Guide to making claims based on experience
Replies
-
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.0 -
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
hmm. I'll use more emoji.0 -
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
While I agree they aren't mutually exclusive, empathy is quite exhausting and a lot to expect from a complet stranger, let alone thousands of them. If someone chooses to ignore truth because it doesn't come from an empathetic post that's on them.0 -
ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
While I agree they aren't mutually exclusive, empathy is quite exhausting and a lot to expect from a complet stranger, let alone thousands of them. If someone chooses to ignore truth because it doesn't come from an empathetic post that's on them.
Seems put on and patronizing to me, but some people want that, I guess.0 -
ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
While I agree they aren't mutually exclusive, empathy is quite exhausting and a lot to expect from a complet stranger, let alone thousands of them. If someone chooses to ignore truth because it doesn't come from an empathetic post that's on them.
Seems put on and patronizing to me, but some people want that, I guess.
I'm actually naturally an empathetic person, it is something I had to learn to turn off as a young child because if someone was in pain, sad, frustrated, or any other strong emotion I felt it like a freight train. Empathy is a great tool when needing to connect or understand a person.
It's sympathy that I see as patronizing. But, that's just my opinion.
0 -
Faking it is exhausting. But if you can really say, "Damn, that would suck," it's not so exhausting.ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
While I agree they aren't mutually exclusive, empathy is quite exhausting and a lot to expect from a complet stranger, let alone thousands of them. If someone chooses to ignore truth because it doesn't come from an empathetic post that's on them.
I don't suggest anyone (much less everyone) should sugarcoat anything.
There's just a huge difference between Kumbaya and nasty, personal attacks. Some people (and I don't mean anyone specific, especially not dbmata) seem to think it has to be one or the other.
There was a line on TV where someone was saying that they believed in telling the brutal truth and the other person said, "You do realize there are other kinds, right?" It's probably not a verbatim quote, but it makes sense.
0 -
Faking it is exhausting. But if you can really say, "Damn, that would suck," it's not so exhausting.ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
While I agree they aren't mutually exclusive, empathy is quite exhausting and a lot to expect from a complet stranger, let alone thousands of them. If someone chooses to ignore truth because it doesn't come from an empathetic post that's on them.
I don't suggest anyone (much less everyone) should sugarcoat anything.
There's just a huge difference between Kumbaya and nasty, personal attacks. Some people (and I don't mean anyone specific, especially not dbmata) seem to think it has to be one or the other.
There was a line on TV where someone was saying that they believed in telling the brutal truth and the other person said, "You do realize there are other kinds, right?" It's probably not a verbatim quote, but it makes sense.
It is exhausting to tell the brutal/sweet/empathetic/sympathetic/.... Truth. I feel the best truth is the one that isn't shaded by any emotion at all. The problem with shading the truth with emotion is it can, and many times does, lose it's power.0 -
Some people (and I don't mean anyone specific, especially not dbmata) seem to think it has to be one or the other.
0 -
Did I step in the middle of a spat?0
-
That's great, too.ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »
Faking it is exhausting. But if you can really say, "Damn, that would suck," it's not so exhausting.ThePhoenixIsRising wrote: »
Having empathy doesn't preclude telling the truth.
Empathy, lol.longtimeterp wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.
This!
What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?
None of us are 8 years old.
What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)
I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
We can have both.
While I agree they aren't mutually exclusive, empathy is quite exhausting and a lot to expect from a complet stranger, let alone thousands of them. If someone chooses to ignore truth because it doesn't come from an empathetic post that's on them.
I don't suggest anyone (much less everyone) should sugarcoat anything.
There's just a huge difference between Kumbaya and nasty, personal attacks. Some people (and I don't mean anyone specific, especially not dbmata) seem to think it has to be one or the other.
There was a line on TV where someone was saying that they believed in telling the brutal truth and the other person said, "You do realize there are other kinds, right?" It's probably not a verbatim quote, but it makes sense.
It is exhausting to tell the brutal/sweet/empathetic/sympathetic/.... Truth. I feel the best truth is the one that isn't shaded by any emotion at all. The problem with shading the truth with emotion is it can, and many times does, lose it's power.
It's the added nastiness that detracts from the message. No emotion at all leaves just the message.
Sometimes people say "some people" as a passive-aggressive slam at an individual and I didn't want it to be taken that way. Plus, I quoted you before, so, there was that that. I really did mean "some people."
You know how people are always defending rudeness and nastiness with "I tell the truth!" as if it can't be told without being rude - that's what I mean.0 -
I am also told to eat sugar " in moderation ", because not eating sugar is not sustainable for any one. I wonder when the time of sustainability starts ? After 60 years or 70 ? Is 45 years not enough to prove sustainability ?
You quickly learn in the dieting world that many people truly believe if a path isn't sustainable for them, it therefore isn't sustainable for anybody else. It's bizarre, but it's so common.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions