|
|
|
|
|
by AshamedCaptain
1691 days ago
|
|
To put it simply, I think most people would prefer being directly called an idiot versus "we question so much your ability to make decisions that we are going to try to censor the information that we provide you without telling you anything". It's actually wiser, strategically, to do this silent manipulation (and most definitely it's not strategically wise to call one an idiot), but, as the receiver, I'd prefer the honest approach myself. |
|
I don't know if the silent manipulation is benefitting the world, maybe it is getting more people to vaccinate, but I can guarantee that this only makes me personally dig deeper and distrust most things coming from the same sources that silently manipulate the information. Also given a "good to be true" view of mainstream or anything I disbelieve it. If something is too good to be true, like how current vaccines are portrayed, it deserves further inspection.
All in all when you are classifying someone "an idiot", is there any other correlation that this person would likely have in their characteristics?
E.g. let's say is definition of "an idiot" to you someone who "didn't take the vaccine".
Or is "an idiot" someone who generally has poorer mental capabilities? What do you think it correlates to?
Below average memory?
Below average comprehension? Of what?
Below average scientific understanding?
Below average abstract reasoning?
Below average working memory?
Do you think being an idiot means at least few of those? How do you think they reached their conclusion? Can you even understand how they reached their conclusion or are you just speculating in your head how they reached it and therefore they must have poor comprehension or memory?
I mean you can't see in their head.