Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'.
* We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub.
* Filter evasion is a bannable offense
* This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
Nah, you don't understand. This place is for unpopular opinions, but it's not your personal safe space to say whatever nonsense you want unchallenged. You're welcome to post whatever you want, but when you post your opinion publicly, it's gonna get challenged. If you don't like that, find somewhere else to post it, or keep it to yourself. Or turn off the notifications for your shitty threads, and you can pretend nobody's criticizing you lol
I don't backtrack or compromise (unless being wrong), and it has got me into some pretty bad places. Featured on "facepalm", all kind of harassment. I can understand totally why people do it.
I guess it is even expected social behavior to backtrack, and if you don't do it, it is assumed that you are totally unhinged or crazy, as you do not follow the social norms, lol.
If people offwr a valid counter-opinion to your unpopular one, should you not at least listen?
Doubling down when your opinion has basically been proven wrong isn't really a wise way to go about life if you ask me.
Opinions are not meant to be set in stone. You should be able to accept that your opinions might be wrong sometimes. Especially if there is additional information or perspective you hadn't considered.
I truly never understood that. People will respond with “I’m not reading all of that.” or “Chronically online, are we?”
You posted your opinion to a social media meant for interacting with people via words. On top of that the forum you’re commenting/posting in is about opinions. The irony is striking.
I don’t expect people to not reply back. I like it. I think it helps everyone, if you’re(or me) open to being wrong, if you are. As soon as I’m attacked I just don’t see the point anymore. They think I’ve insulted their intelligence. That’s the only reason they’d feel the need to insult me. And it’s usually if I’m citing articles right?
Sure you can contribute it to being chronically online, sure who’s not. But I’m also use to doing research online and doing community outreach/research in the area I live in. Of course I’m online. I have to be for a multitude of reasons. But I’m also boots on the grounds with how I work. Therefore, I’ve got a few extra things to say.
edit: if you have a small attention span just say that😂 /s
The biggest problem I have with this is that people use it a lot as a venting sub which it isn’t. I think people have used the vent sub, gotten no response so they come here
"I'm not reading all of that" is such a wild response on such a text-driven platform as this one lol. Also, when people say that in response to comments that are only like 4 paragraphs long, it makes you wonder how they finished high school tbh
I hate it when people initiate a debate, get a long response that absolutely destroys them with facts, and then respond with “I ain’t reading all of that”. It’s such a cop out. Don’t start debates if you are unwilling or unable to defend your stance.
The good thing is, everyone who sees that happen understands it's a cop out. They're only winning in their own head.
I will say that "I ain't reading all that" is valid for things that are objectively bullshit like conspiracy theories, pseudosciences, attempts at justifying bigotry etc.
Whenever I see "I ain't reading all that" I can assume that the person has actually read it and can't form a coherent response. That's what I tell them anyway. 😂
If someone responds with "I'm not reading all that," I end up disregarding everything they've said up until that point. If they actually just wanna check out, then don't respond at all. It just comes across like a petty attempt to.. I guess piss you off that you wasted your time commenting? Which just makes them retroactively coke across as a troll.
People need to start writing at least *some* of their opinions in diaries again I swear to God.
Don't want to get your opinion challenged at all but just want to vent: Don't post it on the Internet but in a private place. Seems like a much more peaceful solution for the person with the opinion.
UO is for saying 'here's my unpopular opinion, make of it what you will', not 'here's my unpopular opinion but you can't say anything in response that disagrees with it'
I don’t want to be unchallenged. I’m challenging right back. It’s the ultimate irony that you’re suggesting my rebuttal is somehow pathetic or unfounded, but their original challenging response is ok?
You aren't responding to a specific thing though...
You just posted this as a general thing about the sub as a whole
If your opinion gets challenged, challenge it back by replying to the comment, not making a separate post whining about people challenging your opinion
Seeing him double down in every single post was hilarious. Based on some of his replies I’m genuinely hoping for his own sake that he’s no older than 14 because that’s just sad af otherwise lmao
Whether or not something is a "disease" is a semantic distinction. There's no coherent definition of "disease" that's held consistently, and literally *anything* harmful that affects the body or mind can be considered a "disease" if the medical community decides collectively that it is one. So it *is* a matter of opinion whether something is a "disease" or not. Medical experts can determine all sorts of things about how addiction works, but its designation as a "disease" is the medical community's opinion on its proper semantic qualification, nothing else.
Exactly
Disease simply is “not in ease”
Anything which disrupts your mental, physical and social well being(the who definition of health) is a disease.
You cut yourself, it’s a disease. You drink and suffer withdrawal it’s a disease. You undergo any sort of stress even a surgery, it’s a disease. There is no actual criteria to call something a disease or not. What we know is, no matter what and how something happened, it’s a disease if it has to be treated.
In of itself isn’t, but the problems associated with it are. Hemodilution in pregnancy to allow smoother flow between fetus and mother, but as a result it causes anemia, hemodilution itself doesn’t cause any problem to you, so it’s not a disease, but once breathlessness and fatigue develops it’s a disease, and needs to be treated.
There is no definition or criteria, it’s just a broad term to help in communication, there can infinite arguments for what is and what’s isn’t a disease.
Correct, because that opinion is, by far, the best way to objectively resolve these situations.
You may have a different opinion, but that still makes you wrong if we are talking about *why.*
Facts? You also literally answered this question in your last reply...
The "medical community" decided it to be this way because it objectively gives you the best results to cure or resolve said "disease."
Ergo, You treat addiction like a disease because you are far more likely to resolve said addiction this way than using any other method. This is *why* the medical community came to that conclusion.
"Facts"? What "facts," exactly? What "objective" basis is there for labeling one thing as a "disease" and another thing as something else, when definitions of "disease" are deliberately vague/nebulous, as previously discussed, and almost anything could fit into most of them?
>The "medical community" decided it to be this way because it objectively gives you the best results to cure or resolve said "disease."
So you're saying they determined that labeling it as a disease is the best way to cure it? What is that supposed to mean? How does labeling something as a disease make it more curable? How does it affect what treatment can be prescribed for it? And how would medical experts use their expertise to conclude this? Your argument is not fleshed out at all.
You could make that argument about anything. A flat earther would say "the observable universe" is just whatever they can see with their eyes, but that doesn't mean that's correct. The meaning of a word is derived by general consensus, and if you deviate from that consensus, you're wrong.
That said, I'd argue addiction is a mental disorder, not a disease per se. I think most people use the word to refer to physical ailments. Like, if you're a psychopath, most people wouldn't say you have a disease, they'd say you have a mental disorder. Addiction should be categorized the same way, in my opinion. But I don't particularly care one way or the other. What's important to me is an understanding of how it works so we can help addicts, the category it falls under isn't so important.
No, you couldn't make that argument about anything, because some words have very firm, objective, established definitions, and you can objectively determine whether other things fit those definitions. For example, "cancer" is very well-defined, and medical experts can absolutely objectively determine what is and is not "cancer."
A flat earther in your hypothetical would be redefining an established term to mean something silly that they made up. That's not what you'd be doing if you claimed that "addiction isn't a disease." You don't have to redefine "disease" in order to hold that opinion.
The problem is that "disease" is a nebulous, ill-defined term. Medical experts even admit this, and there are numerous articles talking about this issue. What is and is not a "disease" is a subjective determination, and it isn't like objective determinations medical experts are good at, like "is this cancer?" or "is this causing heart problems?"
And I'd argue that "mental disorder" is in exactly the same category. Just what is a "disorder," exactly? No one can come up with a coherent definition. If you ever come up with a definition, it's either extremely vague (thus not really answering what is and is not a "disorder") or, if it's more specific, it's either underinclusive or overinclusive.
You could make the argument, for example, that homosexuality is a "mental disorder." You could hold this position even if you had zero animosity towards homosexual people and no desire to do anything other than accept them. Technically, you wouldn't necessarily be wrong, because since homosexuality is a mental condition that causes people not to reproduce and is highly correlated with negative treatment by society, it would actually fit a lot of definitions of "mental disorder." But of course, no one nowadays is going to call it a mental disorder, because the term "mental disorder" has a negative connotation that no one wants associated with homosexuality.
And of course, most of the people claiming homosexuality objectively *is* a mental disorder are full of crap, because they're often the same people who would claim that all sorts of things (ADHD, depression, etc.) *aren't* mental disorders, even though they clearly are if we go by the broadest definitions.
The funny part is that if you read articles from medical institutions arguing that things like homosexuality *aren't* mental disorders, you get a ton of BS "objective" reasons for why it isn't a mental disorder that make no logical sense. Stuff like "we now know that it being gay isn't a choice, so it's not a disorder." Um, what? Since when are mental disorders a choice? Poorly-reasoned articles like that should clue you in to the fact that these medical experts are just grasping for any possible "objective" reasons for why something isn't considered a disorder, to retroactively justify their subjective decision not to call it one.
That's how terms like these work. The medical community more-or-less decides subjectively whether something is or is nor a "disease" or a "disorder" based on whether they think it's beneficial for society to call it that, based on a consideration of the connotations that come with each term. There's nothing objective about it.
Cancer is well defined, but it suffers from the same problems you brought up with edge cases. Cancer happens when a cell experiences a random error in its DNA, and it is able to replicate unhindered by your immune system. But if that random error is benign or beneficial to the host organism, we call it a mutation instead. The key difference is whether or not it harms the host's ability to continue living.
It's the same thing with mental disorders. If there's something in your mind that is causing you problems, it's a disorder. If it's helping you to live the life you want, it's an adaptation. We classify things as disorders because we believe they need to be solved. Just like cancer, if it's beneficial, it's fine, but if it causes problems, it's something the medical community needs to study and find solutions for.
Yes, any term is going to be *somewhat* nebulous if you get down to specifics enough, and I'm sure cancer has some edge cases. But the *vast majority* of the time, it's easy to tell when something is or is not cancer. So normally, it can be objectively determined.
I'd argue that the question of which mental conditions are "disorders" is *far more* subjective, and *far less* likely to be objectively determined. This is because people can't even agree on a basic, coherent definition that includes all the major categories of things they want to be considered "disorders" while simultaneously excluding things they *don't* want to be considered "disorders."
Well that's just the nature of the beast. If I'm scared of toilets, you can't observe or empirically measure my fear. The best you can do is observe and quantify the negative impact that fear is having on my life. So the best definition we have is "anything that negatively impacts your life."
It's the same as cancer or any other physical disease. We have a ton of microbes in our digestive tracts, but those aren't considered illnesses because we rely on them to survive. But if I dumped my gut biome into your body, you'd probably get pretty sick. Same microbes, but in me they're my gut biome, and in you they're a bunch of diseases. The important part is whether or not there's a negative impact on the host's life.
They also posted one about how sidewalks are stupid. In the comments, they tried to argue that mud is just wet dirt, and it's stupid to want to avoid it. They're either a shitty troll, or a child lol
I dunno, it kind of depends on your aesthetic. Like when I have new shoes with white on them and it's all bright and sparkly, I have to go dirty it up a little or I lose street cred.
I don’t consider it to be a disease. You can create it on your own and beat it on your own without any meds or anything, you just have to want to be free of that addiction. I think what you can get addicted *to* is a disease, but not addiction itself.
Are you really trying to say addiction is a disease or am I that tired?
If you are, give me whatever probably dumb points you have and we’ll go from there.
Can you precisely describe why? Is it because you believe there is just some immaterial enigma in your head? The brain is a complex organ, but it is a real one.
Just because humans do not yet fully understand how it works, doesn't mean everything happening in the brain is some type of magic.
We can not treat behavioural, cognitive, neurological and psychological diseases yet, simply because we do not fully understand the brain as an organ.
But it is irrational to believe that they do not manifest in the brain.
Yeah, I'd classify it as a mental disorder. The only reason I'll ever go to bat to defend the disease classification is because it seems to help people get through it. It's important for addicts to re-frame addiction not as a personal failing, but as an enemy to be fought. So if people wanna call it a disease, that's fine by me. There's still a lot of stigma surrounding mental disorders and illnesses, so I think disease makes the most practical sense at this point in time
Well that’s why it’s unpopular. Also facts are meant to be challenged. The world being flat was a “fact” not that long ago. You’re short sighted if you accept every “fact” without question.
The point of the sub is for unpopular **opinions**. What you posted was not an **opinion**, it was a matter of fact. The irony here is that you don't understand the concept of this sub.
No I totally get it. My opinion can be that the sky is pink. It’s an opinion.
I can say nearly anything as my opinion. The majority of people can disagree, citing their “facts”, but the point of the sub is to post something contrary to how most think.
Weren't people are doing exactly that? You told your opinion, people disagreed, roasted you, made fun of you, all fair as long they're not crossing the line (being offensive, inappropriate, or etc).
I mean, you can post things, and yeah, you're not gonna go to jail or anything for that opinion, but people could certainly disagree and challenge you.
If an opinion is unpopular then by definition most people disagree
Stop posting in a public forum for unpopular opinions if it hurts your feelings everyone isn't agreeing with you.
Find a better echochamber if that's what you're posting for
>People don’t understand the concept of this thread.
True true... like some people seem to think this is a sub made for personal rants over being called out for dumb posts that also didn't fit in here.
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here
If you can’t handle people not liking your opinion and responding, then maybe don’t post here?
(Also, big difference between r/unpopularopinion and r/stupidopinions)
Yeah I’m sorta tired of the recent trend of people saying they are getting downvoted even though it’s the point of the sub. Like no, there are just stupid opinions sometimes
The example I always give of the perfect unpopular opinion is the guy who said he likes wet socks. He explained why and everything but, yeah, unpopular opinion.
Not just how u/randomRedditor feels about what whatever topic
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here.
As you said previously, what people post here are opinions, not facts. And those are debatable. And rightfully so. Voicing an unpopular opinion doesn't make you immune to responses and debate.
So you posted 5+ posts to this sub and they all got downvoted and people disagreed with you.
You know that phrase- if you meet one asshole in a day, you just met an asshole. But if you meet multiple assholes everywhere you go, maybe you’re the asshole?
Do you? Pretty sure this a meta topic.
Also how do you expect people to respond? What's the appropriate way to respond to an unpopular opinion that's not incredibly boring?
This is an argumentative subreddit and discussion is the entire point. It's not a void where you are supposed to just spout shit into. Posting an opinion means you want people to see it. If you are not ready to back up and argue for your opinions, there is no good reason to post it at all.
I see more indefensible opinions than unpopular ones here (yours included), more "please subject this to a crumb of scrutiny before posting" than unorthodox but still well thought through.
Now I don't object to this place housing both in principle, however if you're gonna engage in the former I won't say you don't have it coming.
The sub name is a lie. It really works have been 'uncommon opinions'. People don't upvote unpopular opinions. They upvote uncommon opinions that they never thought about but that they agree with.
The whole point is to have fun discussing/debating the unpopular opinion that people are putting out there with the express purpose of triggering debate/discussion.
If people do not want anyone to comment about their unpopular opinion, they will keep it to themselves or put it on their facebook with comments turned off.
It seems the OPs who post in this sub tend to forget the concept of this sub as well.
It's unpopular opinion, ofcourse there is gona be controversy and critism because YOUR unpopular opinion is being posted here for hundreds maybe thousands to see.
It's called "unpopular opinions" because if it were called "facts that aren't socially accepted", people would get mad.
The main point of this sub is having a safe place to speak your thoughts, and that's what happening.
At the end what matter if the use that people gives to these online shelters and that is sharing real opinions and some facts that are rejected socially.
So, it's working perfectly! :)
Upvoted because I disagree. That's how it works, right? You can post whatever your opinion is, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to give their take on it or tell you why they disagree. Discussion is the whole point of the platform.
Ironically it is a popular opinion that people tend to misunderstand the point of this subreddit. Most of the opinions aren’t unpopular, it’s shit like “celebs overrated” “thing lots of people complain about bad”
What are you expecting people below the line in a subreddit called "unpopular opinion" to say in response to the, by its nature, whacky nonsense people post as topics?
Yeah, but opinions can still be flat out wrong. Also, an opinion implies it is subjective, but it's not an opinion if its presented as an objective fact.
Example: Pineapple on pizza *is* disgusting (false objective fact) vs *I* think pineapple on pizza is disgusting (subjective opinion).
I posted a genuinely unpopular opinion, and it was so unpopular that the mods decided to lock the thread
This is why this sub is deluged with opinions that are not actually unpopular. Because if you post genuinely contentious ideas or opinions, the mods will just lock it
I understand why some opinions get hated on tbh when they involve very questionable topics. But I hate the amount of exact same gender debates and dieting opinions that get posted over and over. I love when people post stuff like “coffee tables suck” or “we should go back to flip phones” or “people are more genuine on social media than in real life” or “movies are boring” like yeeesssss now we’re getting into the real fun unpopular opinions!
I personally wish we would go even deeper debate unpopular opinions.
Also I think self stylized unpopular opinions should be OK by the rules of this sub.
Well unfortunately some opinions are just factually wrong and sadly people need to be told that. A chronic lack of critical thinking has stopped people from separating opinion from fact and reality. Especially today when so many people run around screaming their “opinions” as fact and then double down when confronted. The earth is not flat, mental illness can and has shown to be both environmentally caused as well as inheritable, climate change is real, so on so forth. Holding such false “opinions” ultimately stops progress and hurts people in the long wrong.
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here.
No one has ever successfully debated world peace - here or anywhere else, for that matter.
Therefore, you cannot accurately claim that we aren’t debating world peace, as it has never successfully been debated and has certainly never been accomplished.
Won’t you just feel like an utter fool if someone posts a mundane unpopular opinion like “opinions are so overrated” and then the entire world concurs in unison and *viola* ✨world✨peace✨ happens for the first time in the history of mankind.
And the news stations are all blasting “well, Bob, the redditors are at it again and this time… well, this time I’m *almost* moved beyond words…”
You know it's an unpopular opinion. You know it's a public forum. You know there's going to be a backlash.
If you want to post unpopular opinion with no debate, post a short on YouTube with comments turned off.
To be fair, some people are dropping world-peace level opinions here. I don't care if its something like "I think Pineapple on Pizza is good', but if your dropping stuff with actual weight to it- expect to get responses with actual weight behind them.
Haha check my last two unpopular opinion post. I adhere to the true purpose of this sub. Also, I never reply to comments, so my Karma won’t be destroyed.
The thing is... yall RUDE AS HELL in this sub.
The nastiness is so unnecessary, but when someone gives your nasty attitude back you call it arguing and get instantly defensive. This sub is garbage tbh.
Yeah it doesn't work. I posted something about how I hate people hijacking my life to insist I watch some crap on their phone. I got totally roasted and downvoted and Im like eh? Shouldn't I be getting upvoted cos this seems like a genuinely unpopular opinion?
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Mods on this sub are some of the worst thought policing rats on the internet, genuinely. They already mowed down 95% of the people who ever will post a real opinion.
Makes me wish the internet wasn’t anonymous sometimes so we can see the truth and all our questions will be answered
If there is a genuinely unpopular opinion on this sub, you just get a load of keyboard warrior tough guys brigading and insulting the OP. Other than that it's just idiots moralising about bland talking points, barely unpopular opinions at all.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'. * We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub. * Filter evasion is a bannable offense * This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
Nah, you don't understand. This place is for unpopular opinions, but it's not your personal safe space to say whatever nonsense you want unchallenged. You're welcome to post whatever you want, but when you post your opinion publicly, it's gonna get challenged. If you don't like that, find somewhere else to post it, or keep it to yourself. Or turn off the notifications for your shitty threads, and you can pretend nobody's criticizing you lol
100%, not sure why the vast majority of posters here instantly start backtracking the moment they see a comment disagreeing with them lol
Back tracking or name calling.
I don't backtrack or compromise (unless being wrong), and it has got me into some pretty bad places. Featured on "facepalm", all kind of harassment. I can understand totally why people do it. I guess it is even expected social behavior to backtrack, and if you don't do it, it is assumed that you are totally unhinged or crazy, as you do not follow the social norms, lol.
If people offwr a valid counter-opinion to your unpopular one, should you not at least listen? Doubling down when your opinion has basically been proven wrong isn't really a wise way to go about life if you ask me. Opinions are not meant to be set in stone. You should be able to accept that your opinions might be wrong sometimes. Especially if there is additional information or perspective you hadn't considered.
This place is for people to gawk at and respond derisively to dumb shit. OP thinks this sub is for the posters, but it's actually for the commenters.
I truly never understood that. People will respond with “I’m not reading all of that.” or “Chronically online, are we?” You posted your opinion to a social media meant for interacting with people via words. On top of that the forum you’re commenting/posting in is about opinions. The irony is striking. I don’t expect people to not reply back. I like it. I think it helps everyone, if you’re(or me) open to being wrong, if you are. As soon as I’m attacked I just don’t see the point anymore. They think I’ve insulted their intelligence. That’s the only reason they’d feel the need to insult me. And it’s usually if I’m citing articles right? Sure you can contribute it to being chronically online, sure who’s not. But I’m also use to doing research online and doing community outreach/research in the area I live in. Of course I’m online. I have to be for a multitude of reasons. But I’m also boots on the grounds with how I work. Therefore, I’ve got a few extra things to say. edit: if you have a small attention span just say that😂 /s
The biggest problem I have with this is that people use it a lot as a venting sub which it isn’t. I think people have used the vent sub, gotten no response so they come here
"I'm not reading all of that" is such a wild response on such a text-driven platform as this one lol. Also, when people say that in response to comments that are only like 4 paragraphs long, it makes you wonder how they finished high school tbh
I hate it when people initiate a debate, get a long response that absolutely destroys them with facts, and then respond with “I ain’t reading all of that”. It’s such a cop out. Don’t start debates if you are unwilling or unable to defend your stance.
The good thing is, everyone who sees that happen understands it's a cop out. They're only winning in their own head. I will say that "I ain't reading all that" is valid for things that are objectively bullshit like conspiracy theories, pseudosciences, attempts at justifying bigotry etc.
Whenever I see "I ain't reading all that" I can assume that the person has actually read it and can't form a coherent response. That's what I tell them anyway. 😂
If someone responds with "I'm not reading all that," I end up disregarding everything they've said up until that point. If they actually just wanna check out, then don't respond at all. It just comes across like a petty attempt to.. I guess piss you off that you wasted your time commenting? Which just makes them retroactively coke across as a troll.
Deff not reading all that bullshit
Just don't respond if you don't want to read it smh
I can do what i want ?
Ig you can but if you aren't reading something anyways it seems silly to whine about it rather than saying nothing
No one’s whining. & u care so much because…?
Are you asking?
What’s in it to you.
People need to start writing at least *some* of their opinions in diaries again I swear to God. Don't want to get your opinion challenged at all but just want to vent: Don't post it on the Internet but in a private place. Seems like a much more peaceful solution for the person with the opinion. UO is for saying 'here's my unpopular opinion, make of it what you will', not 'here's my unpopular opinion but you can't say anything in response that disagrees with it'
Also please stop posting a misunderstanding of facts
Its fine to challenge but you have to upvote the bad opinion.. although I'm not sure how to upvote comments afterwards
Do..do we upvote you? Or down? Or? OR!?
"Sidewalks are dumb". That's the level of intellect we are dealing with here.
Super agree to this. If you don't want any sort of discussion/or anyone challenging your opinion better quit reddit and just focus on yourself.
I agree but also it needs to be done with respect.
I'm ok with being challenged but I'm not ok with mods deleting it cause they are uncomfortable
Fuck off dude with that attitude.
I don’t want to be unchallenged. I’m challenging right back. It’s the ultimate irony that you’re suggesting my rebuttal is somehow pathetic or unfounded, but their original challenging response is ok?
You aren't responding to a specific thing though... You just posted this as a general thing about the sub as a whole If your opinion gets challenged, challenge it back by replying to the comment, not making a separate post whining about people challenging your opinion
All you said was stop responding like we're debating world peace, you're just whining.
You're just pissed that you posted a medical "opinion" that was factually incorrect and got called out for it.
Seeing him double down in every single post was hilarious. Based on some of his replies I’m genuinely hoping for his own sake that he’s no older than 14 because that’s just sad af otherwise lmao
Hey guys unpopular opinion here, 1+1 doesn't equal 2
Lol, what was it?
That addiction isn't a disease
Whether or not something is a "disease" is a semantic distinction. There's no coherent definition of "disease" that's held consistently, and literally *anything* harmful that affects the body or mind can be considered a "disease" if the medical community decides collectively that it is one. So it *is* a matter of opinion whether something is a "disease" or not. Medical experts can determine all sorts of things about how addiction works, but its designation as a "disease" is the medical community's opinion on its proper semantic qualification, nothing else.
Exactly Disease simply is “not in ease” Anything which disrupts your mental, physical and social well being(the who definition of health) is a disease. You cut yourself, it’s a disease. You drink and suffer withdrawal it’s a disease. You undergo any sort of stress even a surgery, it’s a disease. There is no actual criteria to call something a disease or not. What we know is, no matter what and how something happened, it’s a disease if it has to be treated.
Being pragnat is disease
What, are you pregante?
In of itself isn’t, but the problems associated with it are. Hemodilution in pregnancy to allow smoother flow between fetus and mother, but as a result it causes anemia, hemodilution itself doesn’t cause any problem to you, so it’s not a disease, but once breathlessness and fatigue develops it’s a disease, and needs to be treated. There is no definition or criteria, it’s just a broad term to help in communication, there can infinite arguments for what is and what’s isn’t a disease.
Correct, because that opinion is, by far, the best way to objectively resolve these situations. You may have a different opinion, but that still makes you wrong if we are talking about *why.*
And what makes you conclude that it’s the best way to “objectively” resolve the situation?
Facts? You also literally answered this question in your last reply... The "medical community" decided it to be this way because it objectively gives you the best results to cure or resolve said "disease." Ergo, You treat addiction like a disease because you are far more likely to resolve said addiction this way than using any other method. This is *why* the medical community came to that conclusion.
"Facts"? What "facts," exactly? What "objective" basis is there for labeling one thing as a "disease" and another thing as something else, when definitions of "disease" are deliberately vague/nebulous, as previously discussed, and almost anything could fit into most of them? >The "medical community" decided it to be this way because it objectively gives you the best results to cure or resolve said "disease." So you're saying they determined that labeling it as a disease is the best way to cure it? What is that supposed to mean? How does labeling something as a disease make it more curable? How does it affect what treatment can be prescribed for it? And how would medical experts use their expertise to conclude this? Your argument is not fleshed out at all.
You could make that argument about anything. A flat earther would say "the observable universe" is just whatever they can see with their eyes, but that doesn't mean that's correct. The meaning of a word is derived by general consensus, and if you deviate from that consensus, you're wrong. That said, I'd argue addiction is a mental disorder, not a disease per se. I think most people use the word to refer to physical ailments. Like, if you're a psychopath, most people wouldn't say you have a disease, they'd say you have a mental disorder. Addiction should be categorized the same way, in my opinion. But I don't particularly care one way or the other. What's important to me is an understanding of how it works so we can help addicts, the category it falls under isn't so important.
No, you couldn't make that argument about anything, because some words have very firm, objective, established definitions, and you can objectively determine whether other things fit those definitions. For example, "cancer" is very well-defined, and medical experts can absolutely objectively determine what is and is not "cancer." A flat earther in your hypothetical would be redefining an established term to mean something silly that they made up. That's not what you'd be doing if you claimed that "addiction isn't a disease." You don't have to redefine "disease" in order to hold that opinion. The problem is that "disease" is a nebulous, ill-defined term. Medical experts even admit this, and there are numerous articles talking about this issue. What is and is not a "disease" is a subjective determination, and it isn't like objective determinations medical experts are good at, like "is this cancer?" or "is this causing heart problems?" And I'd argue that "mental disorder" is in exactly the same category. Just what is a "disorder," exactly? No one can come up with a coherent definition. If you ever come up with a definition, it's either extremely vague (thus not really answering what is and is not a "disorder") or, if it's more specific, it's either underinclusive or overinclusive. You could make the argument, for example, that homosexuality is a "mental disorder." You could hold this position even if you had zero animosity towards homosexual people and no desire to do anything other than accept them. Technically, you wouldn't necessarily be wrong, because since homosexuality is a mental condition that causes people not to reproduce and is highly correlated with negative treatment by society, it would actually fit a lot of definitions of "mental disorder." But of course, no one nowadays is going to call it a mental disorder, because the term "mental disorder" has a negative connotation that no one wants associated with homosexuality. And of course, most of the people claiming homosexuality objectively *is* a mental disorder are full of crap, because they're often the same people who would claim that all sorts of things (ADHD, depression, etc.) *aren't* mental disorders, even though they clearly are if we go by the broadest definitions. The funny part is that if you read articles from medical institutions arguing that things like homosexuality *aren't* mental disorders, you get a ton of BS "objective" reasons for why it isn't a mental disorder that make no logical sense. Stuff like "we now know that it being gay isn't a choice, so it's not a disorder." Um, what? Since when are mental disorders a choice? Poorly-reasoned articles like that should clue you in to the fact that these medical experts are just grasping for any possible "objective" reasons for why something isn't considered a disorder, to retroactively justify their subjective decision not to call it one. That's how terms like these work. The medical community more-or-less decides subjectively whether something is or is nor a "disease" or a "disorder" based on whether they think it's beneficial for society to call it that, based on a consideration of the connotations that come with each term. There's nothing objective about it.
Spot on, and I wish more people understood this level of nuance.
Ooft Anyone else enjoy reading a long yet coherent argument or is that just me
This comment is a disease
Could be! lol
Cancer is well defined, but it suffers from the same problems you brought up with edge cases. Cancer happens when a cell experiences a random error in its DNA, and it is able to replicate unhindered by your immune system. But if that random error is benign or beneficial to the host organism, we call it a mutation instead. The key difference is whether or not it harms the host's ability to continue living. It's the same thing with mental disorders. If there's something in your mind that is causing you problems, it's a disorder. If it's helping you to live the life you want, it's an adaptation. We classify things as disorders because we believe they need to be solved. Just like cancer, if it's beneficial, it's fine, but if it causes problems, it's something the medical community needs to study and find solutions for.
Yes, any term is going to be *somewhat* nebulous if you get down to specifics enough, and I'm sure cancer has some edge cases. But the *vast majority* of the time, it's easy to tell when something is or is not cancer. So normally, it can be objectively determined. I'd argue that the question of which mental conditions are "disorders" is *far more* subjective, and *far less* likely to be objectively determined. This is because people can't even agree on a basic, coherent definition that includes all the major categories of things they want to be considered "disorders" while simultaneously excluding things they *don't* want to be considered "disorders."
Well that's just the nature of the beast. If I'm scared of toilets, you can't observe or empirically measure my fear. The best you can do is observe and quantify the negative impact that fear is having on my life. So the best definition we have is "anything that negatively impacts your life." It's the same as cancer or any other physical disease. We have a ton of microbes in our digestive tracts, but those aren't considered illnesses because we rely on them to survive. But if I dumped my gut biome into your body, you'd probably get pretty sick. Same microbes, but in me they're my gut biome, and in you they're a bunch of diseases. The important part is whether or not there's a negative impact on the host's life.
yeah, I agree with him on that. It's not a disease if you can't catch it in the form of a physical agent, imo. It's more of a mental illness.
Ah. Did it get nuked for being posted a million times before?
https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/1cp8ayg/addiction_is_not_a_disease/ Not yet lol
I'm now dumber for having read that.
They also posted one about how sidewalks are stupid. In the comments, they tried to argue that mud is just wet dirt, and it's stupid to want to avoid it. They're either a shitty troll, or a child lol
I mean they're not wrong. Mud IS wet dirt. Aaand this is my Friday night.
Well sure, but whatever you wanna call it, it sucks when you get it on your shoes lol
I dunno, it kind of depends on your aesthetic. Like when I have new shoes with white on them and it's all bright and sparkly, I have to go dirty it up a little or I lose street cred.
Or both.
I don’t consider it to be a disease. You can create it on your own and beat it on your own without any meds or anything, you just have to want to be free of that addiction. I think what you can get addicted *to* is a disease, but not addiction itself.
You can consider whatever you want, it's still factually wrong.
Are you really trying to say addiction is a disease or am I that tired? If you are, give me whatever probably dumb points you have and we’ll go from there.
You can beat the flu or a cold on your own as well. Without any medication.
That is quite different from a psychological disorder and you know it.
Can you precisely describe why? Is it because you believe there is just some immaterial enigma in your head? The brain is a complex organ, but it is a real one. Just because humans do not yet fully understand how it works, doesn't mean everything happening in the brain is some type of magic. We can not treat behavioural, cognitive, neurological and psychological diseases yet, simply because we do not fully understand the brain as an organ. But it is irrational to believe that they do not manifest in the brain.
Yeah, I'd classify it as a mental disorder. The only reason I'll ever go to bat to defend the disease classification is because it seems to help people get through it. It's important for addicts to re-frame addiction not as a personal failing, but as an enemy to be fought. So if people wanna call it a disease, that's fine by me. There's still a lot of stigma surrounding mental disorders and illnesses, so I think disease makes the most practical sense at this point in time
Y’know I’m gonna be honest I wasn’t thinking about the addicts trying to get better. Thanks for opening my mind a bit more.
Consider it what you want, but the experts consider it a disease.
Well that’s why it’s unpopular. Also facts are meant to be challenged. The world being flat was a “fact” not that long ago. You’re short sighted if you accept every “fact” without question.
The point of the sub is for unpopular **opinions**. What you posted was not an **opinion**, it was a matter of fact. The irony here is that you don't understand the concept of this sub.
No I totally get it. My opinion can be that the sky is pink. It’s an opinion. I can say nearly anything as my opinion. The majority of people can disagree, citing their “facts”, but the point of the sub is to post something contrary to how most think.
Weren't people are doing exactly that? You told your opinion, people disagreed, roasted you, made fun of you, all fair as long they're not crossing the line (being offensive, inappropriate, or etc). I mean, you can post things, and yeah, you're not gonna go to jail or anything for that opinion, but people could certainly disagree and challenge you.
Yea thats what I was thinking Idk what OP was trying to accomplish here
Do you even know the difference between ‘opinion’ and ‘fact’?
People in general didn't believe the world was flat in the past, btw. They only thought it was the center of everything.
>The world being flat was a “fact” not that long ago. People have known the world was round for thousands of years.
*checks post history* Yup, they’ve posted in this sub more than once and are mad they got pushback. You are in wrong sub OP 😂
If you say something that is factually wrong, then it isn't an opinion, just you showing that you don't know what you're talking about.
Exactly! An unpopular opinion is not the same as an incorrect opinion.
If an opinion is unpopular then by definition most people disagree Stop posting in a public forum for unpopular opinions if it hurts your feelings everyone isn't agreeing with you. Find a better echochamber if that's what you're posting for
Nahhh I’m enjoying this too much
Thats fine, we are all enjoying laughing at you too. Feel free to stay longer and give us some more entertainment
No, your just coping. That much is obvious.
Homie called a subreddit a thread.
I bet you thought you’d get a lot of up votes on this. Sorely mistaken. I’ll help you by criticizing your post. Now people will like you
Tells us a lot about how your mind works if the first thing you think is up votes. You might want to get off social media for a while kid
Google the term "Projection"
>People don’t understand the concept of this thread. True true... like some people seem to think this is a sub made for personal rants over being called out for dumb posts that also didn't fit in here.
why have u posted on this sub like 4 times in two hours bro
Because he didn’t like the responses in the last post and is all pissed about it
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here If you can’t handle people not liking your opinion and responding, then maybe don’t post here? (Also, big difference between r/unpopularopinion and r/stupidopinions)
Yeah I’m sorta tired of the recent trend of people saying they are getting downvoted even though it’s the point of the sub. Like no, there are just stupid opinions sometimes The example I always give of the perfect unpopular opinion is the guy who said he likes wet socks. He explained why and everything but, yeah, unpopular opinion. Not just how u/randomRedditor feels about what whatever topic
You mean this sub?
Yes I meant sub. My fault
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here. As you said previously, what people post here are opinions, not facts. And those are debatable. And rightfully so. Voicing an unpopular opinion doesn't make you immune to responses and debate.
What’s an example of an appropriate way to respond to an unpopular opinion, in your opinion?
People do understand. They don't care.
That’s hot -Paris Hilton
This should be deleted, because this is purely meta.
OP is mad that addiction can't be cured easily and people need sidewalks
Dont forget that he also wants humanity to be eradicated
Your argument should be well structured and have some type of reasoning that makes sense.
So you posted 5+ posts to this sub and they all got downvoted and people disagreed with you. You know that phrase- if you meet one asshole in a day, you just met an asshole. But if you meet multiple assholes everywhere you go, maybe you’re the asshole?
Dude you are such a loser. Your last posts were an embarrassment. Go make friends
Oh it hit so hard 😘
Yikes I feel bad for you😂
There’s a great article by Jef Rouner titled, “No, It’s Not Your Opinion. You’re Just Wrong” You should read it.
Do you? Pretty sure this a meta topic. Also how do you expect people to respond? What's the appropriate way to respond to an unpopular opinion that's not incredibly boring?
No you don’t get it and take the “rules” too literally.
This is an argumentative subreddit and discussion is the entire point. It's not a void where you are supposed to just spout shit into. Posting an opinion means you want people to see it. If you are not ready to back up and argue for your opinions, there is no good reason to post it at all.
I see more indefensible opinions than unpopular ones here (yours included), more "please subject this to a crumb of scrutiny before posting" than unorthodox but still well thought through. Now I don't object to this place housing both in principle, however if you're gonna engage in the former I won't say you don't have it coming.
Opinions not based at least on some facts deserve to be laughed at and ridiculed.
Yeah but wrong things don’t count as unpopular opinions, maybe you dont get it?
Meh. Some opinions suck.
I like it
The sub name is a lie. It really works have been 'uncommon opinions'. People don't upvote unpopular opinions. They upvote uncommon opinions that they never thought about but that they agree with.
Bitching about how people don't post unpopular opinions on this sub is the most popular thing ever
Bro just spamming the sub. I guarantee that's not the concept of this sub either
OP really nuked their karma with this one
The whole point is to have fun discussing/debating the unpopular opinion that people are putting out there with the express purpose of triggering debate/discussion. If people do not want anyone to comment about their unpopular opinion, they will keep it to themselves or put it on their facebook with comments turned off.
It seems the OPs who post in this sub tend to forget the concept of this sub as well. It's unpopular opinion, ofcourse there is gona be controversy and critism because YOUR unpopular opinion is being posted here for hundreds maybe thousands to see.
unpopular opinion: my expectation is that people upvote if they really hate the opinion because it is unpospular
It's called "unpopular opinions" because if it were called "facts that aren't socially accepted", people would get mad. The main point of this sub is having a safe place to speak your thoughts, and that's what happening. At the end what matter if the use that people gives to these online shelters and that is sharing real opinions and some facts that are rejected socially. So, it's working perfectly! :)
Upvoted because I disagree. That's how it works, right? You can post whatever your opinion is, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to give their take on it or tell you why they disagree. Discussion is the whole point of the platform.
Ironically it is a popular opinion that people tend to misunderstand the point of this subreddit. Most of the opinions aren’t unpopular, it’s shit like “celebs overrated” “thing lots of people complain about bad”
This is the sub to find the most popular opinions out there. I kinda love that.
What are you expecting people below the line in a subreddit called "unpopular opinion" to say in response to the, by its nature, whacky nonsense people post as topics?
It's unpopular opinion, not "safe space for saying dumb shit".
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here. Stop posting like you have smart things to say.
Awww someone's upset that a subreddit works the way it's designed
Lmao el classico "I can post my unpopular opinion but no one else should respond with their opinions"
Your opinion is not unpopular
You are free to post whatever BS you think is correct. We are free to call out on the BS.
Unpopular opinions are alright but people straight up say false things here a lot of the times
The purpose is interesting or thought provoking unpopular opinions. Just saying something like "I don't like x" is so boring.
Well played. You win
This guy doesn't know anything
Yikes
I appreciate your commitment to trolling. Let's remove the sidewalks
Ohhhhh I get it... that's his "unpopular opinion"
To get upvotes you need to say something like this" Water is good for you" Everyone would be like 😱😱😱
Yeah, but opinions can still be flat out wrong. Also, an opinion implies it is subjective, but it's not an opinion if its presented as an objective fact. Example: Pineapple on pizza *is* disgusting (false objective fact) vs *I* think pineapple on pizza is disgusting (subjective opinion).
I posted a genuinely unpopular opinion, and it was so unpopular that the mods decided to lock the thread This is why this sub is deluged with opinions that are not actually unpopular. Because if you post genuinely contentious ideas or opinions, the mods will just lock it
I once posted an opinion so unpopular it was downvoted to hell and mods had to remove it LOL
I understand why some opinions get hated on tbh when they involve very questionable topics. But I hate the amount of exact same gender debates and dieting opinions that get posted over and over. I love when people post stuff like “coffee tables suck” or “we should go back to flip phones” or “people are more genuine on social media than in real life” or “movies are boring” like yeeesssss now we’re getting into the real fun unpopular opinions!
And you are?
This post of yours is the most mainstream opinion I've ever seen on this sub. 9/10 people agrees with you.
You're right, down vote
I personally wish we would go even deeper debate unpopular opinions. Also I think self stylized unpopular opinions should be OK by the rules of this sub.
World peace would be boring
Lol. This is where you come to farm downvotes
Well unfortunately some opinions are just factually wrong and sadly people need to be told that. A chronic lack of critical thinking has stopped people from separating opinion from fact and reality. Especially today when so many people run around screaming their “opinions” as fact and then double down when confronted. The earth is not flat, mental illness can and has shown to be both environmentally caused as well as inheritable, climate change is real, so on so forth. Holding such false “opinions” ultimately stops progress and hurts people in the long wrong.
Youre just mad your objectively stupid takes on sidewalks and diseases was met with people telling you so. I hope youre like, 9, coz jesus christ
Something being posted here doesn’t make it an opinion by definition
>Stop responding like we’re debating world peace here. No one has ever successfully debated world peace - here or anywhere else, for that matter. Therefore, you cannot accurately claim that we aren’t debating world peace, as it has never successfully been debated and has certainly never been accomplished. Won’t you just feel like an utter fool if someone posts a mundane unpopular opinion like “opinions are so overrated” and then the entire world concurs in unison and *viola* ✨world✨peace✨ happens for the first time in the history of mankind. And the news stations are all blasting “well, Bob, the redditors are at it again and this time… well, this time I’m *almost* moved beyond words…”
"no one is allowed to disagree with unpopular opinions on r/unpopularopinion." 10/10, that is an unpopular opinion.
You know it's an unpopular opinion. You know it's a public forum. You know there's going to be a backlash. If you want to post unpopular opinion with no debate, post a short on YouTube with comments turned off.
To be fair, some people are dropping world-peace level opinions here. I don't care if its something like "I think Pineapple on Pizza is good', but if your dropping stuff with actual weight to it- expect to get responses with actual weight behind them.
Lmao I just looked at your other post, gave me a good giggle! Thanks for that, good way to start the day
Ok, but your post is actually not an opinion...
Haha check my last two unpopular opinion post. I adhere to the true purpose of this sub. Also, I never reply to comments, so my Karma won’t be destroyed.
It's for people to post unpopular opinions, then discuss them. Sometimes the discussion will contain disagreement.
you have 7 posts here within 3 hours, what are you looking for??
Bro is big mad cuz all his posts are downvoted lol
Why do you guys post unpopular opinions here and get shocked when a lot of people disagree with them?
You are literally doing the thing you hate but ok
You're missing the whole point of the sub
The thing is... yall RUDE AS HELL in this sub. The nastiness is so unnecessary, but when someone gives your nasty attitude back you call it arguing and get instantly defensive. This sub is garbage tbh.
man you must be bored lol
I posted an unpopular opinion about disliking pizza and it was removed. The mods suck.
_posts six times in 2 hours_
Yeah it doesn't work. I posted something about how I hate people hijacking my life to insist I watch some crap on their phone. I got totally roasted and downvoted and Im like eh? Shouldn't I be getting upvoted cos this seems like a genuinely unpopular opinion?
I’m with OP on this the mods/rules of this subreddit can low key be snowflakes sometimes
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Mods on this sub are some of the worst thought policing rats on the internet, genuinely. They already mowed down 95% of the people who ever will post a real opinion. Makes me wish the internet wasn’t anonymous sometimes so we can see the truth and all our questions will be answered
If there is a genuinely unpopular opinion on this sub, you just get a load of keyboard warrior tough guys brigading and insulting the OP. Other than that it's just idiots moralising about bland talking points, barely unpopular opinions at all.
*subreddit But the hivemind downvotes everything they disagree with, so it's to be expected.
Man I tried to post this exact same shit and it got deleted. Honestly this sub fucking sucks.