Oh No, anyway

This is just "both sides are equally wrong/bad."

Idk about equally, but often enough, both sides are indeed wrong.
- "Enlightened centrists". I make fun of you people constantly.
Maybe I’m too naive, but I didn’t think they were referring to just politics. They were just referring to two people arguing.
- You know, I think you're right. I'm so used to the phrase "both sides" meaning a specific thing it didn't register as anything else. If it had been phrased "both sides of an argument" I would have understood.
- Does it normally refer to politics? Maybe for Americans, and they are responsible for a good deal of the English language content online. Right, and the 2 party system...
  I'm with you, though, both sides means both sides of an argument. I think the news had something on that a while back- for every climate scientist they interviewed, they had to also interview a climate denier to present a "fair and balanced" view XD

Why are y'all in the comments trying to act like one or another universalist position has to fit like a sock to all situations? There are debates where one side is blatantly wrong and the other is blatantly correct, debates where one side is wrong and the other has some points right, debates where both sides have some points right, debates where both sides would do well to return to school and debates where no side can be objetively correct because they're discussing something intrinsically subjective. The "enlightened centrist" meme is useful to mock the stupid position that "the truth is always in the middle", but if you think you're always going to find someone in any debate who has the right answer, you're going to find yourself siding with stupid shit all the time.

Yes! Can we pin this somewhere for new Lemmy users to read? I'm so over the right/wrong ONLY attitudes
- It would be better if we taught people to be critical thinkers
Differing opinions is not the same thing as misinformation.

"Understanding is a three-edged sword. Your side, their side, and the truth."

My side is that vaccines do NOT cause autism.
Their side is that vaccines DO cause autism.
So the truth is that vaccines cause autism sometimes?
- No, Autism isn't caused by vaccines but the risk of vaccines for everyone is not zero. It's just the amount of people affected are in the .00X% or .000X% range.
- My side is that many great doctors are autistic, therefore autism causes vaccines.
- Plot twist: Autism is causing vaccines /s
- Or causality is an imperfect representation of reality.
- No the truth is scientifically proven that they don't(at least those that are certified in the EU)
  Your side may overlap with the truth.
Understanding sounds a little more like an M1917 trench knife with its triangular stiletto blade.

BuT bOtH sIdEs !!!1

Monke brain see "both sides"
Neuron fire
CENTRIST DETECTED
no further thought needed

both sides

wtf did u just say to me u lil bishh

Can't you just live normally in a filter bubble like the rest of us?

bOtH siDeS

Both sides can be misinformed but, it doesn't mean you need to react negatively to someone else's viewpoint. If you disagree there's nothing wrong with saying "I disagree because I think that....." or "I've read that...." and you don't have to call the other person a nasty derogatory name.

You‘re new here, right? Keep that positive attitude as long as you can.
- Actually I wrote that because I am not new to this stuff at all. Just kind of fed up with always getting called names just because sometimes I post things that arent the most popular view or are different ways of looking at things. I'm OK with people saying "I don't agree" if they can explain why without also adding "you idiot" or "you fucking idiot" onto the end. I try to be civil, but am always surprised how people respond with uncalled for name calling.
If you've previously identified one side as consisting of pathological liars, it's best to ignore whatever they say because the more you hear from them, the more likely you are to accidently believe one of their lies. It takes a lot of vigilance to listen to a bunch of plausibly-true statements without misremembering some of them as being true.
99% of us just think whatever our friends think. Is that an argument for or against what we're thinking?
- We automatically choose our friends based on similar taste, opinions and humour so it's not surprising that these things match up.
- Well I think you're right, but I hope people have more brains to than to simply go along with what their friends think. I'm very anti-religious, but have close friends who are deeply religious. We just stay off the topic. I think people choose to hang with others who think the way they do most of the time. That doesn't prove anybody right, it just proves we like to congregate with those whose opinions are the same as ours.

Why limit yourself to two?

Yup my current favorite combo is hexbear and the neolibs at /r/Destiny. Completely ideologically opposed on nearly all issues. I usually side more with the hexbear crowd but they also have their own bubble thing going on

Fires up the grill