this post was submitted on
335 points (56% like it)
1,500 up votes 1,165 down votes
shortlink:

pics

subscribe2,245,335 readers

16,478 users online

Looking for an image subreddit with minimal rules? Check out /r/images

A place to share interesting photographs and pictures. Feel free to post your own, but please read the rules first (see below), and note that we are not a catch-all for general images (of screenshots, comics, etc.)

Spoiler code

Please mark spoilers like this:
[text here](/spoiler)

Hover over to read.

Rules

  1. No screenshots, or pictures with added or superimposed text. This includes image macros, comics, info-graphics and most diagrams. Text (e.g. a URL) serving to credit the original author is exempt.

  2. No gore or porn. NSFW content must be tagged.

  3. No personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder. Stalking & harassment will not be tolerated.

  4. No solicitation of votes (including "cake day" posts), posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor, or [FIXED] posts. DAE posts go in /r/DoesAnybodyElse. "Fixed" posts should be added as a comment to the original image.

  5. Submissions must link directly to a specific image file or to an image hosting website with minimal ads. We do not allow blog hosting of images ("blogspam"), but links to albums on image hosting websites are okay. URL shorteners are prohibited.

  • If your submission appears to be filtered but definitely meets the above rules, please send us a message with a link to the comments section of your post (not a direct link to the image). Don't delete it as that just makes the filter hate you!

  • If you come across any rule violations, please report the submission or message the mods and one of us will remove it!

Please also try to come up with original post titles. Submissions that use certain clichés/memes will be automatically tagged with a warning.

Links

If your post doesn't meet the above rules, consider submitting it on one of these other subreddits:

Comics  
/r/comics /r/webcomics
/r/vertical /r/f7u12
/r/ragenovels /r/AdviceAtheists
Image macros Screenshots/text
/r/lolcats /r/screenshots
/r/AdviceAnimals /r/desktops
/r/Demotivational /r/facepalm (Facebook)
/r/reactiongifs /r/DesktopDetective
Wallpaper Animals
/r/wallpaper /r/aww
/r/wallpapers /r/cats
The SFWPorn Network /r/TrollingAnimals
  /r/deadpets
  /r/birdpics
  /r/foxes
Photography Un-moderated pics
/r/photography /r/AnythingGoesPics
/r/photocritique /r/images
/r/HDR
/r/windowshots
/r/PictureChallenge
Misc New reddits
/r/misc /r/britpics
/r/gifs Imaginary Network
/r/dataisbeautiful /r/thennnow
/r/picrequests /r/SpecArt
  /r/LookWhoIMet
  /r/timelinecovers
  /r/MemesIRL
  /r/OldSchoolCool
  /r/photoshopbattles

Also check out http://irc.reddit.com

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

334
335

How I view the reddit mentality (i.imgur.com)

submitted ago by TheKidney

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on
all 134 comments
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]feellikeanut 43 points44 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If you ever think Redditors are openminded, try advancing a viewpoint radically different (or even a little bit different) from theirs. These people are in lockstep.

[–]hairyotter 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"If you don't agree with me and the rest of reddit, you are a sheep who can't think for yourself."

[–]NoNeedForAName 11 points12 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Hell, just try saying something politically conservative.

[–]butth0lez 8 points9 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The minimum wage increases poverty and outsourcing jobs allows for comparative advantage.

Edit: Im serious.

[–]LuxNocte 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Your statement highlights the one flaw with the overall truism of Hivemind Uber Alles. Redditors are actually fairly diverse, but each headline draws it's own sort of crowd.

[–]NoNeedForAName 10 points11 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I've actually said that here before, at least the minimum wage part. I even explained why. I got destroyed by downvotes. My econ degree may be a little rusty, but it's more than a lot of these guys have.

[–]butth0lez 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I just graduated with an econ degree. In my experience, talking economics with non-economists is probably the quickest way to not make friends. And I'm not some heavy breathing preachy type. I actually avoid it as often as possible... unless its on reddit :)

[–]Sve7en 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm halfway to getting my econ degree, I'm like you guys from the past! :D

[–]NoNeedForAName 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I have a couple of econ-minded friends. Outside of Reddit, I limit my econ conversations to them.

[–]JonZ1618 5 points6 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Nuh uh because you see, like, Jon Stewart TOTALLY made fun of that idea last night!

[–]butth0lez 0 points1 point ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I think Jon Stewart is hilarious. He's really good a pointing out how ridiculous politicians and news channels can get. Once he starts talking economics though I just tune him out. Economics isnt his area of expertise, so why would his opinion about economics have any weight? Thats like asking a non-surgeon about whats the best way to take out a tumor, or a non-forensic psychologist to screen a serial killer.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Sarcasm is such a great tool for the open-minded.

[–]illustrissim 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

he's a witch!

[–]AestheticDeficiency 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'll agree with the outsourcing jobs allowing for comparative advantage, but would you care to elaborate on why having a minimum wage increases poverty?

[–]butth0lez 2 points3 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Okay so under perfect competition, wages are derived from supply of workers and marginal value product (MVP or MPV). MVP is derived from how productive you are (marginal physical product) and the dollars the firm receives from you. The MVP is downward slopping because of diminishing marginal utility-- the first one is very valuable, the second is slightly less etc.

So basically you now have a upward slopping curve (supply of workers) and a downward slopping curve (MVP = demand). So where these two lines meet is where you have the wage rate and quantity demanded.

Now lets say a minimum wage is imposed. If the minimum wage is below equilibrium for this certain job, then its not significant. If the minimum wage is higher than equilibrium, then it certainty is significant. Since a minimum wage does nothing to productivity, the MVP does not shift. Since its above equilibrium, yes the wage rate goes up, but quantity demanded decreases. Not only does a firm demand less quantity, but you also have a new set of people willing to work at this new wage rate. This difference of labor demanded is added to the unemployment rate. The quantity demanded thats shift away equilibrium are the amount of people out of the job. Now you have some people who used to earn some money now earning nothing-- poverty. (When a firm is deciding who to lay off, they pick the least skilled/ experienced worker because they atleast want to keep the best ones. This means the poorer get poorer.)

A real world example of this would have been Puerto Rico, who suffered huge unemployment rates because of minimum wage laws.

You can find anecdotal evidence of how minimum wage laws help some people, but looking at the big picture you'll realize its usually at the cost of a lot of others.

[–]cibyr 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The trouble with this argument is that the people earning below the minimum wage are in poverty anyway.

Now you have some people who used to earn some money now earning nothing-- poverty.

All the people in that job were in poverty before the minimum wage. Now some of them aren't. Well, if the minimum wage is set at the poverty line (why have a minimum wage if you are going to set it below the poverty line anyway).

[–]butth0lez 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The higher the minimum wage, the higher the unemployment rate. You either have equilibrium, or some people earning a lot with most out of work.

Look at the extreme case: "Hey we want to make everyone rich. What do we do? SET MINIMUM WAGE AT 1 MILLION/YEAR!" Imagine the consequences...

Or just look at how minimum wage laws effected Puerto Rico...

[–]cibyr 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Why does it have to be "most out of work"? Why can't it be a some people out of work, but everyone else earning at least enough to keep them out of poverty?

I'm not arguing for the extreme case - the goal is to minimise the number of people in poverty, not to make everybody rich. Setting the minimum wage too high can obviously have a detrimental affect on the number of people living in poverty, but your argument doesn't support the idea that anything above zero is too high.

[–]butth0lez 1 point2 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

http://imgur.com/2SPtg First graph is for comparison of the next 2 graphs. As you see, about 1/3 benefit as 2/3 suffer.

http://imgur.com/2SPtg&gETGEl&rmH9m Here is where the demand is inelastic. No change in quantity demanded if you put a price floor (no one gets fired yay!), but it does effect unemployment. Also my little note is wrong. Doesnt mean necessarily only one person could do the job. What it does mean though is no matter what the price, you NEED exactly that amount of people. Think... accountants... (i guess...)

http://imgur.com/rmH9m Here is where the demand is elastic. This represent low skilled jobs. As you see even FEWER people benefit while MORE people suffer.

EDIT: Changed whole post. I initially posted it from my iphone

[–]Enphuego 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

How many employees a company hires is a pretty straightforward cost/benefit analysis. By raising the cost of hiring someone, you are quite literally putting people out of a job. Without a minimum wage you'd have close to full employment and shortages in the labor market would drive the price of labor. While there would be some people making $3 an hour, no doubt, at least those people would be productively employed while they searched for another job instead of filling out applications for companies that aren't hiring. The vast majority of people are making over minimum wage anyways so removing the minimum wage isn't going to really affect them.

Mandating a person's wage to be $5 an hour instead of $3 makes the person worth $3 an hour unemployed, it doesn't earn him $5 per hour. You can't really legislate the fair market value of labor, you'll just end up with inefficiencies - unemployment and businesses that won't expand.

[–]Probably_immortal 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Child labor laws are ruining this country.

[–]butth0lez 1 point2 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Where these laws are insignificant, they're insignificant only due to increases of the standard of living thanks to increases of productivity. Where they're significant, they're only significant in the negative sense.

I come from Bolivia where theyre are child labor laws but theyre poorly enforced AND THANK GOD FOR THAT. Without this extra income, starving families would become dead families. I'm here in the United States only becuase they're was an absence of these laws (as my parents grew up)-- how else do you think my parents got started? How else do you think they got the money to bring me here to the US?

Although yes its horrible, it sometimes necessary. Thinking your doing good when you're actually not is just moral imagination.

P.S. You can even go into a wider variety of topics. Is a "child" able to consent? Do you give a child full rights? Throw parent rights out the window? etc...

EDIT: I know its not directly related, but imagine "Elderly Labor Laws"-- old people cant work because they're weaker and its for their safety. Their siblings or gaurdians should be in charge of taking care of them. Excluding social security and other forms of aid, where do you think this will take us? Imagine developing countries that already don't have these forms of programs, where do you think these types of laws will take them?

[–]m0llusk 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Maybe that is the problem. People are getting tired of hearing the same conservative lines all the time, especially when they are badly thought out, flatly wrong, and damaging everything from the economy to society and the environment as a whole.

[–]JonZ1618 14 points15 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Especially in the more specific subreddits. Anything other than naive realism in /r/atheism will get you downvoted to oblivion.

[–]AestheticDeficiency 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Just out of curiosity, because i see this statement a lot about r/atheism, what would you like them to be more open minded about? What did you post in r/atheism that got you downvoted to oblivion?

[–]JonZ1618 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

For defending open-mindedness. I kid you not - there was a post making fun of wacky postmodern philosophy, which I decided to defend. It was along the lines of there being socially constructed reality (I explained the concept as best I could here.) When I said that /r/atheism always preaches about the virtues of having an open mind, except when they end up disagreeing with the atheism hivemind, everyone jumped in saying that this person OBVIOUSLY had too open of a mind and just accepted this idea without critically examining it. The rationale for that? Because it didn't make sense to the people in that subreddit, since it was obvious what reality was and how to evaluate it/understand it. But, my saying that maybe there was more to the argument than they understood at first glance, and perhaps they DIDN'T know exactly what this person's thought process was, got me downvoted deep into the negatives with each post.

Edit: What I would like to see them more open-minded about is the opposition. They're fantastic at being skeptics and having rational debate about religion, but the second you move into any issue besides modern day religion and its issues, they turn into a bunch of fucking idiots.

[–]MeloJelo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What exactly were the aspects/ideas of "wacky postmodern philosophy" were they making fun of, if you recall?

[–]JonZ1618 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

http://imgur.com/MZMU1

Here's the link to the comic - you can see for yourself.

[–]Kontradaz 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, I would make fun of that as well. Creating a strawman using some psedo-philosophy is BS and should be labeled as such. I'm sorry if people don't want to waste their time paying attention to every person who comes into a scientific discussion expousing the supposed merits of a philosophy that supposedly usurps the empirical scientific process and replaces it with some crap "we don't really know the true spiritual nature" explanation.

i don't even know what you could actually defend in that comic to be honest.

[–]JonZ1618 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

i don't even know what you could actually defend in that comic to be honest.

Well I picked out one specific section, because the OP did just throw a bunch of random crap together, the part on socially constructed reality (which I explain in the link a couple posts up). But I was not defending the idea as being true, just that people cannot say with certainty that someone who comes to that conclusion did so without any critical examination.

If you don't like it or don't believe the ideas, that's fine, but what pissed me off was the reaction in /r/atheism that NOBODY could come to that conclusion without just blindly accepting that idea, and that a second of thinking about it would show it to be ridiculous. THAT kind of arrogance is what I was talking about in my original post here.

[–]Kontradaz 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh that's what you were defending. I totally agree. But it kinda does fly with the whole belief that liberal arts=mindless and that philosophy=mindless "arse gazing", which has stopped surprising me on the internet.

Plenty of writers across the ages have created works backed by serious logic, reasoning, and available data to create excellent arguments w/ large philosophical merit that deal with topics such as "socially constructed reality". To brush those off as "ridiculous/mindless" is ignorance.

[–]tins1 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So while agree with your point here, in the thread you linked I think you were defending a different point than the one being portrayed in the comic, and that's why you got downvoted.

[–]JonZ1618 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There were about 50 points of view being portrayed in that comic - everyone seemed to jump on the solipsism bandwagon though (don't know why - it's not solipsism). I just picked out one clear point of view that was mentioned (constructed reality) and defended that. They were not downvoting me because of the question of the viewpoint (you can check the other posts I made in that thread if you like, and you'll see that even when I don't mention the content of the comic and just the general point I was trying to make, it too gets downvoted). It was because they disagreed with the content of my posts.

[–]Unknown_Default 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I agree. If someone is to disagree, at least be respectful, and ask questions about their viewpoint, more so you can understand their stance, rather than just blatantly harass them for contradicting your ideas.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

As it should! Being open minded means be able to consider ideas based on merit, regardless of your predisposition or your personal feelings and wishes. It does not mean that ideas with little or no evidence deserve consideration. If someone starts talking about a magic sky fairy, or their spirit power or whatever, I will shut them down and rightfully so. This is the correct action of an open minded person. To consider ideas based on merit and to accept and reject accordingly. It doesn't matter how popular or likeable the idea of a magic sky fairy is, an open minded person will rightfully dismiss it because of a complete lack of evidence. Present evidence the intelligent, intellectual strong folks at /r/atheism will be happy to see it.

[–]MBSquared 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You are exactly who were talking about.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That is incorrect.

[–]sh3rog 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

haha you are so one of the people on /r/atheism that downvotes people to oblivion

[–]JonZ1618 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

As it should!

facepalm.jpg

Do you even know what naive realism is? No, it's not a belief in God, as the rest of your post seems to indicate.

Present evidence the intelligent, intellectual strong folks at /r/atheism will be happy to see it.

Lollerskates, see my other post on here about just how open and intellectual they really are.

[–]MeloJelo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I agree with you, mostly, Biotethical. There's nothing wrong with considering and ultimately rejecting an idea with no evidendence.

Rejecting someone's idea or belief can easily come off as mean, though, so a lot of people get offended--sometimes understandably so. If rejection consists a downvote or of saying, "no, that's dumb, you're wrong," (as I think it sometimes does on /r/atheism) people are more likely to view you as a self-righteous, narrow-minded ass.

If, on the other hand, you say, "your idea is interesting/imaginative/inspiring (assuming it is any of those lovely things), but it's probably not true as there is no evidence supporting it and no way to test it empirically," I think you're being both reasonable and polite.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If, on the other hand, you say, "your idea is interesting/imaginative/inspiring (assuming it is any of those lovely things), but it's probably not true as there is no evidence supporting it and no way to test it empirically,"

I won't sugar coat my response to other people's ridiculous, unverifiable, and flat out stupid beliefs. And fuck cultures where it is considered wrong to tell people when they are wrong. No one is entitled to an existence where they can parade around lies and wishful thinking as truth. And then, to go that extra step and call those who don't close minded and insensitive! No fucking way.

[–]JamesObscura 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Fuck you. You're wrong and stupid.

[–]Unknown_Default 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Argumentative fallacy known as "argument from ignorance"

[–]Timmmah 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I made a comment about how novelty accounts were becoming annoying and detracting from actual discussions taking place. Mass down voting ensued. ಠ_ಠ

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Each post gathers the people who agree or disagree about the topic, all the redditors who don't give a fuck are off giving a fuck about some thing else.

[–]freebullets 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Unsubscribe from /r/politics. Problem solved!

[–]kurin 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Sometimes people are just wrong.

[–]junkit33 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The sad thing is it wasn't always like this. Nowadays god forbid you put out a well reasoned argument that deviates even slightly from the group think.

[–]feellikeanut 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Don't worry, soon it will be nothing but lolcats.

[–]MarlonBain 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What the hell is unique about reddit about that? Most groups are that way.

[–]MeloJelo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, I was waiting for someone to point out that most of humanity is like that. It's one of many psychological tendencies we share as a species. Sad that you're seemingly one of the first to bring it up.

[–]gid13 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm not sure you're using the term open-minded correctly. Open-mindedness, as I understand it, implies a willingness to consider what the evidence says. You could be open-minded and still have extremely strong opinions. For example, if someone claims that the odds of flipping a coin and getting tails are 1 in 3 and declines to provide evidence, an open-minded evaluation of the situation leads one to conclude that the claim is wrong. There's nothing necessarily close-minded about either a) having considered other views before and having handy arguments, or b) tearing you a new asshole for believing something that they think is wrong or stupid.

[–]JamesObscura 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Open-mindedness is the willingness to hear and accept new evidence or ideas. This includes acknowledging ideas that don't mirror your own, even if there's less evidence supporting said idea or if it doesn't mesh well with your worldview. The problem with running around declaring people's ideas are wrong even if the evidence supports your view is that evidence changes. Part of discovery and the pursuit of knowledge is holding possibly false views. It's called a hypothesis. If you refuse to even acknowledge the possibility of an idea that seems unlikely, then you're not only currently dumb, but you'll stay dumb.

It's the difference between saying "There is no god." and saying "Based on the evidence present at this time I come to the conclusion that it is very unlikely for there to exist an omnipotent being, but if evidence changes I am willing to reconsider this position".

[–]gid13 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

While I mostly agree with you, I would point out that people don't generally say "Based on the evidence present at this time I come to the conclusion that it is very likely that the sky is blue, but if evidence changes I am willing to reconsider this position" even though that would be an accurate reflection of how I feel about it.

It's also worth considering that an open-minded person should not change their opinion in the absence of new evidence. So for example, being unwilling to accept an argument I've heard before, considered, and rejected would not make me close-minded.

Finally, although I am always willing to acknowledge my own fallibility and consider the possibility that I'm wrong about something, a lot of people that complain that I'm not open-minded enough don't just want me to admit that... They want me to say things like "I could be wrong, therefore homeopathy/numerology/Christianity is just as valid as science." And without providing massive amounts of evidence for such things (which would ironically MAKE them science), I would say that anyone who thinks that isn't open-minded at all.

[–]JamesObscura 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You're missing the point entirely. The point of being open-minded is to not reject ideas. You're just going to straw man me again if I continue this conversation so I'm not really interested in trying again, but I really hope you become more open-minded in the future. It's the way of logic and science.

[–]gid13 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Straw man you? I mostly agreed with you. I'm aware that you weren't arguing that homeopathy/numerology/Christianity were as valid as science etc., I was just clarifying.

Having said that, if your idea of being open-minded is not rejecting ideas, then it's not the way of logic and science. The way of science is letting the evidence decide which ideas to reject. And I would call that my idea of open-mindedness.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You're a redditor? You're in lockstep and part of "these people."

edit- downvoted? Nice. Fucking hive mind always marching in lockstep.

[–]junkit33 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Not necessarily. The significant majority is like this, but not 100% of the userbase.

[–]elcoremino 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh, I see: "Everybody on here is the same... except me!"

[–]junkit33 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No, the majority is like that, but not everybody. Very different statement.

This really isn't difficult to understand. In fact, a simple question is usually all you need to determine if you are "one of the problem"...

When you read a well stated opinion that you disagree with, do you upvote it or downvote it? If you downvote, you're part of the problem.

Thus you need look no further than just about any thread with a topic near and dear to the hearts of the hivemind - a dissenting opinion is usually lucky to break even, and often ends up in the negatives.

[–]Darkjediben -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Downvoting this statement makes me happy.

[–]MeloJelo -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

More or less.

[–]SweetNeo85 -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

We don't automatically condemn radically different viewpoints, we just automatically condemn radically different viewpoints that are provably incongruous with reality.

No shit /r/atheism condemns the religious! It's because they're wrong. Provably so.

If I tried to say that the Earth was flat, would I have the right to complain when people condemn my radically different viewpoing?

Differening, plausible opinions are fine. Stupid opinions are stupid.

[–]jetRink 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I present Exhibit A.

[–]tangalicious -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

People don't like change. To say that a person wants to protect the integrity of their own community. That's just human nature. Everyone does it.

[–]MBSquared 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Everything is constantly changing. To say people don't like change is to say they resist reality. I don't think that's the case.

It boils down to thinking for yourself. Everyone loves memes because it's a thought or a phrase that everyone enjoys and therefore they know if they use it, everyone will enjoy them for it. It's not thinking for yourself, it's using other peoples funny ideas in order to fit in. This causes a tightly knitted group that will only get smaller and smaller until it eventually dies.

[–]tangalicious 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No flame, but that made absolutely no sense. Dunno if trolling or just really dumb. Sry, could you rephrase that?

Wide sweeping generalization 1st sentence. *People resist "reality" all the time, e.g. anti-immigration laws in Arizona, procrastinating on reddit ***Circular logic in 2nd sentence of 2nd paragraph.

[–]MBSquared 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Sure, I'll give it a shot.

Everything is constantly changing. This refers to the world. Yes, general but also universal, which was my point. The world in which we live in is always changing, every day things are slightly different. That's part of the reality of existence, right? The trees are turning over new leafs, new grass grows, we get older, we learn something new every day, our cars become closer to breaking down every day. My point was simply that everything is changing and to resist that change is resisting reality. I'm aware that people do resist reality, but to me that isn't a good approach to living life.

The next part doesn't really fit with the conversation. Either I was high when I wrote that, or I replied to the wrong comment. Just disregard it if you can't make sense of it.

[–]deefree -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I always say.. there's nothing different than a fundamentalist liberal and conservative. Both are "religious" and moronic.

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–]Darkjediben 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Your wish is my command!

[–]netbich 13 points14 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

“I reject your reality and substitute it for my own.” - Adam Savage

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It is easy to fall into that mindset. I try to live by the motto "check yourself before you wreck yourself."

[–]Snow88 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I generally chiggity check myself just to be sure.

[–]TheKidney[S] 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I dig this.

[–]Happyhotel 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That is actually the natural mentality of the vast majority of people. Have you ever tried to change someone's opinion? Especially on something important/significant to them?

[–]JonBanes 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

yeah, how many people actively think that they, themselves, are wrong? How does that work? Wouldn't they change their mind if they thought they were wrong?

[–]NotSoSober 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It depends how they approach that change, though. Many people will not change their mind, regardless of the evidence. I'm personally very stubborn and difficult to convince, but only on issues I've thought a great deal about. Some people are really flighty and get swept along in others' wake.

Provided you're willing to re evaluate your beliefs in light of (new) evidence, there's nothing untoward about saying "you're wrong and I am right".

Mere belief isn't the issue here, it's the verification and justification thereof.

[–]gautamadude -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Which is the wrong mentality, mine is right! ;)

I see nothing wrong in thinking ones views are "right", if you actually go with what the totality of your experience points to so far and that you don't deal in absolutes, "God exists, maybe", that you suspect the reality of things, else there will never be a point in arguing with you, you should just be the king of the universe and tell everybody how it is.

"Right" as in I don't have complete access to any map of the universe except my own, and it's what I suspect is right.

[–]Happyhotel 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I wasn't trying to say that it was "wrong" or "right," I was just trying to say that this phenomenon is hardly limited to reddit. Also, just by the way, all of the people who have this mentality believe that they don't. Maybe think about that before saying that your mentality is the "right" one.

[–]Hydris 2 points3 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I welcome opposing view and logical arguments. Helps better educate me. Why would I want everyone to agree with me? Just makes everything dull and no progress is made. It's the arguments that go "Your wrong cause I say so even though I have no info. Or any reason behind my argument other than I'm right" that I don't care for. Sadly I can't speak for everyone when it comes to this. Some people won't admit they are wrong even if it saved them 10 years of thier life.

[–]TheKidney[S] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Exactly the comment I wanted to see

[–]jayfehr 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I agree with you, everyone else is wrong. Lets create our own subreddit.

[–]Alphabet_Master 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Reddit and the rest of the internet. Try posting any statement seriously and the Schrutes will come out of the woodwork questioning or rebuffing it.

Some places are worse than others. Reddit is like filet mignon compared to the gristly comments sections on AOL articles or Youtube.

Did you see my meat analogy

[–]waffleninja 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Sometimes true. I have had people insist they are right on reddit when they have no idea about the subject. Also, some of the subreddits of the views I strongly support actually annoy me because they don't think critically sometimes and just circlejerk.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You should read this exchange, for which I know I am 100% correct (maybe I'm displaying the mentality you're talking about). And then the other redditor accuses me of ignoring the facts.

(my comments are part of the thread below the comment i link to)

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/hugpi/til_the_third_richest_man_in_china_lives_on_20/c1yiy99

[–]TheKidney[S] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I had this exact exchange in person with someone who was convinced that 'smoking' electronic cigarettes was just as bad or worse than real cigarettes.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You are correct, sir.

[–]IplaywithmypNES 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is the mentality of most of the people I've met OL and IRL (including myself).

[–]Kieroshark 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Personally, I'm of the mind this is far less prevalent on Reddit than most places on the internet.

Human nature is human nature, and the internet begets righteousness.

[–]faggatron 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I agree. Most people are convinced that their beliefs are the only ones that could possibly be correct, it's not a reddit thing.

Actually, quite often I'm surprised by the positive reactions whenever there's an AMA by a conservative, or Christian, or something like that. Lots of civil discourse and honest questions, with only a few (significantly downvoted) asshole comments.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Here comes the whining/circlejerk...

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No, the circlejerk is outside this thread. It's reddit.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is reddit?

[–]Darkjediben 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That was quick!

[–]jmurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrz 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That is wrong

[–]Nutchos 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

When it comes to religion.... Yea I'll give you that.

[–]TheKidney[S] 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That and hipsters, music, politics, gaming, the 'wrong' type of posts on a user-based submission site... I could go on.

[–]Atreides_Zero 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

  • Let's talk about it

[–]TheBawlrus 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

When ever i see him now all I can think of is Ellen Paige with half her face blown off.

[–]gusbustafunk 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"You're way of thinking is wrong. I have let a bunch of anonymous internet users tell me what is right and I agree with them for some reason."

[–]StickFromAssRemover 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I feel I will be needed in here.

[–]Jagestah 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Speaking of closed-mindedness; I hereby decree that "Reddit" shall forever be henceforth known hitherto as "The Reddit". And none shall sway me!

[–]transphorm 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Try hanging out in /r/programming...nothing but primadonnas...well at least the ones that comment.

[–]martja10 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You're probably just wrong a lot.

[–]oreopimp 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That's the mentality of all humanity. It's just been passed down and carried over to reddit.

[–]ThumpNuts 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

False.

Your way of thinking is wrong and my way of thinking is correct.

[–]sxcamaro 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Reddit like all other online websites is run by hiveminded people that have nothing better to do than [insert random grumbling about downvotes, not being open minded]. The a time came when I [insert another short story]. I mean it was total bull crap that they [insert restatement of previous two message]! Seriously folks! [insert rage face comic] this has got to change!

[–]someNOOB 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I tend to stop thinking (believing) things which I don't think are right (or at least try to).

This leads me to hold beliefs which I think are right.

Many of these beliefs are mutually exclusive with the beliefs are others.

This leads me to think that others who disagree are wrong.

I change my mind after step 1, (usually brought about by getting information from others). I don't think i'm really that special in having these characteristics, and seems to be what the pic portrays.

[–]thejavolina 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You've got it all wrong buddy, I am the one who is right.

[–]APennyForMe 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Look at individualistic vs. collectivism. Then see how many redditors are from each societies.

[–]cicadawing 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

He is a Baha'i. So, no, he's thinking wouldn't be better than mine.

[–]SigmoidFreund 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

and the way to tell who is right is... ding ding ding - logic

[–]Somnivore 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Fact. Bears eat beets. Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.

[–]woddermanerx 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I second that!

[–]CasedOutside 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If I disagree with you, I prove you right. If I agree with you, I prove you wrong. Does that make sense to you?

[–]Jabem 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

yes, it's a fun exercise in debate.

[–]prsnep 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I would like to know in which community, the mentality is not this.

[–]Bskrilla 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

To be fair if you don't think this then why the hell do you believe what you believe? Obviously a person should be open to testing their views and investigating new ones, but you hold your beliefs because you think they are right. If you didn't you wouldn't hold said beliefs.

[–]Japeth 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

False.

[–]DoesNotTalkMuch -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The fact that you describe this as "reddit" mentality tells me that your worldview is severely limited. I would not say that your way of thinking is incorrect, but the scope to which you have applied it is in severe need of expansion.

TLDR; sod off

[–]TheKidney[S] 1 point2 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Worldview??? I apply it to what I've seen on this particular website as of late.

[–]jtbob -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is dumb, you're dumb for liking it.

[–]Shiftgood -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You people are making shit up and then arguing about it. Nice job. PS. the Office (US) sucks.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No, Redditors are open and accepting of any viewpoint NOW GET THE FUCK OUT!

[–]sxcamaro -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

http://imgur.com/y2ivk

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

π Rendered by PID 6374 on app-16 running 1316af9.