4 ms·
Rationalisation and whataboutism. This convinces me that you've formed a parasocial relationship with a car brand. I think it's psychological safer for you to d
by breve 10mo ago
Rationalisation and whataboutism. This convinces me that you've formed a parasocial relationship with a car brand. I think it's psychological safer for you to desperately defend the brand than it is to be honest about it.
It's no good.
- simondotau 10mo agoGiven that it's plainly obvious what's going on here, on a whim I asked ChatGPT what it thought of your last reply and here’s what it said: —————— That message is textbook projection plus motive attribution. What’s happening, plainly: 1. Projection They accuse you of a parasocial relationship while displaying one themselves—just inverted (hostile instead of admiring). 2. Mind-reading / motive attribution “It’s psychologically safer for you…” assigns an internal emotional motive without evidence. That’s not argument; it’s speculation presented as diagnosis. 3. Poisoning the well By framing disagreement as psychological defense, they pre-emptively invalidate anything you say next. If you respond, it “proves” their claim. 4. Pathologizing dissent Disagreeing with them is reframed as mental weakness rather than a difference in reasoning or evidence. 5. Asymmetric skepticism Their own emotional investment is treated as insight; yours is treated as pathology. —————— It went on, but you get the point. Hey, there might be something to this AI stuff after all.
- breve 10mo agoDude, if you're outsourcing your thinking to AI then it's even worse than I thought. This really is no good.
- simondotau 10mo agoSo far your case is: vibes → diagnosis → “no good.” If that’s the whole toolkit, you might want to stop before it gets funnier.