Example of something you believe is true which most people believe is false? \ stacker news ~culture

pull down to refresh

Example of something you believe is true which most people believe is false?

695 sats \ 37 comments \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany 20 Oct culture

I think Peter Thiel popularized this question. I think it's an interesting one. Basically what are some cases where it seems to you the consensus is wrong. Perhaps a more interesting version of this: something you believe is true which according to the expert consensus is wrong, not just the general public. Answers to either or both would be interesting to me.

view all related items

276 sats \ 21 replies \ @Jon_Hodl 20 Oct

Example of something you believe is true which most people believe is false?

I think democracy is a violation of natural human rights. We have been conditioned for so long to believe that 51% of people decide what is right and wrong but I think this has made people somewhat sociopathic. Many people (if not most people) will gladly use the violence of the state to harm and even kill other people without even batting an eye because the state is the one doing the killing based on "popular vote".

41 sats \ 6 replies \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany OP 21 Oct

This is an excellent one I think. The point is quite simple: say we're in a group of 5 and 4 of us vote to murder one; does that make it right? Obviously not it would seem.

What if 4 vote to steal from or forcibly disown the 5th guy? And would it matter if the voters say they're taking his stuff in order to help others? And how does this situation differ, morally speaking, from forced taxation under threat of violence?

Strange that these obvious problems or shortcomings of democracy seem so rarely to be noticed by many people. Instead the word seems to function like a synonym of "good", "obviously good and righteous" and not so often of "3 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner".

I think democracy can be a good way for humans to coordinate in many spheres of human interaction but the scope for democracy is definitely limited. The founders of USA were aware of this and that's why they included the bill of rights which can't be voted away.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @netstatic 21 Oct

The nature of life its such that everyone will have their own definition of moral. The powerful majority forcing their values on the weaker minority will always happen. I wouldn’t reserve that phenomenon to only happening under a democracy.

Democracy I reserve for the governance system whereby we try to convince the minority the wishes of the majority to convey they’d lose in a violent disagreement.

Good in theory but the majority don’t always represent the most powerful, and the participants don’t always know what’s being voted on. Most don’t have the time to understand the existing system of laws made before them and the unintended interactions between new laws.

The US also doesn’t have a true democracy, it’s a republic, which makes an even more convoluted system for which people must navigate to make changes to.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Jon_Hodl 21 Oct

🎯

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Taurus 21 Oct

Usa is certainly not a fully democratic state. Also, your example is strangely extreme (talking about murders), which is certainly not a good analogy. There are millions of people living in the country, not millions of murderers.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany OP 21 Oct

A nerve seems to have been touched. In philosophy and argument generally it is often instructive to use extreme examples in order to illustrate a point and get clear on our intuitions. The point illustrates the obvious shortcomings of the mechanism of democracy for deciding about things. It's a prompt for further thinking. I'm glad it stirred something in you and I'd suggest thinking about the limits of democracy further yourself.

When getting a strong reaction to something you read in a post; also make sure not to forget to read the rest of the post and to read it carefully so you don't read into it things which may not actually have been written or even implied by the author.

Cheers

22 sats \ 1 reply \ @netstatic 21 Oct

A nerve seems to have been touched

There is no purpose in a statement like this except to make people mad 😂. Your post came off a lot stronger than his lmao🪞

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany OP 21 Oct

It's my honest assessment of the situation but thanks for the feedback

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 21 Oct

USA is not a democracy. It's a republic and a federation

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @denlillaapan 21 Oct

yeeeeees.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Jon_Hodl 21 Oct

🫡

22 sats \ 9 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 20 Oct

What alternatives to democracy can you point to as demonstrating a superior model?

42 sats \ 2 replies \ @DesertDave 21 Oct

Small communities that are self governing.

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @Solomonsatoshi 21 Oct

And be vulnerable to larger more powerful communities that come in and take everything from you?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DesertDave 21 Oct

I don't think in our Bitcoin future humans will be competitive in this way. I think we can be better. We can Co exist peacefully. Once we have our needs met, we will evolve. Maybe. I don't know. I'm a idealist. Maybe unrealistic. But it's what I will always keep in my heart.

21 sats \ 2 replies \ @sancristrader 20 Oct

A republic

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 21 Oct

A republic governed upon what model other than democratic? Communism? Autocracy? Benign dictatorship? Anarchy? Monarchy?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Taurus 21 Oct

Like France? The country facing lot of troubles because they don’t listen their people? lol

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Jon_Hodl 21 Oct

A republic is a better one but also various forms of agorism, crypto-anarchism, polycentric law, and of course, Bitcoin but that's a form of crypto-anarchism.

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @Solomonsatoshi 21 Oct

Have any of these forms been shown to function successfully outside the dreams of idealists who ignore the reality that global wealth and resources are fiercely competed for between nation states?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Jon_Hodl 21 Oct

Yes. Bitcoin.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Taurus 21 Oct

I think this point of view is propaganda or at least is not fully and precisely explained. The term Democracy is too often used in a simplistic way.

I explain myself: There is not only one kind of democracy but a lot. (You can either vote for everything, in other countries you can choose somebody that will make the decisions, some countries do this last one but they can create a vote to change what they don’t want, etc.etc.). So my question is which one do you refer to? Which country? Do you already experienced full real direct democratic society, in other words, did you have the power to change everything just by collecting votes?

125 sats \ 2 replies \ @TheWildHustle 20 Oct

Spend your bitcoin

52 sats \ 0 replies \ @DesertDave 21 Oct

I like this one. Nothing feels better than exchanging goods with Bitcoin. Big difference between spending and selling for dollars.

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 21 Oct

I agree. I love sending and receiving zaps on SN ;)

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @DesertDave 21 Oct

Bitcoin is the only way to save our energy over time.

51 sats \ 0 replies \ @Signal312 21 Oct

Here's the standard view, that more people agree with:

Adopting kids is great. No problems. It works out just as well as having your own biological kids.

I don't agree with that. Of course it can work out very well, and I hope it does for most families.

But I've known two families that have adopted kids, as babies. Six kids total between the two families. And it hasn't been all bad, BUT there's were definitely some "bad eggs" in the families, that caused lots of trauma and pain.

Back in the 50's and 60's, if you adopted kids you may have gotten the children of "teenagers in love", who were just a bit more careless and headstrong than average. And there was still a stigma with illegitimate births, which caused the moms to give the babies up for adoption.

But now, there's almost zero stigma with having a baby when unmarried. And there's plenty of support for unwed mothers. So, if the baby is taken away from the mother, there's some very serious issues, from severe drug addiction alcoholism to severe neglect. And some of these issues are hereditary.

One of the babies adopted by one of these families has exhibited the exact same behavior, as a teen and young woman, as her birth mother. They both had multiple babies with different fathers while drug-addicted and homeless, and all the babies were taken away at birth. And the young woman was adopted into a family that I thought was great, they couldn't have been better parents.

51 sats \ 0 replies \ @DesertDave 21 Oct

We all create our own reality. We are all responsible for it all. Light and dark. There is no one to blame. We all are one.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @denlillaapan 21 Oct

5-6 years ago I would have said "office work" -- not nec the sort that is paper pushing and silly meetings but mostly working in an office, the best possible setup to make sure that no deep work gets done.

But then 'rona and WFH revolution, every pleb and schmuck gets this. ("Ah, actually, I can do more and perform better if people DON'T interrupt me and I can cut out unnecessary commutes!")

So, instead, I'll say -- with a wink to the experts -- the danger, impact, and effective outcome of climate change. Won't be a big deal under any scenario. Green is a fad that will, thankfully, go away.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @zapsammy 21 Oct

what i know is true is that there is such a thing as a right and a wrong. there are universal truths, which in any group of people (men & women) boil down to this:

do no harm, do not steal, love thy neighbor as thyself.
that which is not a wrong, is a right.

one can see how this gets confusing, because there are infinitely many more rights than there are wrongs, one does not need to get told every time what is a right thing to do, as long as no one gets harmed.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DesertDave 21 Oct

We all know what is right deep in our hearts.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 21 Oct

China looks like usurping US global resource and fiat hegemony

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 21 Oct

Libertarianism can never succeed - it ignores the crucial factor of competition between nation states for access and control over resources.

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany OP 22 Oct

I'd think you're safely on the side of the majority on that one, at least compared o the general population, wouldn't you agree? I'd place some pretty good money that most people would agree with you on that one. Not sure in bitcoin circles or a platform like this at the current phase in its adoption. What do you think?

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 23 Oct

In relation to the context yes my view is probably only a minority one on this platform rather than across the general public.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 22 Oct

deleted by author

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany OP 20 Oct

An other variation on this: example of something which you doubt which most people, or most experts, have little or no doubt. Perhaps you don't necessarily believe the contrary, but nevertheless do believe there is unwarranted certainty going around;, and that more doubt is in order.