This is a very basic standard to hold ourselves to. Does not strictly need to be a rule, just know if you claim something and fail to back it up, it's your opinion and nothing more. Truss T'miebroh is NOT a valid source. And no amount of senseless downvoting or baseless, emotional conjecture is going to magically validate your claims. Neither does "look it up". If you're so confident your claim is solid, then you should be able to at least point me or anyone asking in the right direction. But the most effective way to persuade is to have evidence ready to share.
Citing sources and providing proof is the very basis of logic and reason. And this community claims to be a proponent of such yet I see many many posts that go unchallenged or fail to back up information when directly asked for follow up information. Just know that I and many other logicians will assume your claim is an opinion and promptly disregard it as such if you don't bring the facts.
I am guilty of this even as I try to be better about it. Confirmation bias is a nasty drug. But confirmation bias isn't the truth. In fact more often that not it can be the furthest from.
This is a core practice that we need to adopt as the norm. It does not matter if normies lash out. That is never a justifiable excuse to not call them out. Remember, they are the minority and the worst anyone can do is try to kill you for disagreements which if they try, defend yourself. Oh that sounds extreme? Good. It is and likely will never happen. Despite what Twattertards say, they don't have the stomach to kill a small animal, let alone a human and no, their goon squads are of no real threat either. The cabal wants you to live in fear of the masses because it's us, said masses they fear. And yes, we are no different than the normies in the grand scheme. This is everyone versus them. Always has been. It's time to wake them to this truth with logic and reason. And that starts by holding each other to the standards of citing claims.
Theories are excepted. I may ask for sources to better understand your stance, but that's it. Theories are meant to be challenged, but my goal is to seek the truth. Always remember the difference of being right and what is right. And they seldom align. It's okay to be wrong.
May God protect, bless and guide us safely through this tumultuous hour.
Sometimes. That's why I vet sources and all sources are subject to scrutiny.
I read the title and just thought of my lib educated son.
If I tell him the source is Daily Mail then it’s right wing racist and biased.
If i tell him it was RT then it’s Putin propaganda.
If I tell him it was News Group then its Murdoch playing devils advocate.
If I tell him the source was straight from the horses mouth( George Soros) I get “ but were you there in the room when he said it”.
I post source when putting on a post and will often give an opinion quoting a source.Sometimes my memory will be jogged and I’ll find an article from 20 to 30 years ago to back up my retained knowledge, but source isn’t a deal breaker.
Ask him to prove his claims about your sources. Also add Epoch Times to your source bin.
Everything anyone ever tells you, should be assumed to be an opinion or a subjective observation. Just because you post a source does not make it a fact.
I hope Anons have learnt that understanding reality requires a lot more than sources. Its a state of mind thats slowly refined by being exposed to a constant stream of information (subjective, opinions) coupled with critical thinking. Reality is built by our mind, individually, with our intuition and spirituality.
Its always good to include where you came up with the information, because that helps the intuitive process for others. But that does not make it a fact.
Unless it's irrefutable. The sky is blue, gravity is provable, the Earth is round. Start with the basics and build from there. Yes, sources can be scrutinized and should be. Everything should be questioned and nothing ever assumed as truth.
Great post! Making a clear distinction between opinion, theory, and something considered factual (long discussion of the term "fact" being bypassed here) makes sense.
That's a sensible idea that makes things more clear without stepping on anyone's toes -- bring your opinions, your theories, and the relevant facts you come across; all are welcome.
I like it.
When I get info that I question I look it up myself. If I am questioning someone's comment, why would I trust their source.
I think people who always ask for sauce are just too lazy to research on their own.
Not as lazy as those who refuse to provide them. I often direct them to a starting point such as Operation Mockingbird or the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. I'm also curious if they find more info.
People who respond with "do your own research" without so much as a starting point are obviously insecure about their claims and are mad they're having their position challenged.
Gotta add this cuz of the big dumb!
Not providing source material does not make a fact an opinion. Providing source material does not make an opinion a fact! It just means that it wasn't made easier for you to sort through. QQ
Just saying.
BIG DUMB!
If there's no source it's just opinion. I reject your take completely.
Do as you like but my statements remain true. There is nothing wrong with being skeptical of information without a source, but how long have we been force fed information like that? Again, if you cannot be bothered you come off as someone looking for a quick way to 404 links, many are being 404d right now.
Doesn't matter how you feel about facts either, I suggest you start not caring because they certainly do not care about you. A fact is a fact, even if sources are not provided. An opinion is an opinion even if sources are provided.
Get Good!
Learn how to discern fact from opinion yourself!
Having said that, I have just gone through your comments to see how you fair.
250 comments, at 25 comments per page for 10 pages of comments.
I found 7 links.
How do we ask for that which we ourselves fail to provide from others?
I half expected the encyclopedia britannica over here!
You trying to kick off some confirmation bias or what?
Look for the material, if you cannot be bothered then you are likely working for someone else trying to find links to 404. No thanks!
Part of the problem with feeding the information to you is that with a few posts one might be considered truthful and relevant, having linked to information in the past. That lends to superiority and vested/vetted authority. How often do news agencies link to information that says the opposite of what was said in the article, but it has SOURCES so it must be true!!!! Also, if I tell you what something is before you read it I have imprinted on you the Idea that I want you to get from it.
I want you to learn how to learn on your own because you were taught how to rely on others for far too long!
Vet sources as hard as you feel you need to. The news is straight up lies so that's a moot point.
Questioning sources to no end is entirely allowed if not encouraged. Arguably anything beyond your eyes is made up and subject to scrutiny.
Thank you for making it easy for me and everyone else to disregard anything you have to say or contribute.
Not an atheist. Not discouraging posting. Way too many people here are insecure to begin with and made worse when called out for not providing proof of their claims. If you don't want to back up your claims, that's fine. But again, they well be regarded low if that is your stance.