Free_Opinions @ Free_Opinions @feddit.uk

Independent thinker valuing discussions grounded in reason, not emotions.

---

Read more

Posts

10

Comments

570

Joined

1 yr. ago

Even something like being anti-abortion is a perfectly logical stance to hold for someone who beliefs that soul enters the body at conception. That belief is based on what I'd argue is a false premise but I can't exactly prove that either. It's not logical from my perspective but it is from theirs.

I'm not so much talking about right wing beliefs per-se but about the shift towards the centre which is to the right. Where it crosses to the side of the right, I don't know and I doubt there even is concensus on that. Something like being against DEI programs, I guess, is considered to be quite "right wing" yet virtually all of the people whose opinions I respect are against it and I'd hardly consider any of them right wing. Freedom of speech would be another - also fitting the context.

I don’t personally have any issue with algorithms - they work quite well for me, though it does require some active management. For example, if I watch one or two 30-second videos on YouTube, it quickly starts recommending more, which quickly floods my feed. However, when I start ignoring those recommendations, despite the temptation to click, the algorithm eventually stops pushing them and shifts back to suggesting accurately tailored, long-form content that genuinely interests me. The same goes for using the “not interested” button. This aligns with my experience on platforms like Twitter and Instagram as well, though the latter I no longer use.

Algorithms obviously don’t care whether the content they show you makes you glad that you saw it. They simply serve what captures your attention. If it's outrage, then that’s exactly what you’ll get. The algorithm knows plenty of other users engage with that kind of content, so it rationally assumes the same will apply to you.

I remember trying to take a similar picture of my own eye with an DSLR and learning that this close the depth of field was so narrow that if I focus on the surface of the eyeball, the iris would be out of focus. Never before that had I really thought about the fact that there's depth to it. This is really impressive for an iPhone shot.

That's quite a broad generalization. While this applies to some positions, sure, you seem to be implying it's true of right-wing views as a whole which simply isn't true.

Right wing ideologies tend to be simpler and thus appeal to those that tend to dislike nuance.

I don’t agree with this - at least not in the sense that there’s a significant difference between the left and the right here. Both sides tend to oversimplify and misrepresent each other’s views in online discussions. However, when you dig deeper into why someone holds a certain stance, it’s very rare to find it entirely lacking in nuance, regardless of which political side they’re coming from.

You seem to be making lots of assumptions here. You could've just asked if you want to know what I think about something.

Like 95% of social media users, regardless of the platform, are mostly lurkers. A tiny fraction of the total user base creates the majority of the content. This is a self-selecting group of people who, by definition, don’t represent the average person - the average person doesn’t comment on message boards.

Reading discussions on Lemmy, for example, can create a skewed perspective of reality. Views like being okay with murdering CEOs are fairly popular here, yet I’ve never met anyone in real life who thinks this way. My work involves going into people’s homes to fix things, and we frequently chat about current events. I find that my average customer is far more reasonable in their views compared to the extreme opinions that often get highly upvoted here.

There’s also the broader observation that the left seems to struggle to win elections globally. We hear a lot about people moving toward the right, but rarely about anyone moving the other way. I’m not claiming this as absolute truth - it’s simply how I see things. Of course, there’s always a chance I could be wrong.

Few days back my SO was annoyed by how she predicted I would have answered if she were to ask me to do something.

I’d be lying if I said I didn’t enjoy the moral panic caused by this, at least a little. It shows that the pendulum is indeed swinging back from the woke left toward a more reasonable, rational center.

Disagreeing with things like DEI programs doesn’t make someone far-right - it just means they’re not far-left. You might not like it, but the reality is that the vast majority of people don’t agree with many of the views that are overrepresented on left-wing social media platforms like Lemmy. Doubling down on it just means losing more elections.

When you think you're paying attention to more than one thing at a time you're actually not paying attention to anything.

I don't think that tops the content on rotten.com

I have a strong feeling that if we were to re-live the 90's right now we'd quickly realise it wasn't so "innocent" after all. People just had thicker skin back then and recreational outrage wasn't really a thing due to how slow news and trends speaded at the age of early internet.

Simply having the same or similar features alone doesn't make it a viable replacement. I switched from Instagram to Pixelfed and went from hardly anyone seeing my photography to literally no one seeing it.

I don't believe in free will or the self. That's the difference for me here. Just like the hurricane couldn't have done otherwise, I don't think that a human could have either. I wouldn't get angry at a bear attacking me in the forest either - that's what bears do. Doesn't mean I like it, or approve of it but I just don't pretend as if they could have acted any other way.

Why does he suck though? Aren't we all conducting uncontrolled trials on ourselves? Better that, than doing it on other people, right?

No, I don't think the feeling of anger is foreign to anyone. It's a basic human emotion and we're all capable of it. By my question I'm rather asking about dwelling in anger thorought the day/week rather than the acute sense of it when something anger-provoking has just happened.

When someone cuts me off in traffic I might go "You son of a.." but then I catch myself getting angry and the feeling of it just kind of vanishes. It doesn't really withstand any sort of observation. I guess the difference here is getting angry and staying angry.

My front page says otherwise.

Hate is an extremely strong emotion. To me, it means basically that you wish they were dead. That I do not feel of anyone. However, I can't say I intensely dislike anyone either. It's not quite compatible with the way I see the world. Hating a person, to me, is like hating a hurricane or a volcano. It simply doesn't make any sense.

It was hot garbage before Musk and people still kept using it. The world is not binary like that.

What anger?