What it feels like having a conversation with conservatives
It's a matter of perspective
Submitted 1 month ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to [deleted]
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d22fb208-2940-48cd-bb20-a4cb4f9bbed2.jpeg
Comments
A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 1 month ago
GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 1 month ago
and tankies*
TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 month ago
And liberals
(Just trying to be inclusive)
paladin3494@feddit.dk 1 month ago
Interesting. I guess it’s about cultural conditioning. Growing up in Scandinavia the “both sides” and subjectivist approach was more common for leftists. Especially the “your terrorist is my freedom fighter”. In contrast rightists and liberals usually insisted on exactly this two-plus-two-is-four rhetoric. As analyzing American discourse from the outside I’m still not sure if the right wingers of my Nordic childhood was right anyway, or if American leftism has regressed horrendously
A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 1 month ago
If we were talking about the normal version where one perspective does see 4 sides and the other 3, then I’d agree. But right wingers often completely ignore science and facts for what they feel is right - despite loudly claiming the opposite. They’re simply wrong about any number of things, from economics to gender studies to climate change, but they insist on their positions because of how they feel on a fundamental level - that all the common-sense folks around them think this way, their preacher thinks this way, and they don’t trust anyone they haven’t personally encountered long enough to understand. Time and time again, science has disproven explicitly conservative viewpoints, from race biology to Social Darwinism to climate change and so on. But they double down because to change their perspectives risks alienating their peers, or even worse, possibly damning them to Hell.
That’s why I said what I did. Liberals are a pain in the ass and generally incapable of accomplishing much of value, but at least they typically welcome new data that may contradict a previously-held position.
ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
This thread is basically what modern politics feels like
awwwyissss@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Too real.
PaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Is there a way to see this as four? I’m assuming so but legitimately can’t see anything other than three. Is that the joke and I’m overthinking‽ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 1 month ago
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
alternative interpretation: it’s only possible to be neither right nor wrong on when the object is physically impossible
tehmics@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Thank you. I’ve seen the old one before and I knew there was an illusion but I obviously couldn’t find it in the OP.
pyre@lemmy.world 1 month ago
my favorite thing is when a comic has a very clear message but it’s also written at the top what it’s about and whay i should take from the message is further explained below.
Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Pretty sure its a riff on this …fineartamerica.com/…/three-or-four-bar-optical-i…
Voyajer@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s an impossible object optical illusion but edited to be possible
Pinklink@lemm.ee 1 month ago
The original is one of those MC Escher type things where all the lines are connected and it actually does have four “ends” on one side
lath@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I can think of a few ways, but considering where this is posted, there’s no need to overthink. Just keep it simple.
sloppy_diffuser@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
The original used XI where it was 9 or 11 depending on the side.
m0darn@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
At least there are no centrists in here claiming it’s 3.5
Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Or that we should agree on “throur”
can@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Is it though?
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Typical. Both sides think theirs is the only correct answer, and that the other side is just wrong.
lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
But in this case, the other side is wrong!
nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 1 month ago
It might be.
cybermass@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
It could possibly go either way.
slaacaa@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Big if true
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 month ago
I can’t see four. I’m sure it’s there, it just doesn’t appear to me.
Sabata11792@ani.social 1 month ago
Do you not see four? Your really missing out. I think some guys even started worshiping it. We even started selling a book about four. Once you see it, you can join out super cool club and four based economy.
Scubus@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
We should build a wall around four, and make three pay for for it
Faresh@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
I think the joke is that there’s indeed unequivocally just three, and that one of them still says four despite that fact, contradicting the readers expectations who normally for this format expects the middle thing to be something that changes with perspective (eg. 6 vs 9)
ameancow@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Originally it was supposed to be an optical illusion that looks like three or four rods from different angles.
This edit has changed it to be just literally three. It’s a joke on certain people denying reality.
Draconic_NEO@lemmy.world 1 month ago
The one on the left is a MAGA, they’re unable to listen to logic even if the answer is right in front of them.
don@lemm.ee 1 month ago
I see the problem, the artist forgot the rest of the sentence:
“Four-sided objects, of which there are three.”
Boom. Done. EZPZ. Do better, artist.
elrik@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Rectangular prisms have 6 sides though.
Allero@lemmy.today 1 month ago
You discovered “political nuance”
Tixanou@lemm.ee 1 month ago
I see seven
GeneralInterest@lemmy.world 1 month ago
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
It’s obviously nine you pan-arab zionist !
Ascend910@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
People take your joke so personally lol
rain_worl@lemmy.world 1 month ago
look at the ends. probably you’re thinking of seven (7) stacked together
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I don’t know why there’s even a debate over that. The answer is clearly “Yanny.”
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 month ago
no, it’s blue and gold
PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Instructions unclear, I got my dick caught in the number 8.
rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Top or bottom?
PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Yes?
lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
There are four lights!
trolololol@lemmy.world 1 month ago
There’s 3 lights
TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 month ago
I’ll never lose another argument with this up my sleeve
paladin3494@feddit.dk 1 month ago
I guess it’s all a matter of cultural conditioning but growing up in Scandinavia this kind of rhetoric was always associated with right-wingers and other liberals whereas “both sides” was more common for progressives and leftists. The most common I saw was the one-persons-terrorist-is-another-persons-freedom-fighter.
aidan@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s always been complicated, Chomsky famously got criticized around the world for opposing censorship of different perspectives. Censorship has always come from collectivist ideologies though.
biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
'bour tree fiddy
don@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Goddammit, Loch Ness Monster, I ain’t gonna give you no tree fiddy
FlickeringScreens@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I fucking knew these comments would get political, they always do
dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 month ago
Everything social is political, because politics are the mechanics of society. A non political conversation is impossible.
Thcdenton@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Welcome to Lemmy
Scubus@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
What would you prefer we discuss?
FlickeringScreens@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I give up fuck this shit
RangerJosie@lemmy.world 1 month ago
9
Tante_Meier@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
0-based indexing vs. 1-based indexing
elrik@lemmy.world 1 month ago
What? The first ordinal you start counting at doesn’t change the total count, and alternatively the last item would be indexed at 2 if you used 0-based indexing.
Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 month ago
18
Lumisal@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Six
nifty@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Sure it’s a matter of perspective, but only so far because reality constraints that the number of items on the ground are either three or four. One of these people is closer to what’s real.
Thcdenton@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Image
SARGE@startrek.website 1 month ago
Goddamn cardies…