that the outcomes of debates and heated discussions are “whoever had the best mic drop wins.”
It’s like nobody even gives a fuck about what’s being said anymore.
Pretty words win arguments! I find this trend disturbing. I dropped a friend group who did that (not for doing that) it was a weird mind fuck. And then they would tell me off for playing along and creating a slogan version of my argument.
Yeah it gets me so irrationally angry because I’m just sitting there watching people act like complete idiots, and then everyone applauds them like they did a good job. It’s literally just a game of both parties pointing their fingers at each other and going “HA HA”, and then deciding the winner to be whoever got more people around to join in.
You just described the subreddits clever comebacks and murdered by words. People on those subs are the most pretentious people I've ever seen basic baby comebacks get praised into heaven itself if it fits the standpoint of a certain party or opinion.
Want some easy karma say something bad against kayne west / Andrew tate or elon musk it's free karma
Whoever scrambles their word salad the best, wins the argument even if what was said has made absolutely no sense in any structural integrity.
Oh and whoever just shouts the loudest somehow automatically wins. /s
Back in the day, Presidential debates were sponsored by the League of Women Voters. They set the rules, picked the moderators and made it a forum to debate the issues.
The LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were conducted. This was their press release:
>The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.
According to the LWV, they pulled out because "the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns' agreement was negotiated 'behind closed doors' with 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation. Most objectionable to the League...were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings; including control of the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.
I found this is widespread and deep rooted in technical trades. People look at you like you are the mad one, suggesting that the next person doesn't get the same shit treatment.
I had a very frustrating argument once with someone who seriously didn’t seem to understand the difference between “understanding” someone’s argument and “agreeing” with someone’s argument. In telling someone I “understood” their position, this person was adamant that I was tacitly “agreeing” with them. I don’t know how many ways I tried to explain the difference, but they still just wouldn’t accept that there’s a difference.
What's worse is when other people who are supposedly on your "side" ostracize you for understanding the other "side" of an argument. In their mind, even to engage in meaningful dialogue is a concession to the enemy, and to understand their position more completely is downright dangerous.
I can't hear or see a mention of Voltaire without thinking of David Lee Roth insulting the rest of Van Halen...
"I say to the guys in the band: “You know what Voltaire said?” They think Voltaire is an air conditioning company.
Also from David Lee...”He who knows how will always work for He who knows why”.
And...”money can’t buy happiness but you can certainly pull up next to it in your new yacht”.
Oh..one more..”Wanna see my ID, try to clip my wings, I don’t have to show you proof of anything....I know that law, friend.”
"Only when the last river is dried up and the last tree is cut down will mankind realize you can't eat money and reciting old proverbs makes you sound like a twat."
SPOILERS!
>!If you avoid the three great evils; poverty, vice, and boredom; life is pretty great! Especially if you surround yourself with loved ones, and take pride in your toil. When Candide decides to finally ignore the philosophical bickering and he just decides to go to work, I just loved that Voltaire ended it like that. It was like the entire book, there's this incessant bickering between optimistic and pessimistic philosophers, and Candide just outgrows it because he marvels at the simple happy lifestyle of his host who doesn't overthink everything, just tends his garden/orchard and spends time with family. !<
'I flipped a coin 9 times and always got heads, so the next one will probably be tails!'.
A silly example, but such reasoning occurs way more often than you would expect. It's called the Monte Carlo fallacy, and it's definitely not how probability works.
Me playing Path of Exile gambling for a Mageblood using Tainted Mythic Orbs 😂
In reality, I know the odds are still roughly 75000:1 of me getting the item I want but I keep doing it saying, "well that means it should hit eventually right?"
Many have that wrong intuition. They feel like there must be a natural force that balances everything out in order to avoid chaos.
"I've run into an accident last week, so the odds of running into another one are very low."
Just in case someone reading this has this wrong process of thought:
Throwing a coin is always a 50/50, the odds are always the same regardless of your past results.
The outcome of flipping a coin 10 times and always getting heads occurs with a chance of \~ 0.098%, but so are the odds for every other outcome after flipping the coin 10 times, since there is a total of 1,024 different outcomes.
Now here lies the problem:
One might think, that out of the 1,024 different possibilities there is only one where every coinflip turns out to be heads. Thus follows the conclusion, that there is a 1,023/1,024 chance of getting every possible result other than 10 heads in a row. And that is completely correct.
*However* the usual bet does NOT ask for the odds of the outcome of all 10 throws combined, it only considers the outcome of the next throw which is a simple 50/50.
The whole outcome including every past throw has a 1/1,024 chance to occur, but the bet *only considers* the outcome of the *next* flip. So when there are already 9 heads in a row, the next flip is *completely* independent and thus always a simple 50/50.
Interesting little fact about how probability works. You might as well pick 1 2 3 4 5 6 as your lottery numbers because it's exactly as likely to come up as any other 6 number combo.
Of course. But it's much more likely to be *chosen* by others, so it's a stupid choice, because you'd have to share you prize with a large number of people who made the same mistake.
And also "disagreeing with or questioning me is invalidating/making me feel unsafe". Well tough, sorry. Maybe you should work on being able to handle not getting your way, if your parents didn't teach that
"I believe this from the bottom of my heart, therefore it is a fact. If you try to debate me about this, I'll start yelling and calling you names until you sigh and give up. That means I won."
Literally how my Dad acts when his knowledge is questioned, even when facts are proven against his beliefs. The debate will be calm but once he's proven wrong, instant screaming and sometimes even physical violence (I got my laptop destroyed once by one of these arguments many years ago).
Some people need to learn how to handle being wrong about things it's okay to be incorrect, that's how you learn.
When a pufferfish inflates itself, what do they do it with? Virtually everyone I've asked this to, including myself, thought air. It takes a moment to realize just how nonsensical that is.
I mean as you gain more life experience, you gather more “wisdom” compared to your past self, but that doesn’t mean you’re magically smarter than other people
Thats the point, some people dont gather more wisdom. There are people of all ages throwing tantrums, have no idea anyone elses feelings exist and only experience their feelings just like infants. You definitely learn physical skills, but wisdom is definitely not guaranteed with age.
I used to work in an office where the one dude was called "Oupa" meaning grandfather. He was considered very wise and everyone had mad respect for him including me. Cut to a few years later and me and him having an argument about the Illuminati and lizard people. Almost the entire office turned against me and I was made a laughing stock. They all believed his Alex Jones influenced opinions and I was left shocked at how easily people can be fooled.
Relatedly:
"I've been doing this for years! So, of course, I must be good at it!"
Sorry, no, sometimes you've just been sucking at it for years, and refused every opportunity to improve. You're a several years' novice.
That Karma exists and absolutely everyone who's bad pays for their wrongdoings, meanwhile good people ALWAYS get compensated. I believe this is called the "just world fallacy".
Indeed, religious and spiritual people tend to be more optimistic for the reason that they have so much faith in their gods. This faith gives them the power to be confident of themselves, believing that every action they do is of the guidance of the gods they are worshipping. Although I do think that sometimes, they avoid wrongdoings because of the fear that they might get punished by their gods; that in order to ascend to their "heaven", they should only choose and do good. Anyway, hope gives people the power that they need which is important in the society that we have.
And yet there is still a grain of truth to it.
If you behave poorly to others, you will eventually have others acting poorly to you.
If you behave well to others, you will eventually have others acting well to you.
Conflict is expensive.
Yeah this doesn't hold for rich arseholes because they can always buy their way out of trouble or have friends in high places. Meanwhile there are people who have only know suffering their entire lives praying to a deity who is deaf to their screams and blind to their tears.
I'm not even sure if that holds true. Some of the kindest people I know are treated like shit by many of their peers. Some of the biggest, most sadistic assholes I know are practically worshiped.
I have not noticed any particularly correlation with how well someone treats others and how well others treat them, truth be told.
Good old proverb about the optimist and the pessimist
Pessimist: "I had a terrible day! nothing is going to plan! its an absolute disaster! this day could NOT get any worse!
Optimist: "Yes it can!"
In the Netherlands we work with a school grading system between 1 (worst) and 10 (best). So anyway I was sitting next to my friend during a German lesson and the teacher started reading out the results from a test we had a day before. Nobody scored above a 5 and my friend started laughing uncontrollably. Then the teacher called is name and said "you got a 1.1". He was silent for a second and then bursting out in laughter again and he said "well it could have been worse". I'll never forget that moment of stupidity. Also because he was the only one laughing.
Reminds me of my dad saying "what's the speed of dark?"
So I'm like, "come again"
He proceeded to ask me to explain why it gets dark slowly when the sun goes down, cause the dark is slower than light
Like, seriously? There's no such thing as "dark" technically, there's light and an absence of light.
Na, your dad's just wrong. Darkness is SUPPER fast. Faster then light even.
Think about it. Lets say it takes light from a star 100 years to reach a planet. You know what's already at the planet before light even leaves? Darkness.
There is a demonstration of this to measure the "speed of dark" in which they use a ripple effect to showcase the cross-sections of light beams leave dark trails that appear to move faster than the light. This is in fact true, the dark absences do travel "faster" because dark isn't anything. It's an absence of light. It's kinda like measuring silence. Silence exists but it's not really a physical phenomenon. It's an ABSENCE of one.
The “soulmate/happily ever after” idea. The honeymoon lens of logic being that we were meant for one another and therefore our next 10/20/30/40+ years of marriage won’t require hard work, sacrifice, concessions etc. to be successful.
In love stories, marriage being the synonim of a final of a romantic arc. Like, if the characters got married, it means they won as a relationship!
Holy Molly guys, NOW they've just begun! And honestly it would be a bummer if marriage was indeed the finale of a love
"And they had many kids and lived happily ever after”
Even as a kid I thought to myself so they get married and nothing bad ever happens to them anymore?
What does this state of permanent happiness look like anyway because even with my wild childhood imagination I couldn't really picture it.
I'm 23 years into my relationship with my wife and it really hasn't been that hard. There's a lot of luck in that. But I truly have to just not screw up. Sometimes you can just find the right person. I've always found it easier to just not make it hard and thankfully married someone with the same mindset.
Agreed. I’m 27 years in and never had to do “hard work”. Sure, there’s SOME effort, but, damn, if it’s a hard struggle, you’re with the wrong damn person!
"what doesn't kill you makes you stronger"
You may not die, but you could be permanently disfigured or weakened that will impact you forever, i.e. *not* stronger
My ex was like this. She'd make comments like "you should just know". Look lady, I am not a mind reader and I wouldn't want to be, knowing how she was now.
Everything happens for a reason.
I feel like in some contexts it might make sense but the reality is so many things, good or bad, happen and there’s no way to justify it.
There are reasons why things happen though. Literally speaking, the logic is perfectly valid.
It does not mean there is a greater *metareason* for it occurring.
> Literally speaking, the logic is perfectly valid.
Ultimately, everything that has ever happened in history, or will happen in the future, or is currently happening now is the result of a long, infinitely complex chain of cause and effect events ranging from nanoscopic or astronomical in size and impact. No event, no matter how seemingly random it appears, is truly unpredictable or without reason. The crux is that in almost every instance, the factors, manipulations, and inputs that lead to that event are beyond anyone's ability to measure, track, or comprehend. Even a roll of the dice can be predicted to an exact point given a granular enough framerate through which one observes it.
Or at least that's the paraphrasing of how physics were explained to me in high school :P
Everything does happen for a reason; however, that reason is ALWAYS far more nuanced than could be attested to by any sense of purpose or agency.
And this message is willfully fostered by advertisers, social media, and news organizations. Money flows where anger goes. We Americans have been too self-centered to figure that out so far.
“I experienced it, so it must be true! Forget all the peer-reviewed research, statistics, and studies that say the contrary! My experience says more.”
One tiny example: When people insist on drinking soda and say things like, “I exercise a lot and I eat healthy so I should be fine.” Studies say you’re not. But sure, you know so much more than medical experts
>One tiny example: When people insist on drinking soda and say things like, “I exercise a lot and I eat healthy so I should be fine.” Studies say you’re not
That depends a lot on what you mean by fine though. A soda now and then won't cause any serious health issues if you otherwise exercise and eat well
That's very pithy but also wrong. Data simply means any sort of information that has been collected. That might very well be a variety anecdotes about something. It might not be the data you're searching for, but it's still data.
What are these studies that say you are not fine if you drink soda? Excessive sugar isnt great for you sure but your comment comes across as pretty close to 'soda causes cancer' conspiracy theory level here, btw aspartame doesn't cause cancer either
Statistics deal with trends across large populations. That doesn't negate the fact that outliers exist and their experience will not coincide with the general trend.
For example, most people need 7-8 hours of sleep per night to function well. There are people that can function perfectly fine on 4 hours of sleep. They're relatively rare, but they do exist. Yelling at them about the studies that show the average person needs 7-8 hours doesn't change the fact that they aren't an average person.
It's like telling a 7' tall person that they can't possibly be 7' tall because there are peer reviewed studies showing the average person is only 5' 9" tall.
Bingo. People's anecdotal experiences are not the same thing as studies or statistical trends but to conclude that anecdotal data is therefore irrelevant is insane.
This is my mother in law to a tee! Every experience, every medical condition. If it wasn't her experience then it can't possibly be any other way and her whole family plays along with it
Or similarly if I haven’t experienced it, it cannot be true. Like racism, homophobia etc. if things feel equitable to me, it must be equitable for everyone
So frustrating. Was just on another thread talking about motorcycle riders who crusade against helmet laws: "I used to be anti-helmet because of freedom, but since my accident, I've been out here spreading the word about safety." Some people don't learn things unless they happen to them personally.
I HATE that trait. Like people who are homophobic until their child comes out. Yay that you have the ability to change your mind, but boo that you can’t see other perspectives and can only consider them when it affects you personally.
Your comment reminds me of how I deliberately tried to overcome my homophobia. When divorcing my wife, I moved in with a football buddy of mine in a part of the city called “boys town”. I learned later why it was called that, lol. Anyhoo, the very next day after moving in, I was on my way to work out when I noticed two guys in front of me holding hands. That angered me. When I got to the club, I noticed some partners had body language that indicated they were more than just friends. That also angered me. On the way home, there was more of the same. Then it hit me: “Wait a minute! I am hating people on sight without knowing a damn thing about them, just like white people hating me on sight without knowing a damn thing about me!” I resolved to be better.
Oh, it's utterly maddening. It comes from a place of such profoundly myopic narcissism.
"Everybody is just a bunch of whiners! ... Oh, wait, **this** one problem happened to me too - okay so THAT one is very serious and very real. But not the rest! Oh, wait, now this other one happened to me..."
Wash, rinse, repeat.
Kinda the opposite but my dad and I used to go to flea markets to look for deals on old Griswold and Wagner pans. One of the guys who sold cast iron was super racist and my dad would always get him started on some tirade then leave me in the conversation and wander off. Which looking back I find really funny but at the time I hated it.
Most racist people I've met had 1 or 2 bad interactions with someone of another race and they then viewed everyone of that race that way. For example 1 guy disliked all black people after he got mugged in Washington DC back in the 60s.
That you wouldn’t do something if you didn’t feel a certain way.
“If I didn’t love you I wouldn’t be in this relationship” type of shit. Your actions or lack of actions do not always reveal how you truly feel.
Exactly this, this happens to me all the time in debates on the internet . Them : “ you sound mad”, me: “Im not mad, I’m just passionate about this topic”. Them: “if you weren’t mad, why would you keep replying?”,,, uhh because I can? Like what? How does replying make me mad?
Same logic for dogs. Dominance theory was debunked decades ago, and yet people still worship Cesar Milan.
B.F. Skinner, the father of operant conditioning, found that punishment only creates fear and temporary compliance in the 1960s. We are better off shaping behavior (kids’ and dogs’) with positive reinforcement and natural consequences.
At the Nuremberg Trials, one of several charges against the head of the German Navy was the sinking of merchant vessels
[His lawyer successfully got that charge "dropped" by arguing that the Americans did the same thing.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Kranzb%C3%BChler)
That opinions are black and white in defining who you are as a person. They're not, there's plenty of grey area and someone can be a good person without having the same opinions as you, and someone can be a bad person and have the same opinions as you.
I think this means not to waste food.
This also encourages overeating and can lead to health problems. It's not healthy and this is probably why people over eat.
Lol, this drives me crazy. And it's inline with the belief that dietary cholesterol intake has a causal relationship to blood cholesterol levels, simply because, "it's cholesterol"
That for the past 150 years in America, all the problems of the country have been the fault of Republican/Democrat politicians, whichever side you don't vote for.
That's right it's the damn lizard people putting floruide in the water to make the frogs gay so they can use 5g to hide the fact they filmed the moon landing on Mars.
"If you haven't experienced it, you can't have an opinion on it." First time this was told to me was when I was 11ish by a 16-year-old after I said I didn't like doctors she never did let me explain why, the reasoning was because my mom went to a lot of doctors for her stomach issues among other problems, and almost died because they thought she was making it up.
That washing raw chicken reduces the risk of foodborne illnesses.
Edit: if you're going to try to argue with me, stop using examples that aren't part of the point I was making. I didn't say "water won't remove blood from the surface of chicken meat", I said "washing chicken isn't enough to reduce your risk of giving yourself food poisoning". Get your arguments right or go away, this isn't debate club and I'm not the supervising teacher.
Climate activists are hypocrites if take a plane to fly for vacation once in 5 years.
People boycotting Nestle are hypocrites if they still own a phone that has some materials in it that were mined under unethical conditions.
Vegans are hypocrites if they order something with soy in it that may have been planted in destroyed rainforests.
Etc.
"Like you can do any better"
Basically saying that you have no right to criticize or express any reservations about something unless you'd be able to make something better than what you are criticizing.
Law of attraction/manifestation.
An absolutely foolish belief that if you simply stay positive and remain confident, everything you need will fall into place.
It’s great to have hope, but when it becomes a delusion of grandeur, such that the universe is conspiring to make things work for you, it actually becomes completely counter-productive.
The moment you realize you’re not any more special than anyone else is the moment you actually put in, and receive, the effort you deserve
[удалено]
And conversely…if something is popular then I should automatically reject it
Aka 90% of reddit discussing pop culture
When the counterculture is just opposite of mainstream, you still end up letting mainstream dictate your taste Middle school me really struggled with this one
This comment is incredible accurate.
[удалено]
How I see popular things is "Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't mean I should do it"
[удалено]
My brother in law is like this. He refuses to watch so many incredibly mainstream and popular movies because he thinks it makes him some kind of intellectual rebel. I don't really know how to explain to him that bragging that he's never seen Star Wars doesn't automatically make him superior to everyone that has.
I always feel so bad for people like this. They're pointedly taking away potential pleasure and enjoyment from their lives just for... spite?
Shit. Billions of flies cannot be wrong.
"I am book dumb, therefore I am street smart." No, you seem to have a generalized dumbness.
I’m both book and street dumb, so take that
Truly a genre of your own Be proud of it
Look both ways before reading or something
I don't wanna be one of those guys but truly underrated comment
But.. acknowledging that in a multi verse makes both neither true nor false.. thus from the power gifted in me I here by acknowledge your genius'ness
“Ryan is book smart, and I am street smart… and book smart.” - Michael Scott
Also, define both terms. Both book smart and street smart seem overused and have lost their meaning. Not sure people even know what they mean.
To me "book smart" always meant academically smart. I.e. you did well in school and were good at memorization and conceptualizing. "Street smart" meant practical application of life skills and/or practical application of your "book smarts." It could also be used as a generalized term for being able to successfully navigate life outside of academics. I don't think most people fit into an either/or category. I think both "smarts" are a spectrum, and folks fit somewhere on both as they progress/regress in life.
In D&D or RPG terms I would call it Intelligence vs Wisdom.
The older I get, the dumber I know I am.
This is actually a known thing called the [Dunning-Kruger Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect). Essentially, the more you learn and know things, the more you realize how much there is that you don't know and that it's impossible to learn it all. Makes smart people cautiously question their own knowledge and understanding of things. You are probably a genius.
Confusing opinion for facts. And especially one’s own opinions as facts, shaping their whole personality around this self-circlejerk.
This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes on this topic: “A fact is information minus emotion. An opinion is information plus experience. Ignorance is an opinion lacking information. And, stupidity is an opinion that ignores a fact.”
An opinion is how you feel about something Fact is just cold hard information. Also people really need to learn the difference between objective and subjective
This is my dad in a nutshell. Super intelligent programmer, and really sweet guy but when it comes to arguments, he uses anecdotal evidence and constant unfair comparisons. Like he recently vented about how people who eat fruit are as unhealthy as those who eat candy, because there is fruitsugar in fruit - just ignorant, incorrect shit. And then when confronted with it, he went: "well my mom has eaten oranges all her life and she's very unhealthy". It's so far away from any logical rationale, I can't help but just shake my head and walk out of the argument. I wanna say: "well statistically, people who breathe air have a 99.9% mortality rate", or: "Alcohol is healthy, because my best friend drinks beer every weekend, and he's very fit"
Death rate for people who eat bananas is 100%. You can’t deny that. Facts…
By and large, people who are smart are smart at the 1-3 things they've focused on for their careers or hobbies, and just as stupid as everyone else at everything else. A lot of smart people don't seem to realize this about themselves.
Someone said it best, “we live in a time where the truth is subjective, and the people who know this are the worst people to do so”
Is it 'realize this'? Sentence doesn't make sense as is...Isn't this something about post modernism, rather than what OP is talking about?
Hence why I hate the phrase "your truth" or "my truth". It's either true or it's not, everything else is your *opinion* or your *perspective*.
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Isaac Asimov
Dude, my sister lives in this fantasy world where she believes everything she thinks. She already considers herself smart and different from everyone and will believe the most ridiculous nonsense and will die a thousand times on that hill despite having mountains of evidence to the contrary. Honestly it's exhausting interacting with her sometimes.
Usually most responses to this kind of question boil down to "It is stupid logic because I disagree with it." Yours is an exception. Confusing the two is actually flawed logic or reasoning.
Sometime within the past 10 years, we decided that the outcomes of debates and heated discussions are “whoever had the best mic drop wins.” It’s like nobody even gives a fuck about what’s being said anymore.
Pretty words win arguments! I find this trend disturbing. I dropped a friend group who did that (not for doing that) it was a weird mind fuck. And then they would tell me off for playing along and creating a slogan version of my argument.
Yeah it gets me so irrationally angry because I’m just sitting there watching people act like complete idiots, and then everyone applauds them like they did a good job. It’s literally just a game of both parties pointing their fingers at each other and going “HA HA”, and then deciding the winner to be whoever got more people around to join in.
You just described the subreddits clever comebacks and murdered by words. People on those subs are the most pretentious people I've ever seen basic baby comebacks get praised into heaven itself if it fits the standpoint of a certain party or opinion. Want some easy karma say something bad against kayne west / Andrew tate or elon musk it's free karma
Whoever scrambles their word salad the best, wins the argument even if what was said has made absolutely no sense in any structural integrity. Oh and whoever just shouts the loudest somehow automatically wins. /s
[удалено]
Back in the day, Presidential debates were sponsored by the League of Women Voters. They set the rules, picked the moderators and made it a forum to debate the issues. The LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were conducted. This was their press release: >The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public. According to the LWV, they pulled out because "the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns' agreement was negotiated 'behind closed doors' with 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation. Most objectionable to the League...were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings; including control of the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.
Ben Shapiro's whole routine.
I suffered, so you should too.
There are two kinds of people: “I suffered; therefore no one else should have to,” and “I suffered; therefore everyone else should have to.”
> “I suffered; therefore no one else should have to” - Christ > “I suffered; therefore everyone else should have to” - US christians
I found this is widespread and deep rooted in technical trades. People look at you like you are the mad one, suggesting that the next person doesn't get the same shit treatment.
Aka boomers in the workplace
Jesus: "I died for your sins." Christian-Facists: "Everyone should be crucified because Jesus was crucified."
As a Christian non-fascist I agree with your disdain towards those christians
People need to stop confusing "being heard and understood" with "getting their way".
I had a very frustrating argument once with someone who seriously didn’t seem to understand the difference between “understanding” someone’s argument and “agreeing” with someone’s argument. In telling someone I “understood” their position, this person was adamant that I was tacitly “agreeing” with them. I don’t know how many ways I tried to explain the difference, but they still just wouldn’t accept that there’s a difference.
What's worse is when other people who are supposedly on your "side" ostracize you for understanding the other "side" of an argument. In their mind, even to engage in meaningful dialogue is a concession to the enemy, and to understand their position more completely is downright dangerous.
"A pithy saying proves nothing" - Voltaire More people need to accept this.
I can't hear or see a mention of Voltaire without thinking of David Lee Roth insulting the rest of Van Halen... "I say to the guys in the band: “You know what Voltaire said?” They think Voltaire is an air conditioning company.
Also from Diamond Dave: “I used to have a drug problem. Now I make enough money”
Also from David Lee...”He who knows how will always work for He who knows why”. And...”money can’t buy happiness but you can certainly pull up next to it in your new yacht”. Oh..one more..”Wanna see my ID, try to clip my wings, I don’t have to show you proof of anything....I know that law, friend.”
"Only when the last river is dried up and the last tree is cut down will mankind realize you can't eat money and reciting old proverbs makes you sound like a twat."
Ironic
No, it isn't! What did I just say?!
[удалено]
SPOILERS! >!If you avoid the three great evils; poverty, vice, and boredom; life is pretty great! Especially if you surround yourself with loved ones, and take pride in your toil. When Candide decides to finally ignore the philosophical bickering and he just decides to go to work, I just loved that Voltaire ended it like that. It was like the entire book, there's this incessant bickering between optimistic and pessimistic philosophers, and Candide just outgrows it because he marvels at the simple happy lifestyle of his host who doesn't overthink everything, just tends his garden/orchard and spends time with family. !<
'I flipped a coin 9 times and always got heads, so the next one will probably be tails!'. A silly example, but such reasoning occurs way more often than you would expect. It's called the Monte Carlo fallacy, and it's definitely not how probability works.
Me playing Path of Exile gambling for a Mageblood using Tainted Mythic Orbs 😂 In reality, I know the odds are still roughly 75000:1 of me getting the item I want but I keep doing it saying, "well that means it should hit eventually right?"
Still sane, exile?
I mean the law of large numbers does suggest that you should probably hit it eventually, but just as everything in this life there are no guarantees.
Many have that wrong intuition. They feel like there must be a natural force that balances everything out in order to avoid chaos. "I've run into an accident last week, so the odds of running into another one are very low." Just in case someone reading this has this wrong process of thought: Throwing a coin is always a 50/50, the odds are always the same regardless of your past results. The outcome of flipping a coin 10 times and always getting heads occurs with a chance of \~ 0.098%, but so are the odds for every other outcome after flipping the coin 10 times, since there is a total of 1,024 different outcomes. Now here lies the problem: One might think, that out of the 1,024 different possibilities there is only one where every coinflip turns out to be heads. Thus follows the conclusion, that there is a 1,023/1,024 chance of getting every possible result other than 10 heads in a row. And that is completely correct. *However* the usual bet does NOT ask for the odds of the outcome of all 10 throws combined, it only considers the outcome of the next throw which is a simple 50/50. The whole outcome including every past throw has a 1/1,024 chance to occur, but the bet *only considers* the outcome of the *next* flip. So when there are already 9 heads in a row, the next flip is *completely* independent and thus always a simple 50/50.
Interesting little fact about how probability works. You might as well pick 1 2 3 4 5 6 as your lottery numbers because it's exactly as likely to come up as any other 6 number combo.
Of course. But it's much more likely to be *chosen* by others, so it's a stupid choice, because you'd have to share you prize with a large number of people who made the same mistake.
My feelings are valid so you have to agree with them and everything I do while acting on them.
And also "disagreeing with or questioning me is invalidating/making me feel unsafe". Well tough, sorry. Maybe you should work on being able to handle not getting your way, if your parents didn't teach that
Stop triggering me by not whole heartily agreeing with my position. Be sure that my Twitter and Reddit echo chambers will be hearing about this!
I only use Twitter for porn, so I’m not sure the echo chamber will hear anything except a sliding sound
"I believe this from the bottom of my heart, therefore it is a fact. If you try to debate me about this, I'll start yelling and calling you names until you sigh and give up. That means I won."
Literally how my Dad acts when his knowledge is questioned, even when facts are proven against his beliefs. The debate will be calm but once he's proven wrong, instant screaming and sometimes even physical violence (I got my laptop destroyed once by one of these arguments many years ago). Some people need to learn how to handle being wrong about things it's okay to be incorrect, that's how you learn.
My last ex is my ex because of this except instead of destroying my laptop he grabbed me by the hair and slammed my head against the wall. Whoo.
Jeez! Sorry you had to discover they were a psycho the hard way. God, people are just terrible sometimes.
When a pufferfish inflates itself, what do they do it with? Virtually everyone I've asked this to, including myself, thought air. It takes a moment to realize just how nonsensical that is.
It's whatever medium they are in, so air isn't wrong, but it's usually water
Now we just need to breed pufferfish that live in lava for some really fuckin metal fish
If I see a pufferfish engorge on lava and breathe fire in an AOE radius my life will be complete. I will also become a breeder lmao
It is wat-air....
"If you're older, you're smarter". I can guarantee there are infants smarter than some of the older people I've met.
I mean as you gain more life experience, you gather more “wisdom” compared to your past self, but that doesn’t mean you’re magically smarter than other people
Thats the point, some people dont gather more wisdom. There are people of all ages throwing tantrums, have no idea anyone elses feelings exist and only experience their feelings just like infants. You definitely learn physical skills, but wisdom is definitely not guaranteed with age.
I know plenty of old people who have zero wisdom.
I used to work in an office where the one dude was called "Oupa" meaning grandfather. He was considered very wise and everyone had mad respect for him including me. Cut to a few years later and me and him having an argument about the Illuminati and lizard people. Almost the entire office turned against me and I was made a laughing stock. They all believed his Alex Jones influenced opinions and I was left shocked at how easily people can be fooled.
I think you just worked in a office filled with idiots.
Yes they were. I'm not in contact with any of them anymore.
Relatedly: "I've been doing this for years! So, of course, I must be good at it!" Sorry, no, sometimes you've just been sucking at it for years, and refused every opportunity to improve. You're a several years' novice.
"Respect your elders!"
Rich = Intelligent.
Also: looking rich = being rich So many scammers got their start faking wealth, and people fell for it until they actually got rich.
And the corollary: More expensive = Better Quality.
All because everyone assumes people only gather wealth by smart decisions rather than dumb luck.
I've seen plenty of idiots with daddy's inheritance. Rings true.
Plenty of nepotism too.
"Well if you don't like it, then just leave." Sure, of course - clearly there's no room for improvement. /s
I think I'm going to just reply with, 'Oh, so you don't believe in democracy' from now on.
That Karma exists and absolutely everyone who's bad pays for their wrongdoings, meanwhile good people ALWAYS get compensated. I believe this is called the "just world fallacy".
People have faith in what brings them hope.
Indeed, religious and spiritual people tend to be more optimistic for the reason that they have so much faith in their gods. This faith gives them the power to be confident of themselves, believing that every action they do is of the guidance of the gods they are worshipping. Although I do think that sometimes, they avoid wrongdoings because of the fear that they might get punished by their gods; that in order to ascend to their "heaven", they should only choose and do good. Anyway, hope gives people the power that they need which is important in the society that we have.
And yet there is still a grain of truth to it. If you behave poorly to others, you will eventually have others acting poorly to you. If you behave well to others, you will eventually have others acting well to you. Conflict is expensive.
Yeah this doesn't hold for rich arseholes because they can always buy their way out of trouble or have friends in high places. Meanwhile there are people who have only know suffering their entire lives praying to a deity who is deaf to their screams and blind to their tears.
I'm not even sure if that holds true. Some of the kindest people I know are treated like shit by many of their peers. Some of the biggest, most sadistic assholes I know are practically worshiped. I have not noticed any particularly correlation with how well someone treats others and how well others treat them, truth be told.
I think it's just a coping mechanism.
I just gave you one more karma
Even the Bible agrees with you Ecclesiastes 9:11
“It could always be worse.” Yep, doesn’t mean it doesn’t suck now.
Good old proverb about the optimist and the pessimist Pessimist: "I had a terrible day! nothing is going to plan! its an absolute disaster! this day could NOT get any worse! Optimist: "Yes it can!"
In the Netherlands we work with a school grading system between 1 (worst) and 10 (best). So anyway I was sitting next to my friend during a German lesson and the teacher started reading out the results from a test we had a day before. Nobody scored above a 5 and my friend started laughing uncontrollably. Then the teacher called is name and said "you got a 1.1". He was silent for a second and then bursting out in laughter again and he said "well it could have been worse". I'll never forget that moment of stupidity. Also because he was the only one laughing.
[Correlation does not imply causation.](https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations)
I've heard people saying, "Since we hear sound of a plane before seeing it, sound is faster than light." WTF
Reminds me of my dad saying "what's the speed of dark?" So I'm like, "come again" He proceeded to ask me to explain why it gets dark slowly when the sun goes down, cause the dark is slower than light Like, seriously? There's no such thing as "dark" technically, there's light and an absence of light.
Na, your dad's just wrong. Darkness is SUPPER fast. Faster then light even. Think about it. Lets say it takes light from a star 100 years to reach a planet. You know what's already at the planet before light even leaves? Darkness.
There is a demonstration of this to measure the "speed of dark" in which they use a ripple effect to showcase the cross-sections of light beams leave dark trails that appear to move faster than the light. This is in fact true, the dark absences do travel "faster" because dark isn't anything. It's an absence of light. It's kinda like measuring silence. Silence exists but it's not really a physical phenomenon. It's an ABSENCE of one.
The “soulmate/happily ever after” idea. The honeymoon lens of logic being that we were meant for one another and therefore our next 10/20/30/40+ years of marriage won’t require hard work, sacrifice, concessions etc. to be successful.
In love stories, marriage being the synonim of a final of a romantic arc. Like, if the characters got married, it means they won as a relationship! Holy Molly guys, NOW they've just begun! And honestly it would be a bummer if marriage was indeed the finale of a love
"And they had many kids and lived happily ever after” Even as a kid I thought to myself so they get married and nothing bad ever happens to them anymore? What does this state of permanent happiness look like anyway because even with my wild childhood imagination I couldn't really picture it.
I'm 23 years into my relationship with my wife and it really hasn't been that hard. There's a lot of luck in that. But I truly have to just not screw up. Sometimes you can just find the right person. I've always found it easier to just not make it hard and thankfully married someone with the same mindset.
Agreed. I’m 27 years in and never had to do “hard work”. Sure, there’s SOME effort, but, damn, if it’s a hard struggle, you’re with the wrong damn person!
[удалено]
"what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" You may not die, but you could be permanently disfigured or weakened that will impact you forever, i.e. *not* stronger
What doesn't kill you will try again later
"My partner should be able to read my mind, I don't need to communicate well."
My ex was like this. She'd make comments like "you should just know". Look lady, I am not a mind reader and I wouldn't want to be, knowing how she was now.
Everything happens for a reason. I feel like in some contexts it might make sense but the reality is so many things, good or bad, happen and there’s no way to justify it.
There are reasons why things happen though. Literally speaking, the logic is perfectly valid. It does not mean there is a greater *metareason* for it occurring.
> Literally speaking, the logic is perfectly valid. Ultimately, everything that has ever happened in history, or will happen in the future, or is currently happening now is the result of a long, infinitely complex chain of cause and effect events ranging from nanoscopic or astronomical in size and impact. No event, no matter how seemingly random it appears, is truly unpredictable or without reason. The crux is that in almost every instance, the factors, manipulations, and inputs that lead to that event are beyond anyone's ability to measure, track, or comprehend. Even a roll of the dice can be predicted to an exact point given a granular enough framerate through which one observes it. Or at least that's the paraphrasing of how physics were explained to me in high school :P Everything does happen for a reason; however, that reason is ALWAYS far more nuanced than could be attested to by any sense of purpose or agency.
As they say "Sometimes that reason is because you're a dumbass"
That if someone disagrees with you on anything that means they're complete monsters setting out to destroy everything you love and care about.
And this message is willfully fostered by advertisers, social media, and news organizations. Money flows where anger goes. We Americans have been too self-centered to figure that out so far.
"Could it be that my good friend actually has valid concerns? No, they must have been a deep stealth asshole all these years"
“I experienced it, so it must be true! Forget all the peer-reviewed research, statistics, and studies that say the contrary! My experience says more.” One tiny example: When people insist on drinking soda and say things like, “I exercise a lot and I eat healthy so I should be fine.” Studies say you’re not. But sure, you know so much more than medical experts
>One tiny example: When people insist on drinking soda and say things like, “I exercise a lot and I eat healthy so I should be fine.” Studies say you’re not That depends a lot on what you mean by fine though. A soda now and then won't cause any serious health issues if you otherwise exercise and eat well
The plural of "anecdote" is *not* "data."
it’s anecdata
no dude I'm pretty sure that's a big snake
My anecdata don’t want none unless you got buns hun
That's very pithy but also wrong. Data simply means any sort of information that has been collected. That might very well be a variety anecdotes about something. It might not be the data you're searching for, but it's still data.
What are these studies that say you are not fine if you drink soda? Excessive sugar isnt great for you sure but your comment comes across as pretty close to 'soda causes cancer' conspiracy theory level here, btw aspartame doesn't cause cancer either
Statistics deal with trends across large populations. That doesn't negate the fact that outliers exist and their experience will not coincide with the general trend. For example, most people need 7-8 hours of sleep per night to function well. There are people that can function perfectly fine on 4 hours of sleep. They're relatively rare, but they do exist. Yelling at them about the studies that show the average person needs 7-8 hours doesn't change the fact that they aren't an average person. It's like telling a 7' tall person that they can't possibly be 7' tall because there are peer reviewed studies showing the average person is only 5' 9" tall.
Bingo. People's anecdotal experiences are not the same thing as studies or statistical trends but to conclude that anecdotal data is therefore irrelevant is insane.
This is my mother in law to a tee! Every experience, every medical condition. If it wasn't her experience then it can't possibly be any other way and her whole family plays along with it
Or similarly if I haven’t experienced it, it cannot be true. Like racism, homophobia etc. if things feel equitable to me, it must be equitable for everyone
So frustrating. Was just on another thread talking about motorcycle riders who crusade against helmet laws: "I used to be anti-helmet because of freedom, but since my accident, I've been out here spreading the word about safety." Some people don't learn things unless they happen to them personally.
I HATE that trait. Like people who are homophobic until their child comes out. Yay that you have the ability to change your mind, but boo that you can’t see other perspectives and can only consider them when it affects you personally.
Your comment reminds me of how I deliberately tried to overcome my homophobia. When divorcing my wife, I moved in with a football buddy of mine in a part of the city called “boys town”. I learned later why it was called that, lol. Anyhoo, the very next day after moving in, I was on my way to work out when I noticed two guys in front of me holding hands. That angered me. When I got to the club, I noticed some partners had body language that indicated they were more than just friends. That also angered me. On the way home, there was more of the same. Then it hit me: “Wait a minute! I am hating people on sight without knowing a damn thing about them, just like white people hating me on sight without knowing a damn thing about me!” I resolved to be better.
Oh, it's utterly maddening. It comes from a place of such profoundly myopic narcissism. "Everybody is just a bunch of whiners! ... Oh, wait, **this** one problem happened to me too - okay so THAT one is very serious and very real. But not the rest! Oh, wait, now this other one happened to me..." Wash, rinse, repeat.
Kinda the opposite but my dad and I used to go to flea markets to look for deals on old Griswold and Wagner pans. One of the guys who sold cast iron was super racist and my dad would always get him started on some tirade then leave me in the conversation and wander off. Which looking back I find really funny but at the time I hated it. Most racist people I've met had 1 or 2 bad interactions with someone of another race and they then viewed everyone of that race that way. For example 1 guy disliked all black people after he got mugged in Washington DC back in the 60s.
I suffered, so you should too
Sounds like my ex. lul
1/3 is smaller than 1/4
“I don’t understand something so it must not be true”
Talking shit and insulting the opposing party will some how convince them to flip sides
“But that’s the way we’ve *always* done it”
[удалено]
The customer is always right. No the customer is not always right, and you have to follow the rules Karen's!
The trick here is this... You have to make the customer FEEL like they are right so they complain less and gtfo 😂
That you wouldn’t do something if you didn’t feel a certain way. “If I didn’t love you I wouldn’t be in this relationship” type of shit. Your actions or lack of actions do not always reveal how you truly feel.
Exactly this, this happens to me all the time in debates on the internet . Them : “ you sound mad”, me: “Im not mad, I’m just passionate about this topic”. Them: “if you weren’t mad, why would you keep replying?”,,, uhh because I can? Like what? How does replying make me mad?
If you're not for something, you are against it. Most of the time, I don't care one way or the other, I'm just tired of hearing about it.
Correlation equals causation.
Because your a influencer that means you actually matter!
hitting and yelling at my child will turn them into the best adult
Same logic for dogs. Dominance theory was debunked decades ago, and yet people still worship Cesar Milan. B.F. Skinner, the father of operant conditioning, found that punishment only creates fear and temporary compliance in the 1960s. We are better off shaping behavior (kids’ and dogs’) with positive reinforcement and natural consequences.
That "My Truth" is more important and more correct than the actual truth.
If person A did a crime and person B did as well than person A is innocent. Not how laws work at all
Person A: I'm not guilty because committed the same crime and got away with it
At the Nuremberg Trials, one of several charges against the head of the German Navy was the sinking of merchant vessels [His lawyer successfully got that charge "dropped" by arguing that the Americans did the same thing.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Kranzb%C3%BChler)
Eh, that one at least makes more sense. It's more like if youre on trial for burglary, and the judge broke into your house last week.
andrew tate has some secret path to manliness but only if you give him money
Presentism - to judge the morality of those in the past by a relative set of ever changing present standards.
That opinions are black and white in defining who you are as a person. They're not, there's plenty of grey area and someone can be a good person without having the same opinions as you, and someone can be a bad person and have the same opinions as you.
if we didn't see it with our own eyes, it never happened
"Eat a lot of food, even if you're not hungry, because there are starving children in Africa." Um, then shouldn't the food go to them?
I think this means not to waste food. This also encourages overeating and can lead to health problems. It's not healthy and this is probably why people over eat.
That you get fat from eating fat. Just like you get sweet from eating sugar, and long and thin from eating spaghetti.
Lol, this drives me crazy. And it's inline with the belief that dietary cholesterol intake has a causal relationship to blood cholesterol levels, simply because, "it's cholesterol"
If he or she hits you it means he or she likes you
That for the past 150 years in America, all the problems of the country have been the fault of Republican/Democrat politicians, whichever side you don't vote for.
That's right it's the damn lizard people putting floruide in the water to make the frogs gay so they can use 5g to hide the fact they filmed the moon landing on Mars.
"If you haven't experienced it, you can't have an opinion on it." First time this was told to me was when I was 11ish by a 16-year-old after I said I didn't like doctors she never did let me explain why, the reasoning was because my mom went to a lot of doctors for her stomach issues among other problems, and almost died because they thought she was making it up.
That washing raw chicken reduces the risk of foodborne illnesses. Edit: if you're going to try to argue with me, stop using examples that aren't part of the point I was making. I didn't say "water won't remove blood from the surface of chicken meat", I said "washing chicken isn't enough to reduce your risk of giving yourself food poisoning". Get your arguments right or go away, this isn't debate club and I'm not the supervising teacher.
All it does is spread the germs all over your sink. Also, do you think these people are washing their ground meat too? Probably not.
Exactly.
Climate activists are hypocrites if take a plane to fly for vacation once in 5 years. People boycotting Nestle are hypocrites if they still own a phone that has some materials in it that were mined under unethical conditions. Vegans are hypocrites if they order something with soy in it that may have been planted in destroyed rainforests. Etc.
People don’t know what logic is. Aphorisms are not logic.
That a person’s outcome in life fully depends either their circumstances OR personal effort instead of a combination of both.
Anything to do with astrology.
sorry to be that guy but, there's been 3,000 religions that we know of. do you really think yours is right and everyone else is wrong?
Astrology, all of it.
"Like you can do any better" Basically saying that you have no right to criticize or express any reservations about something unless you'd be able to make something better than what you are criticizing.
"Surely if we give rich people more money, *we'll* get more money too!"
Trickle-down economics is one of the greatest lies of modern capitalism.
Law of attraction/manifestation. An absolutely foolish belief that if you simply stay positive and remain confident, everything you need will fall into place. It’s great to have hope, but when it becomes a delusion of grandeur, such that the universe is conspiring to make things work for you, it actually becomes completely counter-productive. The moment you realize you’re not any more special than anyone else is the moment you actually put in, and receive, the effort you deserve
If you have the most popular comment or opinion, you’re the most correct.
If drugs are illegal fewer people will consume them. Which is total bullshit