Even if they tell you IRL too, have you ever spoken to a split couple? Reality can take very different shapes depending on who’s talking, lol.
Good point lol
Check out the episode of Friends where Ross and Phoebe date a divorced couple
bingo. anyone who has been in a bad relationship has had the trip of two radically different interpretations of the same event.
Or just on a bad date. So many bad dates where the other person was in love with me and having a great time and I loathed them, or vice versa.
Spoiler: every narrator is ‘unreliable’ (ie biased and subjective) - just as every real person is. Everyone sees and spins the same events a different way.
For example: ICE claims they HAD to shoot Rene Good, because she was a domestic terrorist who was going to run him over.
And everybody ELSE saw the video and said ICE is full of shit.
See? Different perspectives.
You can write omniscient narrators that state the objective truth of the story. They’re only biased in the sense that language itself is interpretive. Personally I find that to be a redundant argument.
That’s the entire point of citation, repeatable experiment, and peer review. The only way we can ever touch at reliability is cross-referential consensus.
Of course, consensus doesn’t automatically mean truth if the consensers aren’t all being self interrogative and critically thinking.
Certainly, but it’s the only real starting place
yes but not everyone is the same distance from the objective reality of some things.
bad actors also deliberate misrepresent things to push forward an agenda, most people aren’t doing this.
Reminds me of AITA? (am I the asshole?) posts that either felt incredible or just posted as ragebait for farming karma.
most of the posts there and any relationship sub are manufactured for maximum controversy/upvotes/comments.
Hate those kinds of communities thats entire purpose is to make people mad, think I have them all filtered out now thankfully.
So with a healthy amount of skepticism? I agree, but would argue this extends to “reliable” sources too. Just because an author has established a trustworthy track record for themselves, doesn’t mean one should become less critical of future writings.
Good luck with that. Half of what I post is made up, I’m not telling you which half or if this comment is one of them.
If they try to recreate me in AI based on my posts it’s going to be funny af.
Can’t fool me, I already know everyone on the Internet is just a bot except for me.
If you are taking internet posters that seriously, you are doing everything wrong.
You shouldn’t be analyzing anyone’s posts about themselves, you should be laughing at them.
most people when talking about themselves have a very distorted view, often self-aggrandizing or self-diminishing.
I try to be unbiased when telling anecdotes but ultimately everyone is a little biased. Even if they try not to be, they will be a bit biased to making themselves look good
I think it’s fine. You can be a little biased online, as a treat.
100%! I just assume everybody is 12 year olds screwing around…
Only the most milquetoast of peoples with perfect online self-control, and opinions that perfectly align with yours should be listened to, yes.
I’m excited to see which post of mine will be the one.
You shouldn’t listen to anyone online and if you find someone sharing the same opinion as you, you should change your stance and get mad at that person.
