Truth and the avoidance thereof
 

If you can avoid enough information your narrative can seem spot on and make you feel good. I'm hearing a shit-ton of rhetoric without facts, the occasional dialectic across disputed groups of facts, and very rarely someone actually digging up facts opposed to the narrative they run with. If we're going to engage with reality we owe it to ourselves to dig, you dig?

But why do all that digging when a shovel is perfect for smiteing the fools? ;)

Actually very few of us have the resources so our best chance is to use the fact checkers. No matter which one you use someone will say they are bias but what difference do the naysayers make, if two or three fact checkers you're comfortable with agree on a point, you can feel confident making that point. That's the best you can do, chances are you're not changing the other guys mind, you're just making yourself comfortable with yours.

Thinking is hard.

Everybody chooses the less hard option sometimes.

The sum of our choices defines our habits.

...

It's about the narrative. Who do you trust? Those people get to define "reality" for you. If we don't share the same trusted sources, our realities will be similarly disjoint.

I *LOVE* this topic.

It's hard, disorienting, disturbing... and the ideologues will stay safely in their cocoons so in the end it feels counter productive to occasionally tell them they have a good point on some limited thing, because it seems like that is all they'll hear, then it's "See we were right all along!"

The problem is we need all you fuckers. You give us the best chance of survival.

I just say "Yeah well, I was country when country wasn't cool." and let it go at that.

Yeah man, country was cool until it got cool, now it's shit.

I got out when the goin' was good.

This looks like a good place to stick this... said the Bishop to...

And then the universe brays laughter and says "Just kidding. Here, have a slipped disc and some intestinal problems."