[miroljub]

> User counters 13000 word meta study by simply stating the opposite without giving any arguments, sources or studies.

I am giving my opinion on a random forum, not writing a study about mindfulness. I didn't even say anything controversial, a glance at the wikipedia page would list a bunch of criticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness#Concerns_and_criti...

> Is there a forum like Hacker News, but with no "talking out of your ass"? > How could the mechanics of a forum be set up to achieve this?

For example, you could try not to be an asshole and not to "talk out of your ass". Be a change you want to see.

Btw, in your case, a mindfulness practice could actually help. Instead of pretending to be an angry internet gestapo, you can try some basic breathing practices for a few minutes.

[verteu]

> I didn't even say anything controversial, a glance at the wikipedia page would list a bunch of criticism.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness#Concerns_and_criti

Nothing in that Wiki link supports your claim that mindfulness doesn't fight the root cause of distress. The 'Scholarly Research' subsection says reviewers want more reproducing studies with larger sample sizes and better randomization (they always do), the 'Shortcomings' subsection claims it's too commercialized and departs from Buddhist practice (so what?), and the 'Risks' subsection describes some side effects that are proven rare in the literature.

The Buddhist critiques are closest, but are largely framed as a critique of authenticity rather than efficacy.

[tuyiown]

Ha, but your are both right with the wrong behavior.

You're entitled to you tone, and your initial comment is valid, yes, but it's way to much assertive. Respecting people you're discussing with implies two things: strong assertion needs objective backup, opinions comes with deference.

If not, then, people feeling disrespected are entitled to their (civil) call for proper etiquette, whatever how it stings your ego. You both failed.