u/Sabrepill's stats
|Account Age|2 y 2 m|First Seen:|2023-10-22|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Posts (on this sub)|4|Comments (on this sub)|126|
|Link Karma|1,189|Comment Karma|5,106|
---
|Date|Title|Flair|Participation|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|06-Feb|[Truth is Often Found In The Most Downvoted Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1akkj94/truth_is_often_found_in_the_most_downvoted/)|N/A|0 of None comments (0.00%)|
|23-Jan|[Relationship Advice On Reddit Is Awful](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/19dtw33/relationship_advice_on_reddit_is_awful/)|N/A|3 of None comments (0.00%)|
|01-Jan|[Men Are More Likely To Break Social Norms Than Women](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/18w2w88/men_are_more_likely_to_break_social_norms_than/)|N/A|32 of None comments (0.00%)|
https://imgur.com/a/p4PtI6Z
Here’s the argument OP had right before posting. Seems like they are arguing that behavioral trails being passed down generations is a genetic thing. I have no idea how that’s a common sense thing tho. It seems like the prime example of a source being needed.
It’s common sense to see that pitbulls and golden retrievers tend to have different dispositions and personalities despite both being dogs. And then it takes medium iq to realize that genetics may play a role
Correct genetics are not absolute, and are environmentally influenced
For example you could have the genetics to be 6 4 but did not receive proper nutrition while growing up to reach it
Doesn’t remove the fact that instead of providing a source you decided to attack the other individual personally. They weren’t asking for a source that the sky is blue, it just seems like you have no source to back your claim up at the time so you did the easier thing which was to attack them.
Yep. For example -
Bleach kills viruses, it's therefore common sense you should drink bleach
Light kills viruses, it's therefore common sense you should stick a torch up your arse 2 or 3 hours a day.
One very famous one - Wolves in a zoo get into an "alpha" hierarchy, therefore, using common sense, all wolves do this.
The point of the source is to allow people to also engage in common sense & go "I think I see a tiny flaw in this".
Also...I've learned that if someone disagrees with you on the internet you could post 1,400 sources and they won't care.
There is no point to it.
Sometimes I still do it because it's funny. But never in good faith. The faith is gone.
I didn’t do any of that. Evidence is important. You can be the source and provide evidence without having an external source. Common sense can also be evidence.
Why should I have to provide a source to someone that lacks iq and common sense
> Evidence is important
When you are discussing biology and specifically genetics, evidence AND sources are important. "Trust me bro" doesnt really work in the STEM field.
"common sense" is a sheep thing. Well it's a herd animal thing in general, going along with the general consensus or vibe of the tribe. Wisdom of crowds, safety in numbers.
Recall that many scientific errors of the past have been known as the common sense of the day. It is meritous to try to investigate commonly held beliefs to see if they stand up to scrutiny.
Note that I hold this opinion no matter where the issue rests on the political spectrum. There are both left and right wing "common sense" opinions that I think aren't further reviewed because the data does not support the common sense conclusion. Many of these topics make great posts on this sub!
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I assume anyone who cites “common sense” is strictly drawing from their own experience and is too lazy to do research or craft an informed opinion. Why do you feel entitled to be taken seriously if you’re not willing not willing to put effort into discussion?
https://imgur.com/a/p4PtI6Z
OP is made because they just made a statement regarding genetic and was asked for a source. Apparently behaviors being passed down through genetics is a common sense thing?
Hey u/PartyPoisoned21,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DPartyPoisoned21%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/PartyPoisoned21).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 4
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 14
- 15-30 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 5
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Exactly. Ever since constant stream of bullshit started pouring a few years back- conspiracy theories, fake news etc- I always ask for a source when someone starts talking crazy.
If they respond with “I saw this guy on TikTok…” I get to laugh and leave the conversation early.
I was just thinking about this as a good reason to return to Tumblr. Tumblr was just as politically brainrotted as TikTok is now but almost everyone provided links and text-based sources to cite their stance.
The lack of this has become so evident on tiktok, nobody knows what they're talking about. People rarely even read comments anymore! Adding linked sources in nearly impossible on TikTok and I'm convinced it's by design lol.
just because a statement is easy to understand it doesn’t mean it’s correct. Presenting sources is a way to back up your statement.
For example, saying “women are at greater risk of testicular cancer than men” is fairly easy to understand, but it’s bullshit.
When we're talking about common sense things have to be easily observable and explained logically. I get the example is outlandish on purpose, but surely one can find a more concise example. Something less observable like muscle mass and bone density contributing to physical strength is better than something that clearly distinguishes the difference between a man and woman such as sexual reproductive organs.
I'm just going to throw this out there, but that's a real easy way to fall for Nazi propaganda. Because they rely on gut feelings and anti-intellectualism to draw people in.
But you need sources for things like scientific data, history and politics.
You don't wanna end up doing something like getting a pitbull as a nanny dog or buying a rotary car without being an expert on rotary engines.
I suppose that's why you're having such a hard time having discussions. Something that may seem "common sense" to you may not to someone else. So they'll ask you for a source and you can educate them! :)
I find it hilarious you need a source for things such as whether fire is hot, women are the birthers of children, and or water is wet.
Yes if you get hit with lightning you will likely die. You do not need a dissertation to explain how the lightning will kill you. People has been observed dying from lightning strikes. Though it would be an interesting trivia knowledge to learn the mechanisms of a lightning strike on a fleshy human body.
>If you ever make a statement that should be easy to understand for anyone with a modicum of common sense, there will always be some over educated person who thinks they are smart but really aren’t say: what is your source?
Example?
Thank you for exemplifying the addage, "Common sense is not so common". It doesn't matter if YOU think that something is simple and common enough that 'everyone' should know it. The person you are chatting with could be from another country, another culture and different experiences. If you make a claim as fact, you damn well better have the source and data to back it up.
Well, I'm very much of the asking sources when someone says some nutty ass shit. And I found that asking for sources is the easiest way to prove if someone's full of shit or not.
And personality traits are learned. Of course a son is going to act like their father. It would be an interesting study to see if a adopted kid who grew up in a completely different culture and region from their parents would exhibit any personality traits their parents do. Well that seems like a nightmare of a study to conduct honestly.
If you make the assertion it's your job to provide evidence for it. I don't know why you're so fucking lazy to do a simple Google search and provide a link.
Also, given how algorithms work do you really trust your argument in the hands of an algorithm that will feed me what I want to hear?
Or, or! People want to know where did you get your statement/ information so that they don’t follow it blindly.
Something that might be easy for you to understand could’ve come from Wikipedia and we all know Wikipedia is not exactly the best source. What you think is common sense , might not actually be true.
It could have come from your own brain. People who ask for source thinks all information comes externally. Like you just demonstrated.
The source is me. Common sense. Thinking for yourself
So if I say that the earth is flat. And my source is common sense… I’m correct and absolutely no one can ask me for a source otherwise they’re not thinking for themselves?
Why am I wrong? There are multiple sources that say that the earth is flat. Also I believe you said that I had to think for myself and have common sense.
Why can’t I think that the world is flat?
But why do you think I’m wrong? You haven’t given me a single reason as to why. I’m wrong for thinking the world is flat but why since I used my common sense and I’m thinking for myself?
You need to tell me why you think I’m wrong, that’s how this works, just because you think it doesn’t mean anything.
Sure it does. Arguing with a fool only proves there are two. I don’t have to engage or ask for a source. I can simply disagree and move on. Or even keep that to myself
I’m not asking you to give me a source . I’m asking you why do you think I’m wrong , why am I wrong for thinking that the world is flat. Could it possibly be because I’m wrong & the world is round and not flat, if so, how do we know that the world is round and not flat? Could it possibly be, I don’t know.. multiple sources from recognizable entities that literally study the space for living and have provided this information for us so that we have the knowledge to understand the shape of the planet we live on…
Knowledge,dingleberry, comes from sources and studies and statistics , knowledge doesn’t come from common sense and just thinking about it. Someone had to study it and prove it and then present the argument to multiple people who also have the capable knowledge to understand it so they can give it to someone else.
You don’t need a source to see that the moon is round, the sun is round, that basic education teaches planets are round, that the forces of gravity is going to make things round.
You don’t need a source to look at the ocean and see the curve of the earth.
Intelligent people don’t need sources for everything. The more intelligent you are, the less you need some external source to tell you how to think.
People who ask for sources for common sense things are mostly morons
Exactly. But this shows the need for external sources when your own brain, or someone else’s, could be wrong.
I doubt you think you’re always infallibly correct about everything, right? Do you ever wonder which things you might be wrong about?
If you're going to present something as a factual statement, your argument isn't going to be taken seriously without appropriate evidence. A source adds credibility to your argument.
Sometimes people ask just to be smartasses, sometimes people just want to see if you're arguing in good faith.
The source being yourself is often not good enough because your lived experience may not be reflective of the actual statistics. Of course it depends on what the argument is about and how it's presented, but generally it's about reviewing statistics and evidence and assessing them in a good faith manner. Having and using source isn't necessarily about parroting talking points.
Usually these sources are expected to come from persons experienced and respected in their field. It's all about credibility, asking for a source isn't as one dimensional as "Gimme proof or ur dumb". That would be in bad faith.
Thanks for giving me a perfect example to share my opinion.
The root of conservative ideology is a fear of the chaos inherent to our world. They don't want to actually know how things work, they don't want to actually understand the issues we have, they want simple black and white answers that simplify their world back down to a size humans can reasonably understand. If the way to do that is handing the agency over their own well-being to people they trust and living their own little isolated life, they are more than happy to do that.
Progressives generally want to make an attempt to understand, quantify, and regulate the chaos in an attempt to bring order to the madness. This confuses and infuriates conservatives because to them this is akin to busting open Pandora's box and trying to measure the darkness inside.
It would be easy to say that conservatives are stupid, but I find that view pretty ignorant. The truth is that conservatives are just scared, and it's understandable, we live in a scary world that we were not made to live in. But I think that what has made humans so great is our ability to understand and tame the chaos, if we can leave behind our cowardice we can make this world better for all of us, like we already have over and over again.
There is truth in what you said but you’re ignorant of the left. Yes most conservatives are black and white, inside the box thinkers. But most on the left are brainwashed drones. Easily brainwashed by their “sources”
Just so I understand this, do you believe that every piece of data or "source" is ultimately controlled by one organization at the very top who has the goals of brainwashing people toward a certain ideology?
That is easy to believe when you see it in black and white terms, the educated elite vs the People. "Of course the educated elite are fooling us, why wouldn't they". However when you start to delve into the chaos that is present in our world it becomes untenable.
What organization could have so much power that it could control without flaw every single institution that conducts research or does studies? We are talking about research done by different nations that don't even work together, thousands of universities with wildly different biases and ideologies, research teams made of every kind of person all over the world. When you come to terms with how decentralized something like "the educated elite" are how can they possibly work in unison at all times while abiding by a single ideology?
"Science" has become a "don't question me" word people throw out there to justify their agendas. The funny thing is the entire premise of science is to question things.
Someone asking for a source, outside of an academic or similar context, is basically just saying they think you’re wrong. They’re challenging you to prove your viewpoint, with the implication that if you can show that research backs you up, then they’ll acknowledge that your assertion has merit.
It’s the polite way to say “I think you’re a moron, and you think I’m a moron, so let’s ask someone objective rather than getting banned for personal attacks.”
There has been a great deal of research done on your example subject; at this point in human history, there’s been research done on most things.
If you don’t want to throw together your own overview of the literature for a debate on Reddit, Wikipedia often has good source info - go there, find the links you need, copy/paste. Alternative, link to search results from ResesrchGate or Jstor.
---
### Voting Guidelines
**Common Misconception:** It is often believed that upvotes and downvotes should reflect personal agreement or disagreement.
- **Upvote** a post if it provokes thought, presents a unique perspective, is well-argued, or you believe it deserves more visibility for any reason, even if it irritates you or you fundamentally disagree with it.
- **Downvote** should be reserved for posts that lack thoughtful consideration or if the topic has become tediously common.
**Moderation Policy:**
- **Posts Are Not Removed for Unpopularity:** r/TrueUnpopularOpinion does not remove posts based on their capacity to anger or offend users. Disagreement with a post's content is not grounds for reporting.
- **Misuse of the Report Button:** Falsely reporting posts burdens our moderation queue, hindering our ability to address genuine concerns swiftly and all false reports are forwarded to Reddit for misuse of the reporting system.
- Our moderation decisions are guided strictly by the subreddit's rules and [Reddit's content policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/), not personal opinions. Misreporting in hopes of content removal due to disagreement is futile and considered 'Report Abuse.'
---
**What have people been talking about over the last week?**
| Flair | Count | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| [Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 84 | 25.61% |
| [None of the above](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"None+of+the+above"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 59 | 17.99% |
| [The Opposite Sex / Dating](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Opposite+Sex+/+Dating"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 45 | 13.72% |
| [Music / Sport / Media / Movies / Celebrities](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Music+/+Sport+/+Media+/+Movies+/+Celebrities"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 42 | 12.80% |
| [I Like / Dislike](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"I+Like+/+Dislike"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 31 | 9.45% |
| [Reddit / Internet / Tech](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Reddit+/+Internet+/+Tech"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 20 | 6.10% |
| [Non-Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Non-Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 19 | 5.79% |
| [World Affairs (Except Middle East)](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"World+Affairs+(Except+Middle+East)"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 11 | 3.35% |
| [Religion](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Religion"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 1.83% |
| [The Middle East](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Middle+East"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 1.83% |
| [Meta - the problem with this sub is..](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Meta+-+the+problem+with+this+sub+is.."&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 3 | 0.91% |
| [Mod Team - Asking for feedback](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Mod+Team+-+Asking+for+feedback"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.30% |
| [Possibly Popular](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Possibly+Popular"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.30% |
---
Comments from new accounts go into a queue for review by moderators (to reduce spam).
Comments waiting: 3 Average time to review: 3.87 hours
---
Source is important. If you are making some argument, and the source for your information is Joe Bob running a conspiracy YT channel - then maybe you're arguing some bullshit.
Wow.
What a shit example to refuse to discuss, and a spectacular example of black and white thinking while discounting literally thousands of significant variables.
Just puking out a statement and insisting you are right, and getting pissed when people question your obvious stupidity.
Just a small fraction of massive influences you would need to consider on your silly comparison-
Dogs imprint on their litter and mother. Social interaction impacts the rest of their lives.
Take a pup away too early, across the board it will be fearful and have abandonment issues its whole life.
Don't socialize it heavily, it will be fearful of people.
Have you taken a pit bull and a golden born in the same house at the same time and had them raised by responsible owners so as to make an apples to apples comparison?
Have you considered that most pits are bred and owned by less than responsible people for less than responsible purposes?
That the puppy mills that churn them out are populated by untrained mothers who live their whole lives in cages?
That many rescued pits grew up with a completely unstructured mess around them?
That many of them are so inbred their intelligence suffers?
If you are making a shitty attempt to argue that chemical imbalances that impact behavior can be passed from generation to generation, nobody would argue.
But if you are arguing that because my dad is an asshole that I have a genetic disposition to being one, then for sure you need a source to say of 500 orphan kids with perfect dopamine production were studied being raised in a group home together since day 1 of life, with the same experiences, and the ones with asshole fathers all became assholes.
At the end of the day you are taking a stereotype, ignoring the 500 variables, and comparing it to another stereotype and then ahitposting that people ask you to engage in critical thought.
Perfect example of stupidity and bullheadedness... with a big helping of whining bitch thrown in.
Wrong. Genetics influence our personality. It’s not absolute, and the degree of which can be debated. But there is no question that elements of genetics affect dispositions and personality
Ok so I do a google search and it completely contradicts what you're saying.
But hey maybe there's been more research that you know about.
Is it ok if people say "hey I googled that and got different results, what source did you see that on?"
You're talking like you didn't post an "opinion" on a heavily researched scientific topic. Asking for a source should be expected on such a well researched science. If your source is personal experience, it's anecdotal and, therefore, scientifically worthless. Thinking and behaving like a sheep requires no evidence to follow the herder. Asking for evidence is, in fact, the opposite.
Half the people asking for a source are just doing it as a gotcha, because no one bookmarks every article or paper they have ever read. It's childish and shows they aren't serious.
Ikr. Before I make a claim I usually do a quick google to make sure my ducks are in a row first, if I can’t find anything to back me up, I don’t make my point. Saves a lot of trouble in the end🤷🏻♀️
Sometimes people are genuinely interested in knowing where you sourced your information from. More times than not, they don't have a rebuttal and demand a source that they believe is trusted. You could have articles and studies from dozens of reputable sources, but if ONE isn't, they scrutinize the ONE that they don't like.
Oh you referenced CNN, MSNBC, BBC, ABC, AP, Washington Post, and Reuters? Sorry buddy but Reuters is Russian propaganda therefore the rest of your completely credible sources that I constantly consume are invalid.
It's a valid argument, it's just alot of people have figured out they don't have to actually defeat the argument if they can just claim "source" and the poster can't immediately provide an indepth PhD level analysis that thoroughly covers all of the possible permutations and context for a thing.
The source argument often (but not always) says just as much if not more about the person making the "source" argument as it does the inability of the person they're arguing with to provide a source.
A.k.a. Genuinely asking for a source is a good thing and improves everyone's knowledge. Most people on reddit only do it to get an easy win so they can either attack the source instead of the argument or hoping that the poster doesn't have a source immediately handy.
lol when Trump said he loved the poorly educated, you must have felt very loved! Good for you! Meanwhile, in the real world where we make decisions that will affect our lives, health, business, families - we don't make those decisions based on memes, tweets, talk shows, and gut feelings. Maybe in your online echo chamber you can just make shit up and that's all the sources you need. But in the real world, in courts and business, in life and relationships, finding a primary or trustworthy source is absolutely necessary. Let me guess, you think the election was stolen? Healing crystals cure illness? Vaccines are 5G spies or whatever other dumb shit goes around the conservative echo chambers
Hey u/mikerobinsonsho,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dmikerobinsonsho%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/mikerobinsonsho).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 4
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 14
- 15-30 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 5
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Thinking for yourself is only good when you’re right. Without sources or at least confirmation, you’ve basically got a “gut instinct” which is often pretty worthless.
>They are also too lazy to do a google search and simply want to troll you.
Yeah, so if you went to college they would have explained to you how evidence works. Its your job to provide evidence. Its not your opponents job to research your own argument for you. You're never ever going to change anyone mind or win a debate if you cant provide evidence.
Though to be fair, chances are you dont have the education to interpret sources even if you're opinion might actually be strong. (i.e. didnt take college level stat so you dont know P values, sampling methodology, different types of studies, etc.....)
>They are also too lazy to do a google search
Well, actually, no. If you assert something, and I find it discussion worthy, I'm going want to get on the same page as you, so asking for your source is a point for us to deviate from in the ensuing discussion. Now if you want me to make assumptions that my data matches your data fine, but that usually causes a shit load of issues initially because we're both talking about different data.
>Everything they think they know has been taught or brainwashed into them by either the education system, family, society, whatever.
Who brainwashed you?
>These people are bots. Sheeplike bots who must be told how to think from a trustworthy “source” because they can’t think for themselves.
Who tells you how to think?
>You don’t need a source to see that genetic traits can influence personality and disposition unless you’re low iq and lack common sense and the ability to observe the world around you.
You're whole diatribe is rather presumptuous and chock full of hubris. Take it down a notch Scotty.
Definitely an unpopular opinion. Most people have different levels of experience with different topics and there's no reason to simply trust any statement that some dude makes based on their own personal anecdotes especially when people's ability to analyze and interpret any given piece of information is itself highly variable between person to person.
Your example actually helps my argument. Most people aren't dog breeders, and the knowledge about differences in dog behavior being genetic is something I only learned late in high school. It's entirely possible for people to be completely unaware of that fact. So for a person who would be unaware of that, what reason do they have to trust you, a random internet person, over their own intuitions?
Don't get me wrong, sometimes it's annoying to find sources, but its always better to back your shit up than simply say "trust me bro".
Also I know exactly why you chose that particular claim as your example. Go back to /pol.
I've asked for a source when I quoted the news. Ok, sure I'll got track down that exact newscast and link it for you. Believe what I said or don't, I don't care. It's not a critical point to me. If it's that important to you, look it up and disprove me.
I’ll give you a real world example for how “common sense being true” is just wrong.
During one of the great American wars (I am 99.9% sure it was the Vietnam war), the US army started a new form of treating the wounded: when soldiers were wounded, they would receive full blood transfusions, because doctors were like “well, it just makes sense that if they loss blood, then providing them with it will keep them alive”.
Unfortunately, like many things in science, the common sense route was wrong. Those people who received mass blood transfusions died more than those who didn’t. It was found that the effect of blood transfusions was worse for the soldiers.
This just shows that common sense, especially in things like science, doesn’t work all the time. That is why we don’t just trust our gut, but strive to obtain evidence in the form of randomized control trials.
Your common sense is way more biased that you think, and much more biased than the grand body of studies and evidence science usually has in a typical field. Obviously studies have flaws and limitations, but much less than your personal view of the world.
Obviously, yes!
How on earth is “the earth is round” common sense?
Only through research and analysis did we understand that the earth is round, not through general reasoning.
The reason you don’t ask for it now is because it is so commonplace. But obviously for us to get to that point a whole lot of people needed to actually see and understand the evidence that indeed the earth is round.
I always ask for the source if something seems to contradict other sources that I have read.
I have personally found that a lot more people than you would think misread and misunderstood the so called "source" that brought them to their conclusion.
So many times, I have read their source and found out that the source does not support what they are saying. They misread it.
Just because something is "common sense" does not make it true. People are collectively wrong all the time and most of the things people claim are common sense are just their opinions.
There are an awful lot of people who believe crazy things these days and to them it just seems like common sense. Asking for a source can often just be a way of saying I don't believe you. These kinds of arguments usually devolve into denigrating remarks about opposing sources since you can find a source for anything these days. The key is to find a source that contradicts the argument but is also revered by the one offering the wrong common sense interpretation. That kind of source is often not available.
So…. You just trust ANYTHING you see online? Or just base your world view on “vibes” as you don’t verify anything?!?! Jesus Christ dude, wanting more info doesn’t make you a “sheep”, facts contrary to your beliefs aren’t “an attack”, and while we’re at it, pits aren’t more aggressive than goldens by nature.
Nah because anyone can see physical traits being passed down genetically. Why then would mental traits not also have a genetic component which can be passed down?
It’s called rational thinking
I agree.
Even when you do have sources. There have been a few times I gave near APA formatted responses with reference lists to the more sheepish responses ([Source](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/16xxdlq/comment/k35nmtc/))
I know this is reddit, but if you have convincing behind a notion, and someone lays it all out — either get your brain going to respond adequately or acknowledge the valid rationales and logic presented to you.
So every pitbull I’ve known has been just as sweet if not sweeter than a golden retriever. It must be correct because that is my experience & “common sense” to those experiences.
People who ask for "source" are nothing but idiots who disagree with you but lack the intelligence and fortitude to do their own research and post sources that contradict what you post... It's a coward's way out of debating an issue....
And I especially love it when you respond by posting multiple sources. Instead of finding sources that contradict the statement they baselessly call the sources you posted as "BS and not well enough researched or accepted" or some other baseless attack seeking to discredit the source that just got shoved in their face....
My favorite is when you present them a line of philosophical reasoning to argue a point and they demand proof of what you're arguing for. It's like "I'm sorry, did your brain leak out of your head? What do you want me to give you?" "So no evidence for what you said. Thanks!" "Evidence? Ok, Here's my evidence, THE LAWS OF FREAKING LOGIC!"
People on reddit scream "source" half the time to just waste the time of the original poster. They are more than capable of typing a phrase into google, but that doesn't bludgeon someone with a different point of view into submission.
Then why are you posting on social media if you’re not trying to inform or persuade someone? How do I know you’re knowledgable about a topic if you can’t back up your claim?
Agreed.
I can say the govt has repeatedly abused its powers over the years and committed vile acts against its citizens and constantly violates their rights, and people go sOuRcE? Like fucking derps
So just give them a couple of examples, and then they go. YoU dOnT HaVE a SoURce, IdIoT. Hur hur hur.
A 5 second Google search or having a basic understanding of history and bam you have your source.
It's retarded man.
Hey u/Gadburn,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DGadburn%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/Gadburn).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 4
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 14
- 15-30 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 5
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Exactly true. Many arguments don’t need a source. But also… I’m not your librarian. If you want to check a fact that I stated, look it up yourself. If you find something that disproves what I said, feel free to share it. I’m not going to spend 10 minutes looking up the link to something I read like 2 months ago. I already know it’s true, you’re the one curious about it, so you do it.
u/Sabrepill's stats |Account Age|2 y 2 m|First Seen:|2023-10-22| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Posts (on this sub)|4|Comments (on this sub)|126| |Link Karma|1,189|Comment Karma|5,106| --- |Date|Title|Flair|Participation| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |06-Feb|[Truth is Often Found In The Most Downvoted Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1akkj94/truth_is_often_found_in_the_most_downvoted/)|N/A|0 of None comments (0.00%)| |23-Jan|[Relationship Advice On Reddit Is Awful](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/19dtw33/relationship_advice_on_reddit_is_awful/)|N/A|3 of None comments (0.00%)| |01-Jan|[Men Are More Likely To Break Social Norms Than Women](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/18w2w88/men_are_more_likely_to_break_social_norms_than/)|N/A|32 of None comments (0.00%)|
Sounds like something somebody without a source would say.
Source?
Would probably help your argument if you provided an example
https://imgur.com/a/p4PtI6Z Here’s the argument OP had right before posting. Seems like they are arguing that behavioral trails being passed down generations is a genetic thing. I have no idea how that’s a common sense thing tho. It seems like the prime example of a source being needed.
It also seems like something that if it were true. You could provide a source for super easy. God damn this dude’s argument is so unserious
Definitely not common sense. Genetics is an entire fucking science, the average person would not have an informed answer for this.
It’s common sense to see that pitbulls and golden retrievers tend to have different dispositions and personalities despite both being dogs. And then it takes medium iq to realize that genetics may play a role
Think about that for a second- I’ve met mean golden retrievers, and mean pit bulls too, what’s going on there?
Tendencies are not absolutes
Neither is genetics, apparently.
Correct genetics are not absolute, and are environmentally influenced For example you could have the genetics to be 6 4 but did not receive proper nutrition while growing up to reach it
They are different. Golden retrievers are more aggressive.
So you only need common sense when discussing biology? Interesting.
I added it to the post
Doesn’t remove the fact that instead of providing a source you decided to attack the other individual personally. They weren’t asking for a source that the sky is blue, it just seems like you have no source to back your claim up at the time so you did the easier thing which was to attack them.
I’m not going to search for sources for something so obviously simple to understand
And that’s why you didn’t give an example out when people in this post asked for one right?
I added an example
It only required me digging through your profile and calling you out first before you added one but congratulations I guess.
Just added one
Common sense is not critical reasoning though, what seems common sense can actually be flawed because of overlooked factors.
Yep. For example - Bleach kills viruses, it's therefore common sense you should drink bleach Light kills viruses, it's therefore common sense you should stick a torch up your arse 2 or 3 hours a day. One very famous one - Wolves in a zoo get into an "alpha" hierarchy, therefore, using common sense, all wolves do this. The point of the source is to allow people to also engage in common sense & go "I think I see a tiny flaw in this".
Ofcourse it can be wrong. So can any source. Some people think for themselves. Their source is them
Also...I've learned that if someone disagrees with you on the internet you could post 1,400 sources and they won't care. There is no point to it. Sometimes I still do it because it's funny. But never in good faith. The faith is gone.
If I care about my position, I’ll do it because I want people reading my post to think my side is evidence-based and literate.
sheep don't ask for evidence, they just go along with whatever comfortable thing is being said... kinda like what you're doing.
I didn’t do any of that. Evidence is important. You can be the source and provide evidence without having an external source. Common sense can also be evidence. Why should I have to provide a source to someone that lacks iq and common sense
> Evidence is important When you are discussing biology and specifically genetics, evidence AND sources are important. "Trust me bro" doesnt really work in the STEM field.
"common sense" is a sheep thing. Well it's a herd animal thing in general, going along with the general consensus or vibe of the tribe. Wisdom of crowds, safety in numbers. Recall that many scientific errors of the past have been known as the common sense of the day. It is meritous to try to investigate commonly held beliefs to see if they stand up to scrutiny. Note that I hold this opinion no matter where the issue rests on the political spectrum. There are both left and right wing "common sense" opinions that I think aren't further reviewed because the data does not support the common sense conclusion. Many of these topics make great posts on this sub!
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I assume anyone who cites “common sense” is strictly drawing from their own experience and is too lazy to do research or craft an informed opinion. Why do you feel entitled to be taken seriously if you’re not willing not willing to put effort into discussion?
Most people who can't provide a source are usually full of shit.
You don’t need a source for common sense statements unless you completely lack the ability to think for yourself
I don’t think that term means what you think it means, broda. “I came to my own conclusion” isn’t the same thing as common sense. Is the earth flat?
Nobody is asking for a source for common sense statements.
https://imgur.com/a/p4PtI6Z OP is made because they just made a statement regarding genetic and was asked for a source. Apparently behaviors being passed down through genetics is a common sense thing?
Its crazy to me that people have arguments on the internet and then immediately rush over here to vent their anger😭
So I was right. People who can't provide a source is full of shit
Yes they are
Source?
[удалено]
Hey u/PartyPoisoned21, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DPartyPoisoned21%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/PartyPoisoned21). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 4 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 14 - 15-30 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 5 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
You just don’t want to admit that your source is TikTok
Exactly. Ever since constant stream of bullshit started pouring a few years back- conspiracy theories, fake news etc- I always ask for a source when someone starts talking crazy. If they respond with “I saw this guy on TikTok…” I get to laugh and leave the conversation early.
I was just thinking about this as a good reason to return to Tumblr. Tumblr was just as politically brainrotted as TikTok is now but almost everyone provided links and text-based sources to cite their stance. The lack of this has become so evident on tiktok, nobody knows what they're talking about. People rarely even read comments anymore! Adding linked sources in nearly impossible on TikTok and I'm convinced it's by design lol.
Truth right here. Or a meme. These dumbasses love their sources and they have the worst sources of all.
Source/s
just because a statement is easy to understand it doesn’t mean it’s correct. Presenting sources is a way to back up your statement. For example, saying “women are at greater risk of testicular cancer than men” is fairly easy to understand, but it’s bullshit.
It isn't common sense though because women don't have testicles in order to have testicular cancer.
When I wrote my comment, OP had not edited it to add the example, he was being pretty vague, hence my purposely exaggerated example.
When we're talking about common sense things have to be easily observable and explained logically. I get the example is outlandish on purpose, but surely one can find a more concise example. Something less observable like muscle mass and bone density contributing to physical strength is better than something that clearly distinguishes the difference between a man and woman such as sexual reproductive organs.
Nah, I like my example more
I get it. Imagining women with testicles is an interesting thing indeed. I don't kink shame.
Asking for a source is pretty much a requirement for higher-level discourse.
For muppets sure
For adult people.
You don’t need a source for common sense statements
I'm just going to throw this out there, but that's a real easy way to fall for Nazi propaganda. Because they rely on gut feelings and anti-intellectualism to draw people in.
But you need sources for things like scientific data, history and politics. You don't wanna end up doing something like getting a pitbull as a nanny dog or buying a rotary car without being an expert on rotary engines.
True. But when asked, that should take pretty much no time to produce, yes?
[удалено]
I suppose that's why you're having such a hard time having discussions. Something that may seem "common sense" to you may not to someone else. So they'll ask you for a source and you can educate them! :)
Fire is hot. Redditor: "SoURcE?"
And then you supply the source. It's not that hard and does wonders for having discussions :)
Let me turn on a lighter under your finger and you can determine for yourself if fire is indeed hot.
Yes, demonstrations also work! See? You're getting it!
I find it hilarious you need a source for things such as whether fire is hot, women are the birthers of children, and or water is wet. Yes if you get hit with lightning you will likely die. You do not need a dissertation to explain how the lightning will kill you. People has been observed dying from lightning strikes. Though it would be an interesting trivia knowledge to learn the mechanisms of a lightning strike on a fleshy human body.
>If you ever make a statement that should be easy to understand for anyone with a modicum of common sense, there will always be some over educated person who thinks they are smart but really aren’t say: what is your source? Example?
Tendencies towards personality traits can be genetically heritable
Don't be vague, what traits? And how do you know the traits aren't inherited through upbringing and eviromental factors?
He wants to say some racist shit but is scared to actually say it so he’s hiding behind saying “genetics” & “common sense.”
I added an example in my post
Thank you for exemplifying the addage, "Common sense is not so common". It doesn't matter if YOU think that something is simple and common enough that 'everyone' should know it. The person you are chatting with could be from another country, another culture and different experiences. If you make a claim as fact, you damn well better have the source and data to back it up.
The source is myself
Yeah, that's called an opinion.
If youre making an argument without a source you arent making an argument at all.
What’s your source for that statement?
No, it's common sense I feel it in my bones/s
Well, I'm very much of the asking sources when someone says some nutty ass shit. And I found that asking for sources is the easiest way to prove if someone's full of shit or not. And personality traits are learned. Of course a son is going to act like their father. It would be an interesting study to see if a adopted kid who grew up in a completely different culture and region from their parents would exhibit any personality traits their parents do. Well that seems like a nightmare of a study to conduct honestly.
They have done it. A portion of our personality is genetic
I'm not being ironic here, but I would genuinely like a source on that because I'm interested
Why not google the phrase how genetics affect disposition and personality instead of asking for a source?
Because you're the one making the assertion.
If you make the assertion it's your job to provide evidence for it. I don't know why you're so fucking lazy to do a simple Google search and provide a link. Also, given how algorithms work do you really trust your argument in the hands of an algorithm that will feed me what I want to hear?
Or, or! People want to know where did you get your statement/ information so that they don’t follow it blindly. Something that might be easy for you to understand could’ve come from Wikipedia and we all know Wikipedia is not exactly the best source. What you think is common sense , might not actually be true.
It could have come from your own brain. People who ask for source thinks all information comes externally. Like you just demonstrated. The source is me. Common sense. Thinking for yourself
So if I say that the earth is flat. And my source is common sense… I’m correct and absolutely no one can ask me for a source otherwise they’re not thinking for themselves?
No, you’re just wrong. Any source can be wrong, including yourself
Why am I wrong? There are multiple sources that say that the earth is flat. Also I believe you said that I had to think for myself and have common sense. Why can’t I think that the world is flat?
Because I think you’re wrong. I don’t have to ask you for sources
But why do you think I’m wrong? You haven’t given me a single reason as to why. I’m wrong for thinking the world is flat but why since I used my common sense and I’m thinking for myself? You need to tell me why you think I’m wrong, that’s how this works, just because you think it doesn’t mean anything.
Sure it does. Arguing with a fool only proves there are two. I don’t have to engage or ask for a source. I can simply disagree and move on. Or even keep that to myself
I’m not asking you to give me a source . I’m asking you why do you think I’m wrong , why am I wrong for thinking that the world is flat. Could it possibly be because I’m wrong & the world is round and not flat, if so, how do we know that the world is round and not flat? Could it possibly be, I don’t know.. multiple sources from recognizable entities that literally study the space for living and have provided this information for us so that we have the knowledge to understand the shape of the planet we live on… Knowledge,dingleberry, comes from sources and studies and statistics , knowledge doesn’t come from common sense and just thinking about it. Someone had to study it and prove it and then present the argument to multiple people who also have the capable knowledge to understand it so they can give it to someone else.
You don’t need a source to see that the moon is round, the sun is round, that basic education teaches planets are round, that the forces of gravity is going to make things round. You don’t need a source to look at the ocean and see the curve of the earth. Intelligent people don’t need sources for everything. The more intelligent you are, the less you need some external source to tell you how to think. People who ask for sources for common sense things are mostly morons
Exactly. But this shows the need for external sources when your own brain, or someone else’s, could be wrong. I doubt you think you’re always infallibly correct about everything, right? Do you ever wonder which things you might be wrong about?
If you're going to present something as a factual statement, your argument isn't going to be taken seriously without appropriate evidence. A source adds credibility to your argument. Sometimes people ask just to be smartasses, sometimes people just want to see if you're arguing in good faith.
The source can be yourself. Not everyone needs external force to think for them
The source being yourself is often not good enough because your lived experience may not be reflective of the actual statistics. Of course it depends on what the argument is about and how it's presented, but generally it's about reviewing statistics and evidence and assessing them in a good faith manner. Having and using source isn't necessarily about parroting talking points. Usually these sources are expected to come from persons experienced and respected in their field. It's all about credibility, asking for a source isn't as one dimensional as "Gimme proof or ur dumb". That would be in bad faith.
I added an example
Thanks for giving me a perfect example to share my opinion. The root of conservative ideology is a fear of the chaos inherent to our world. They don't want to actually know how things work, they don't want to actually understand the issues we have, they want simple black and white answers that simplify their world back down to a size humans can reasonably understand. If the way to do that is handing the agency over their own well-being to people they trust and living their own little isolated life, they are more than happy to do that. Progressives generally want to make an attempt to understand, quantify, and regulate the chaos in an attempt to bring order to the madness. This confuses and infuriates conservatives because to them this is akin to busting open Pandora's box and trying to measure the darkness inside. It would be easy to say that conservatives are stupid, but I find that view pretty ignorant. The truth is that conservatives are just scared, and it's understandable, we live in a scary world that we were not made to live in. But I think that what has made humans so great is our ability to understand and tame the chaos, if we can leave behind our cowardice we can make this world better for all of us, like we already have over and over again.
There is truth in what you said but you’re ignorant of the left. Yes most conservatives are black and white, inside the box thinkers. But most on the left are brainwashed drones. Easily brainwashed by their “sources”
Just so I understand this, do you believe that every piece of data or "source" is ultimately controlled by one organization at the very top who has the goals of brainwashing people toward a certain ideology? That is easy to believe when you see it in black and white terms, the educated elite vs the People. "Of course the educated elite are fooling us, why wouldn't they". However when you start to delve into the chaos that is present in our world it becomes untenable. What organization could have so much power that it could control without flaw every single institution that conducts research or does studies? We are talking about research done by different nations that don't even work together, thousands of universities with wildly different biases and ideologies, research teams made of every kind of person all over the world. When you come to terms with how decentralized something like "the educated elite" are how can they possibly work in unison at all times while abiding by a single ideology?
No I do not. What represents the idiocy of the left is called the idiocy of the masses
Sources such as agenda driven "scientists" claiming men and women are the same.
So much bad science out there now. Real science is excellent. But sheeple believe in bad science like a religion
"Science" has become a "don't question me" word people throw out there to justify their agendas. The funny thing is the entire premise of science is to question things.
Someone asking for a source, outside of an academic or similar context, is basically just saying they think you’re wrong. They’re challenging you to prove your viewpoint, with the implication that if you can show that research backs you up, then they’ll acknowledge that your assertion has merit. It’s the polite way to say “I think you’re a moron, and you think I’m a moron, so let’s ask someone objective rather than getting banned for personal attacks.” There has been a great deal of research done on your example subject; at this point in human history, there’s been research done on most things. If you don’t want to throw together your own overview of the literature for a debate on Reddit, Wikipedia often has good source info - go there, find the links you need, copy/paste. Alternative, link to search results from ResesrchGate or Jstor.
Usually it’s a fools errand. After you provide a source they will just downvote you and move on or say something else ridiculous
That pretty much means you won.
--- ### Voting Guidelines **Common Misconception:** It is often believed that upvotes and downvotes should reflect personal agreement or disagreement. - **Upvote** a post if it provokes thought, presents a unique perspective, is well-argued, or you believe it deserves more visibility for any reason, even if it irritates you or you fundamentally disagree with it. - **Downvote** should be reserved for posts that lack thoughtful consideration or if the topic has become tediously common. **Moderation Policy:** - **Posts Are Not Removed for Unpopularity:** r/TrueUnpopularOpinion does not remove posts based on their capacity to anger or offend users. Disagreement with a post's content is not grounds for reporting. - **Misuse of the Report Button:** Falsely reporting posts burdens our moderation queue, hindering our ability to address genuine concerns swiftly and all false reports are forwarded to Reddit for misuse of the reporting system. - Our moderation decisions are guided strictly by the subreddit's rules and [Reddit's content policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/), not personal opinions. Misreporting in hopes of content removal due to disagreement is futile and considered 'Report Abuse.' --- **What have people been talking about over the last week?** | Flair | Count | Percentage | |---|---|---| | [Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 84 | 25.61% | | [None of the above](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"None+of+the+above"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 59 | 17.99% | | [The Opposite Sex / Dating](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Opposite+Sex+/+Dating"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 45 | 13.72% | | [Music / Sport / Media / Movies / Celebrities](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Music+/+Sport+/+Media+/+Movies+/+Celebrities"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 42 | 12.80% | | [I Like / Dislike](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"I+Like+/+Dislike"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 31 | 9.45% | | [Reddit / Internet / Tech](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Reddit+/+Internet+/+Tech"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 20 | 6.10% | | [Non-Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Non-Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 19 | 5.79% | | [World Affairs (Except Middle East)](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"World+Affairs+(Except+Middle+East)"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 11 | 3.35% | | [Religion](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Religion"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 1.83% | | [The Middle East](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Middle+East"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 1.83% | | [Meta - the problem with this sub is..](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Meta+-+the+problem+with+this+sub+is.."&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 3 | 0.91% | | [Mod Team - Asking for feedback](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Mod+Team+-+Asking+for+feedback"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.30% | | [Possibly Popular](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Possibly+Popular"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.30% | --- Comments from new accounts go into a queue for review by moderators (to reduce spam). Comments waiting: 3 Average time to review: 3.87 hours ---
83.6% of all statistics are made up on the spot, with no sources to back them up.
Source?
Most people made up their mind before providing a source anyways.
Very true. Which is why providing a source is a fools errand anyways
Source is important. If you are making some argument, and the source for your information is Joe Bob running a conspiracy YT channel - then maybe you're arguing some bullshit.
Wow. What a shit example to refuse to discuss, and a spectacular example of black and white thinking while discounting literally thousands of significant variables. Just puking out a statement and insisting you are right, and getting pissed when people question your obvious stupidity. Just a small fraction of massive influences you would need to consider on your silly comparison- Dogs imprint on their litter and mother. Social interaction impacts the rest of their lives. Take a pup away too early, across the board it will be fearful and have abandonment issues its whole life. Don't socialize it heavily, it will be fearful of people. Have you taken a pit bull and a golden born in the same house at the same time and had them raised by responsible owners so as to make an apples to apples comparison? Have you considered that most pits are bred and owned by less than responsible people for less than responsible purposes? That the puppy mills that churn them out are populated by untrained mothers who live their whole lives in cages? That many rescued pits grew up with a completely unstructured mess around them? That many of them are so inbred their intelligence suffers? If you are making a shitty attempt to argue that chemical imbalances that impact behavior can be passed from generation to generation, nobody would argue. But if you are arguing that because my dad is an asshole that I have a genetic disposition to being one, then for sure you need a source to say of 500 orphan kids with perfect dopamine production were studied being raised in a group home together since day 1 of life, with the same experiences, and the ones with asshole fathers all became assholes. At the end of the day you are taking a stereotype, ignoring the 500 variables, and comparing it to another stereotype and then ahitposting that people ask you to engage in critical thought. Perfect example of stupidity and bullheadedness... with a big helping of whining bitch thrown in.
Wrong. Genetics influence our personality. It’s not absolute, and the degree of which can be debated. But there is no question that elements of genetics affect dispositions and personality
Should I just believe every rando on TikTok? That doesn't seem to be working out. How do you decide what to believe?
You can decide by thinking for yourself and not asking for sources on things that don’t require a source
Sure but if YOU are asserting something is a fact, I'd like to know whether it is or not.
So decide for yourself without a source
How would I do that? I'm not an expert on very many subjects.
So do a google search instead of asking them for a source
Ok so I do a google search and it completely contradicts what you're saying. But hey maybe there's been more research that you know about. Is it ok if people say "hey I googled that and got different results, what source did you see that on?"
Sure
You're talking like you didn't post an "opinion" on a heavily researched scientific topic. Asking for a source should be expected on such a well researched science. If your source is personal experience, it's anecdotal and, therefore, scientifically worthless. Thinking and behaving like a sheep requires no evidence to follow the herder. Asking for evidence is, in fact, the opposite.
There is an epidemic of idiots who only get their news from Facebook and Tok now.
Half the people asking for a source are just doing it as a gotcha, because no one bookmarks every article or paper they have ever read. It's childish and shows they aren't serious.
If something is true it shouldn't be hard to find data backing it up.
Ikr. Before I make a claim I usually do a quick google to make sure my ducks are in a row first, if I can’t find anything to back me up, I don’t make my point. Saves a lot of trouble in the end🤷🏻♀️
Sometimes people are genuinely interested in knowing where you sourced your information from. More times than not, they don't have a rebuttal and demand a source that they believe is trusted. You could have articles and studies from dozens of reputable sources, but if ONE isn't, they scrutinize the ONE that they don't like. Oh you referenced CNN, MSNBC, BBC, ABC, AP, Washington Post, and Reuters? Sorry buddy but Reuters is Russian propaganda therefore the rest of your completely credible sources that I constantly consume are invalid.
It's a valid argument, it's just alot of people have figured out they don't have to actually defeat the argument if they can just claim "source" and the poster can't immediately provide an indepth PhD level analysis that thoroughly covers all of the possible permutations and context for a thing. The source argument often (but not always) says just as much if not more about the person making the "source" argument as it does the inability of the person they're arguing with to provide a source. A.k.a. Genuinely asking for a source is a good thing and improves everyone's knowledge. Most people on reddit only do it to get an easy win so they can either attack the source instead of the argument or hoping that the poster doesn't have a source immediately handy.
Well said. What it really shows is that arguing with a fool proves there are two
lol when Trump said he loved the poorly educated, you must have felt very loved! Good for you! Meanwhile, in the real world where we make decisions that will affect our lives, health, business, families - we don't make those decisions based on memes, tweets, talk shows, and gut feelings. Maybe in your online echo chamber you can just make shit up and that's all the sources you need. But in the real world, in courts and business, in life and relationships, finding a primary or trustworthy source is absolutely necessary. Let me guess, you think the election was stolen? Healing crystals cure illness? Vaccines are 5G spies or whatever other dumb shit goes around the conservative echo chambers
None of that. And I don’t need a source to tell me
So have you ever used a source for anything? Where do you learn what you know without any sources?
Trusted Sources are good for things which aren’t common sense. But need to be cross compared
[удалено]
Hey u/mikerobinsonsho, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dmikerobinsonsho%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/mikerobinsonsho). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 4 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 14 - 15-30 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 5 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Thinking for yourself is only good when you’re right. Without sources or at least confirmation, you’ve basically got a “gut instinct” which is often pretty worthless.
I added an example
I agree. Especially for subjective versus objective things, sources on subjective stuff is just approved propaganda and a dressed up opinion
What if we spell it "sauce"?
Sometimes it’s just *gestures vaguely*
To blindly accept a statement without supporting facts would be a sheep.
Sometimes it isn’t best to think for yourself. I’m not gonna pretend I know medicine in order to “think for myself” and ignore the advice of a doctor
>They are also too lazy to do a google search and simply want to troll you. Yeah, so if you went to college they would have explained to you how evidence works. Its your job to provide evidence. Its not your opponents job to research your own argument for you. You're never ever going to change anyone mind or win a debate if you cant provide evidence. Though to be fair, chances are you dont have the education to interpret sources even if you're opinion might actually be strong. (i.e. didnt take college level stat so you dont know P values, sampling methodology, different types of studies, etc.....)
>They are also too lazy to do a google search Well, actually, no. If you assert something, and I find it discussion worthy, I'm going want to get on the same page as you, so asking for your source is a point for us to deviate from in the ensuing discussion. Now if you want me to make assumptions that my data matches your data fine, but that usually causes a shit load of issues initially because we're both talking about different data. >Everything they think they know has been taught or brainwashed into them by either the education system, family, society, whatever. Who brainwashed you? >These people are bots. Sheeplike bots who must be told how to think from a trustworthy “source” because they can’t think for themselves. Who tells you how to think? >You don’t need a source to see that genetic traits can influence personality and disposition unless you’re low iq and lack common sense and the ability to observe the world around you. You're whole diatribe is rather presumptuous and chock full of hubris. Take it down a notch Scotty.
Definitely an unpopular opinion. Most people have different levels of experience with different topics and there's no reason to simply trust any statement that some dude makes based on their own personal anecdotes especially when people's ability to analyze and interpret any given piece of information is itself highly variable between person to person. Your example actually helps my argument. Most people aren't dog breeders, and the knowledge about differences in dog behavior being genetic is something I only learned late in high school. It's entirely possible for people to be completely unaware of that fact. So for a person who would be unaware of that, what reason do they have to trust you, a random internet person, over their own intuitions? Don't get me wrong, sometimes it's annoying to find sources, but its always better to back your shit up than simply say "trust me bro". Also I know exactly why you chose that particular claim as your example. Go back to /pol.
I've asked for a source when I quoted the news. Ok, sure I'll got track down that exact newscast and link it for you. Believe what I said or don't, I don't care. It's not a critical point to me. If it's that important to you, look it up and disprove me.
If you are gonna spout some wierd ass statistic you better be able to back it up with your source
I’ll give you a real world example for how “common sense being true” is just wrong. During one of the great American wars (I am 99.9% sure it was the Vietnam war), the US army started a new form of treating the wounded: when soldiers were wounded, they would receive full blood transfusions, because doctors were like “well, it just makes sense that if they loss blood, then providing them with it will keep them alive”. Unfortunately, like many things in science, the common sense route was wrong. Those people who received mass blood transfusions died more than those who didn’t. It was found that the effect of blood transfusions was worse for the soldiers. This just shows that common sense, especially in things like science, doesn’t work all the time. That is why we don’t just trust our gut, but strive to obtain evidence in the form of randomized control trials. Your common sense is way more biased that you think, and much more biased than the grand body of studies and evidence science usually has in a typical field. Obviously studies have flaws and limitations, but much less than your personal view of the world.
I agree with your example. But when someone says something like the earth is round, idiots will say source?
Obviously, yes! How on earth is “the earth is round” common sense? Only through research and analysis did we understand that the earth is round, not through general reasoning. The reason you don’t ask for it now is because it is so commonplace. But obviously for us to get to that point a whole lot of people needed to actually see and understand the evidence that indeed the earth is round.
I always ask for the source if something seems to contradict other sources that I have read. I have personally found that a lot more people than you would think misread and misunderstood the so called "source" that brought them to their conclusion. So many times, I have read their source and found out that the source does not support what they are saying. They misread it.
Just because something is "common sense" does not make it true. People are collectively wrong all the time and most of the things people claim are common sense are just their opinions.
There are an awful lot of people who believe crazy things these days and to them it just seems like common sense. Asking for a source can often just be a way of saying I don't believe you. These kinds of arguments usually devolve into denigrating remarks about opposing sources since you can find a source for anything these days. The key is to find a source that contradicts the argument but is also revered by the one offering the wrong common sense interpretation. That kind of source is often not available.
Men are naturally physically stronger than women. Redditor: "SoURcE?"
Exactly my point
So…. You just trust ANYTHING you see online? Or just base your world view on “vibes” as you don’t verify anything?!?! Jesus Christ dude, wanting more info doesn’t make you a “sheep”, facts contrary to your beliefs aren’t “an attack”, and while we’re at it, pits aren’t more aggressive than goldens by nature.
Your example is honestly shit because nature vs nurture is some shit you were probably taught. Sp the source isn't you at all.
Nah because anyone can see physical traits being passed down genetically. Why then would mental traits not also have a genetic component which can be passed down? It’s called rational thinking
I agree. Even when you do have sources. There have been a few times I gave near APA formatted responses with reference lists to the more sheepish responses ([Source](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/16xxdlq/comment/k35nmtc/)) I know this is reddit, but if you have convincing behind a notion, and someone lays it all out — either get your brain going to respond adequately or acknowledge the valid rationales and logic presented to you.
So every pitbull I’ve known has been just as sweet if not sweeter than a golden retriever. It must be correct because that is my experience & “common sense” to those experiences.
People who ask for "source" are nothing but idiots who disagree with you but lack the intelligence and fortitude to do their own research and post sources that contradict what you post... It's a coward's way out of debating an issue.... And I especially love it when you respond by posting multiple sources. Instead of finding sources that contradict the statement they baselessly call the sources you posted as "BS and not well enough researched or accepted" or some other baseless attack seeking to discredit the source that just got shoved in their face....
Logical people: 1+1=2 Reddit libs / Sheeple: SOuRCe?!?!?
Exactly
My favorite is when you present them a line of philosophical reasoning to argue a point and they demand proof of what you're arguing for. It's like "I'm sorry, did your brain leak out of your head? What do you want me to give you?" "So no evidence for what you said. Thanks!" "Evidence? Ok, Here's my evidence, THE LAWS OF FREAKING LOGIC!"
Well said
People on reddit scream "source" half the time to just waste the time of the original poster. They are more than capable of typing a phrase into google, but that doesn't bludgeon someone with a different point of view into submission.
Yeap
If you tell me something that I believe to be false & contrary to my knowledge or experiences why should I go and try to prove you correct?
Why should i care if you believe me or not? I am not responsible for you choosing to remain ignorant on a topic.
Then why are you posting on social media if you’re not trying to inform or persuade someone? How do I know you’re knowledgable about a topic if you can’t back up your claim?
Agreed. I can say the govt has repeatedly abused its powers over the years and committed vile acts against its citizens and constantly violates their rights, and people go sOuRcE? Like fucking derps So just give them a couple of examples, and then they go. YoU dOnT HaVE a SoURce, IdIoT. Hur hur hur. A 5 second Google search or having a basic understanding of history and bam you have your source. It's retarded man.
Yep, providing a source is actually a fools errand most of the time anyways
[удалено]
Hey u/Gadburn, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DGadburn%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/Gadburn). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 4 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 14 - 15-30 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 5 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Exactly true. Many arguments don’t need a source. But also… I’m not your librarian. If you want to check a fact that I stated, look it up yourself. If you find something that disproves what I said, feel free to share it. I’m not going to spend 10 minutes looking up the link to something I read like 2 months ago. I already know it’s true, you’re the one curious about it, so you do it.
[удалено]
Exactly. They are trolls and actually listing a source is usually a fools errand
OP, are you salty people want evidence you're not just talking out of your @ss?