What it feels like having a conversation with conservatives
It's a matter of perspective
Submitted 1 day 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 day ago
GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 1 day ago
and tankies*
TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
And liberals
(Just trying to be inclusive)
paladin3494@feddit.dk 9 hours 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 8 hours 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.
Draconic_NEO@lemmy.world 16 hours 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.
ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
This thread is basically what modern politics feels like
awwwyissss@lemm.ee 1 day ago
Too real.
paladin3494@feddit.dk 9 hours 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 7 hours 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.
m0darn@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
At least there are no centrists in here claiming it’s 3.5
Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 22 hours ago
Or that we should agree on “throur”
PaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.works 1 day 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 day ago
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
alternative interpretation: it’s only possible to be neither right nor wrong on when the object is physically impossible
tehmics@lemmy.world 13 hours 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 15 hours 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 day ago
Pretty sure its a riff on this …fineartamerica.com/…/three-or-four-bar-optical-i…
Voyajer@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s an impossible object optical illusion but edited to be possible
Pinklink@lemm.ee 1 day 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 day 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 day ago
The original used XI where it was 9 or 11 depending on the side.
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 day ago
I can’t see four. I’m sure it’s there, it just doesn’t appear to me.
Sabata11792@ani.social 1 day 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 day ago
We should build a wall around four, and make three pay for for it
Faresh@lemmy.ml 22 hours 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 9 hours 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.
can@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Is it though?
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Typical. Both sides think theirs is the only correct answer, and that the other side is just wrong.
lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
But in this case, the other side is wrong!
nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 1 day ago
It might be.
cybermass@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
It could possibly go either way.
slaacaa@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Big if true
trolololol@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
There’s 3 lights
don@lemm.ee 23 hours 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 22 hours ago
Rectangular prisms have 6 sides though.
Allero@lemmy.today 16 hours ago
You discovered “political nuance”
Tixanou@lemm.ee 22 hours ago
I see seven
GeneralInterest@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 19 hours ago
It’s obviously nine you pan-arab zionist !
Ascend910@lemmy.ml 16 hours ago
People take your joke so personally lol
rain_worl@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
look at the ends. probably you’re thinking of seven (7) stacked together
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
I don’t know why there’s even a debate over that. The answer is clearly “Yanny.”
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
no, it’s blue and gold
PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Instructions unclear, I got my dick caught in the number 8.
rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Top or bottom?
PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 13 hours ago
Yes?
lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
There are four lights!
biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
'bour tree fiddy
don@lemm.ee 23 hours ago
Goddammit, Loch Ness Monster, I ain’t gonna give you no tree fiddy
TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
I’ll never lose another argument with this up my sleeve
FlickeringScreens@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I fucking knew these comments would get political, they always do
dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 day ago
Everything social is political, because politics are the mechanics of society. A non political conversation is impossible.
Thcdenton@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Welcome to Lemmy
Scubus@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
What would you prefer we discuss?
FlickeringScreens@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I give up fuck this shit
Tante_Meier@discuss.tchncs.de 23 hours ago
0-based indexing vs. 1-based indexing
elrik@lemmy.world 22 hours 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.
DonPiano@feddit.org 23 hours ago
1-based indexing vs. 2-based indexing
RangerJosie@lemmy.world 1 day ago
9
therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
I see 37
Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 day ago
18
Lumisal@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Six
nifty@lemmy.world 1 day 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 day ago
Image
SARGE@startrek.website 1 day ago
Goddamn cardies…