Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

So I've recently decided a few things at the end of my post.

The word sheep to describe people is accurate sometimes but sometimes not. We all think on some level that the next person is sheep while we're the spiritually aware ones. I've been called a sheep for the dumbest reasons as I'm sure others have and likewise I've used the word myself to which when it's used against me, I feel some regret admittedly.

It's funny because it's not that I don't think there's any such thing as indoctrination or that there's no such thing as a sense of low self awareness, it's just that I feel like we are all victims of indoctrination and we've all done things by which we were programmed and sometimes you do dumb things you look back on, I feel like this is human. For instance the fake news crowd, you have to get your news from somewhere yes? If you decide to forgo regular news sources, you have to replace it with other ideals and concepts.

But think about it, if you don't indoctrinate people, they essentially grow up to be like dogs acting on instinct. Animals aren't essentially bad, they show altruistic traits as well as aggression and biases but they don't do it consciously. If we never had any indoctrination, we'd be dogs on some level maybe with a little bit more awareness perhaps.

So with all that said, I've come to this conclusion, it's just a matter of what you want to be indoctrinated by, sort of like choosing your poison by which you want to surround yourself with. This is the only true way to make sure you yourself aren't sheep. We mimic everyone else without ever realizing it, their thoughts become our thoughts, their actions can become ours so surround yourself with people and things who you want to become and leave the rest be.

I'm writing this because recently ran into a person who called me a sheep for wearing a mask, I thought about all this as I was wondering why everyone else thinks they're somehow better.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
[quoteFor instance the fake news crowd, you have to get your news from somewhere yes? If you decide to forgo regular news sources, you have to replace it with other ideals and concepts.][/quote]

I've wrestled with ideas myself.

Unlike liberals (or typical liberals) I'm completely ideologically comfortable with criticising the mainstream media. Say that it has a pro-establishment bias, then I'm with you all the way. I also think that the Trumpsters have a point when they say that it is biased against Trump.

CNN say, is not neutral and clearly does have an anti-trump agenda. However, most of its criticisms are also factually correct and you can't dismiss all evidence out of hand because the source 'has bias'. Yeah dude, the source does have bias but reality also has a bias against your position.

Media isn't created in a vacuum. Publications often have an open political slant to match a target market. This is skews slightly to the right in most places because the editorial line is set by rich owners and shareholders as well as customers. Its slightly different in America, basically because the country is so rightwing that the urban upper-middle classes (the class of journalists) are actually centre-left by comparison. That America has its ultra-partisan right-wing sources has further solidified the liberal leanings of American mainstream media. In Britain, the media echo system leans heavily into the centre-right.

So all media has bias. This does not mean that it's all equally good or equally bad because journalistic standards vary. When I'm trying to find out the truth in a story, I look for evidence and direct quotes. When it has neither then I don't take it seriously. Also, what is the publication not saying? They have a story about a court decision being leaked (which is bad tbh) but don't report on the human implications of the court case. What you choose to cover and how you frame it matters. Also, is the article cherry-picking and using an obscure extreme to overhype an issue? These tricks are widespread.

No news source is perfect and frankly, some mainstream 'credible' sources are seriously overrated. However, there is still a huge difference in the quality of journalism between a legacy news channel and some shit Budjack copied and pasted into SW.

Evidence is what matters. Also (if you have time) it's good to read a range of sources to get different opinions on contentious issues. Most people don't do any of this though. They just read and believe what they want.
SatanBurger · 36-40, FVIP
@Burnley123 That's why I like mediabiasfactcheck site.. I routinely will go on there and weigh the pros and cons of the site I'm on.
SatanBurger · 36-40, FVIP
@Burnley123
Media isn't created in a vacuum. Publications often have an open political slant to match a target market.


Yeah it's kind of hard not to I guess.
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
That's why I use the word indoctrination. It's not necessarily a bad thing to be indoctrinated. It's mostly that people are indoctrinated with bad information a lot of the time. If I'm looking to start a fight, I won't use the word indoctrinated, I'll use the word brainwashed.
SatanBurger · 36-40, FVIP
@LordShadowfire Yeah I would use that word too. I been called a sheep lately and that had me thinking lol. Is there ever such a thing as not being indoctrinated by something.. anything though? You'd have to go live in the wild or something.

Brainwashed is very real, much like how a cult does to people. I do believe that's a real thing.

 
Post Comment