4 ms·

I think you're not giving them credit when claiming they're all gullible. Who says your point of view is the correct one? If we take the analogy to the pandemic

I think you're not giving them credit when claiming they're all gullible. Who says your point of view is the correct one? If we take the analogy to the pandemic with social media putting the stamp of approval on posts confirming their narrative, while flagging official .gov links. Then the so called gullible are simply normal people asking for open discussion. And some people on their high horses claim they're brainwashed, gullible, russian agents or bots. Now a lot of that so called misinformation is showing to be true, even the far-fetched lab leak with gain-of-function research funded by a US agency, in fucking China. What's even real anymore. The most important thing humanity can do today is putting higher standards of truth on themselves and their allies instead of knee-jerk reactions and calling the opposite side gullible. They have their arguments if we take a breath and listen. And there's a good chance you're just as brainwashed as those you oppose.

okamiueru 4y ago
> Who says your point of view is the correct one? The whole premise of this article is "believing misinformation". And on that note, it's also not "my point" either. But, let's also allow words to mean what they mean, shall we? Gullible, "easily deceived or duped", is not too off the mark to describe those who fall victim to misinformation. Especially so when it was generalized to a large population always including those more prone to being gullible in whatever context. From your last paragraph, I don't think we disagree, but I suspect that what I wrote would come across more accurately, if it wasn't assumed to be inflammatory. In fact, my argument was that it wasn't the fault of "the gullible", because they will always be there, to some extent. But that the blame should perhaps be directed at those aiming to exploit it, or allow it.
- worksonmine 4y ago
  But your reply is in a context though so I can only assume it should be taken in context. Still here you refer to them as gullible from your perspective. I don't think they'd identify as gullible in their circle, and they call you gullible. Where can you even meet when that's your view of each other? Have you ever stopped to think that maybe you're the gullible one?
  - okamiueru 4y ago
    Who is "them" to you? I'm referring to gullible people by the trait of being gullible. They are by definition gullible. Whether or not I'm within that group depends on the topic, though I'm sure for some, that I am. I don't think you understood that part of my argument. Or, maybe I didn't understand yours. In either case, it seems to me this is rather unproductive. Have a nice day.

okamiueru 4y ago

> Who says your point of view is the correct one? The whole premise of this article is "believing misinformation". And on that note, it's also not "my point" either. But, let's also allow words to mean what they mean, shall we? Gullible, "easily deceived or duped", is not too off the mark to describe those who fall victim to misinformation. Especially so when it was generalized to a large population always including those more prone to being gullible in whatever context. From your last paragraph, I don't think we disagree, but I suspect that what I wrote would come across more accurately, if it wasn't assumed to be inflammatory. In fact, my argument was that it wasn't the fault of "the gullible", because they will always be there, to some extent. But that the blame should perhaps be directed at those aiming to exploit it, or allow it.

worksonmine 4y ago
But your reply is in a context though so I can only assume it should be taken in context. Still here you refer to them as gullible from your perspective. I don't think they'd identify as gullible in their circle, and they call you gullible. Where can you even meet when that's your view of each other? Have you ever stopped to think that maybe you're the gullible one?
- okamiueru 4y ago
  Who is "them" to you? I'm referring to gullible people by the trait of being gullible. They are by definition gullible. Whether or not I'm within that group depends on the topic, though I'm sure for some, that I am. I don't think you understood that part of my argument. Or, maybe I didn't understand yours. In either case, it seems to me this is rather unproductive. Have a nice day.