A lot of people who think they’re saying “[actual fact]” are really just stating “[subjective opinion]” and call any criticism of their opinions “[incoherent rage]”
Not everything that is worth discussing has a source. Abstract ideas and hypothetical scenarios (among other things) have their places in rhetoric and communication.
![[Anecdotal evidence]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/75f540ef-d018-44c9-89e2-e7b6d59f1676.jpeg){kind=link}
A lot of people who think they’re saying “[actual fact]” are really just stating “[subjective opinion]” and call any criticism of their opinions “[incoherent rage]”
[freedom of speech]
[incoherent rage]
[[Hyperlink blocked]]
Which is this?
There are more than three things
so a way to incorporate sources into the posts and judge them accordingly?
Not everything that is worth discussing has a source. Abstract ideas and hypothetical scenarios (among other things) have their places in rhetoric and communication.