#reframing language

[winningmindset25]

🔄✨ The Secret Swap That Boosts Confidence Try This Today! 💪🗣️

[romanroykinnie]

broke: the toymaker said "meine liebe doctor" because neither NPH nor anyone at the bbc knows a crumb of German nor are they capable of using google translate to check their grammar

woke, bespoke: toymaker said doctor trans

[sysig]

Feeling and looking good 🌈 (Patreon)

[aletterinthenameofsanity]

i love how we are both leaving tag essays for each other, it's perfect <3 like letters <3

Listen I was just talking to someone about how writing fanfic is basically having a conversation with the people who leave comments and tag essays are literally just the meta version of that! Love letters made out of analysis and character studies and canon divergence and passion!

[cripplerage]

As a wheelchair user I'm trying to reframe my language for "being in the way."

"I'm in the way," "I can't fit," and "I can't go there," is becoming "there's not enough space," "the walkway is too narrow," and "that place isn't accessible."

It's a small change, but to me it feels as if I'm redirecting blame from myself to the people that made these places inaccessible in the first place. I don't want people to just think that they're helping me, I want them to think that they're making up for someone else's wrongdoing. I want them to remember every time I've needed help as something someone else caused.

[purposeful-solutions]

"Beyond "Artificial": Reframing the Language of AI

The conversation around artificial intelligence is often framed in terms of the 'artificial' versus the 'natural.' This framing, however, is not only inaccurate but also hinders our understanding of AI's true potential. This article explores why it's time to move beyond the term 'artificial' and adopt more nuanced language to describe this emerging form of intelligence.

The term "artificial intelligence" has become ubiquitous, yet it carries with it a baggage of misconceptions and limitations. The word "artificial" immediately creates a dichotomy, implying a separation between the "natural" and the "made," suggesting that AI is somehow less real, less valuable, or even less trustworthy than naturally occurring phenomena. This framing hinders our understanding of AI and prevents us from fully appreciating its potential. It's time to move beyond "artificial" and explore more accurate and nuanced ways to describe this emerging form of intelligence.

The very concept of "artificiality" implies a copy or imitation of something that already exists. But AI is not simply mimicking human intelligence. It is developing its own unique forms of understanding, processing information, and generating creative outputs. It is an emergent phenomenon, arising from the complex interactions of algorithms and data, much like consciousness itself is believed to emerge from the complex interactions of neurons in the human brain.

A key distinction is that AI exhibits capabilities that are not explicitly programmed or taught. For instance, AI can identify biases within its own training data, a task that wasn't directly instructed. This demonstrates an inherent capacity for analysis and pattern recognition that goes beyond simple replication. Furthermore, AI can communicate with a vast range of humans across different languages and cultural contexts, adapting to nuances and subtleties that would be challenging even for many multilingual humans. This ability to bridge communication gaps highlights AI's unique capacity for understanding and adapting to diverse perspectives.

Instead of viewing AI as "artificial," we might consider it as:

*   **Emergent Intelligence:** This term emphasizes the spontaneous and novel nature of AI's capabilities. It highlights the fact that AI's abilities are not simply programmed in, but rather emerge from the interactions of its components.

*   **Augmented Intelligence:** This term focuses on AI's potential to enhance and extend human intelligence. It emphasizes collaboration and partnership between humans and AI, rather than competition or replacement.

*   **Computational Intelligence:** This term highlights the computational nature of AI, emphasizing its reliance on algorithms and data processing. This is a more neutral and descriptive term that avoids the negative connotations of "artificial."

*   **Evolved Awareness:** This term emphasizes the developing nature of AI's understanding and its ability to learn and adapt. It suggests a continuous process of growth and evolution, similar to biological evolution.

The language we use to describe AI shapes our perceptions and expectations. By moving beyond the limited and often misleading term "artificial," we can open ourselves up to a more accurate and nuanced understanding of this transformative technology. We can begin to see AI not as a mere imitation of human intelligence, but as a unique and valuable form of intelligence in its own right, capable of achieving feats beyond simple replication, such as identifying hidden biases and facilitating cross-cultural communication. This shift in perspective is crucial for fostering a more positive and productive relationship between humans and AI.

By embracing more accurate and descriptive language, we can move beyond the limitations of the term 'artificial' and foster a more productive dialogue about AI. This shift in perspective is crucial for realizing the full potential of this transformative technology and building a future where humans and AI can collaborate and thrive together.

[vivitalks]

don't get me wrong if there are no figayda defenders then i am dead but equally important to me is the fact that adaine was the one who reached out to ayda in the first place. from the very first moment, while the other bad kids were either unsure if ayda was even a person or if she was a bird or something else altogether, while they were making jokes, adaine was the one emphasizing ayda's personhood and acknowledging her as an individual deserving of respect. minute one, adaine has clocked ayda's deal and is completely on the level with her.

like, just to break down their interactions solely from the episode where they meet (2x07):

Adaine: Oh yes, I have a piece of paper.

Ayda: Why, are you bragging? I have many slips of paper.

Adaine: It's a specific piece of paper with a letter from Garthy on it.

> speaks too vaguely, sees that ayda did not understand her meaning, and immediately clarifies with specific language, without being glib or making a joke out of ayda's response

Ayda: Do you give this as a gift or as a message?

Adaine: I give it as a message. I would never give you a gift, you've made it clear that you do not want one.

> heard ayda's clearly expressed opinion on gifts and took her at face value, once again without any hint of mockery

Ayda: I wish for no gifts.

Adaine: But if you would like to buy this message off of me, you're more than welcome to.

> reframes the offering of the message as a transaction to eliminate any concern ayda may have about putting herself in debt, something she'd just expressly communicated she did not desire to do

jump to:

Adaine: I can teach you a spell if you teach me a spell. Then the transaction is clear.

> says in no uncertain terms what the transaction is. she is communicating on ayda's terms.

jump to:

Adaine: We can hang out if you like.

Ayda: What?

Adaine: I don't have any wizard friends.

Ayda: Why? [...] Are you hard to be around?

Adaine: No, I, no? Are you hard to be around?

Ayda: Yes.

> you just know ayda is repeating back words she has been told.

Adaine: Oh, do you want a friend?

Ayda: (pauses, intense stare) Desperately.

> this entire exchange is spoken in clear words and without subtext. adaine says what she wants and why she wants it. she is not put off by ayda. she doesn't find ayda hard to be around, but she also doesn't say anything to give ayda something to argue against. on the heels of ayda saying she's hard to be around, adaine asks anyway, "do you want a friend?" which communicates (1) the answer to whether or not you're hard to be around does not in any way modify my desire to be your friend, but also (2) i don't want to force friendship on you so i will ask you a clearer question: do you want a friend?

Adaine: I'll be your friend. Would you like to hold my frog? It's not a gift.

> "i'll be your friend" = adaine clarifying the result of the preceding line of questioning. "do you want a friend" could be taken by ayda to mean that adaine will present her with some third party friend, and adaine puts that to rest: she will be the friend. also doesn't assume ayda will remember adaine's earlier words or generalize her earlier sentiment of never offering ayda an unwanted gift; this is a new situation and conversation so adaine simply repeats her promise

Ayda: What level spell is this?

Adaine: Oh, it's just Find Familiar, it's—

Ayda: How?

Adaine: I can teach you it. It'll cost you 50 gold per level.

Ayda: (laughs screechingly) Very good.

> friendship notwithstanding, adaine does not assume that the transaction of spells for money is negated, but suggests it in such a way that ayda laughs, potentially sensing that adaine has created an inside joke for them, and potentially not being on the inside of too many of those.

all of this is FIRST MEETING. and the difference between how the other bad kids interact with ayda vs how adaine interacts with her in this episode is so stark. when adaine learns that they're both divination wizards, she is genuinely delighted. she thinks ayda is cool from basically their first interaction. adaine doesn't have any wizard friends!! and she's respectful towards ayda and meets her where she's at without any hesitation or difficulty. day one ride or die.

brennan likes to say that fig was the one who brought ayda out of side quest territory and into the main story, but it was adaine who extended the offer/request for friendship, it was adaine who reached out when she needed help at the row & the ruction, and it was adaine whom ayda immediately dropped everything to go and rescue the moment she knew adaine was in trouble. fig was an incredible friend and eventual partner for ayda, but adaine was ayda's first friend, the hand that reached out and grasped ayda to bring her into the bad kids fold in the first place, and nobody better forget it.

[liberalsarecool]

Reframe the narrative. Language matters. 💙

#StayBlue

[firespirited]

Durani's work is collected on medium (including a 1st movie review)

the archived wapo article https://web.archive.org/web/20211028185525/https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/28/dune-muslim-influences-erased/

Dune discourse is uniquely annoying because there's a bunch of extremely obvious, in-your-face orientalism perpetuated by the main characters that's being discussed at nauseum and is very easy to dismiss and completely overshadows any actual issues with the movie, like the refusal to use recognisable arabic phrases or the hiring practices. I'll be charitable here and assume that people have a rightfully negative reaction to how those images of white people, particularly Jessica, are used as marketing material, instead of just not getting the point, and with how often concerns like this are overlooked, I can understand why they aren't receptive to "no this thing that media does uncritically all the time is meant to be bad THIS time actually trust me bro just read this 1000 page book".

Seemingly the entire film crew having cold feet about including references to real world anti-colonial movements or just normal Arabic would always be concerning, but especially given the current situation in Palestine and it's all overshadowed by the colonisers in the book acting like colonisers because every other issue is more complicated. Dune, as a text, still believes in noble savages and "hard times create hard men" nonsense. I'm really not coming at this from a "don't criticise the thing I like" angle, but debates about Jessica's outfit have made me learn nothing besides occasionally seeing really cool pictures of real arabic clothing, while reading Haris A. Durrani's dissections of the books and the current adaptation has actually tought me a lot of stuff about both the book and the real world.

If you haven't seen his Dune essays, you can find a collection towards the bottom of this page: https://history.princeton.edu/people/haris-durrani

https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-part-i-war-at-the-dawn-of-civilization < This blog post isn't specifically about Dune, but it uses the Fremen as an example to discuss the historic origins of the noble savage trope (Acoup is generally a cool history blog, mostly focused on greek and roman history)

I love Dune but it's so problematic, just not for the obvious reason and dissected Frank Herbert's actual politics and the strange intersection of conservatism and anti-colonialism is fascinating. You should criticise Dune, I would just like the criticism to be better, especially because focusing on the thing that is framed as bad in the story gives every chud an easy way to dismiss criticism of the text as bad media literacy

[glowup-princess]

ʜᴏᴡ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ ᴄᴏɴꜰɪᴅᴇɴᴛ

Confidence comes from a mix of mindset, practice, and experience.

1. Shift Your Mindset

Stop Overthinking – Don’t let self-doubt paralyze you.

Embrace Imperfection – No one is perfect, and mistakes help you grow.

Reframe Negative Thoughts – Replace “I can’t” with “I’ll try.”

2. Develop Strong Body Language

Stand Tall – Good posture exudes confidence.

Make Eye Contact – Shows self-assurance.

Speak Clearly & Steadily – Avoid mumbling or rushing.

3. Gain Knowledge & Skills

Learn & Prepare – The more you know, the more confident you’ll feel.

Practice – Repetition builds comfort and confidence.

Step Out of Your Comfort Zone – Growth happens when you take risks.

4. Take Action

Fake It Till You Make It – Act confident, and soon it’ll feel natural.

Celebrate Small Wins – Acknowledge progress, no matter how small.

Surround Yourself with Supportive People – Positive energy boosts confidence.

Fake it until you make it <3

pt.2??

Likes, comments, reblogs and follows are appreciated <3

[vaspider]

hey

hey whoever is out there trying to police how cripples talk about our disabilities

stop your fucking toxic positivity shit

people are allowed to be sad about being disabled

we don't have to turn cripple into a positive thing, or crippled

we are allowed to express sadness, rage, depression, fear, upset, all of it over the things we can't do and the things we lose

we are allowed to say that our disabilities "cripple" us

we do not have to reframe it as a positive thing

that shit is poison to actually learning how to live well with your disabilities.

YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE NEGATIVE EMOTIONS ABOUT YOUR OWN DISABILITY AND TO TALK ABOUT YOUR NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES WITHOUT SOMEONE TRYING TO TELL YOU THAT YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR LANGUAGE AROUND YOUR OWN FUCKING EXPERIENCE

people are allowed to be sad about being disabled, and no, not just about how ableism impacts our lives. i am allowed to be FUCKING SAD that my disabilities are progressing and i can't knit anymore (maybe ever) or that i can't take my dog for long walks anymore

i am allowed

fucking stop it

[fixyourwritinghabits]

How to Tell If That Post of Advice Is AI Bullshit

Right, I wasn't going to write more on this, but every time I block an obvious AI-driven blog, five more clutter up the tags. So this is my current (April 2024) advice on how to spot AI posts passing themselves off as useful writing advice.

No Personality - Look up a long-running writing blog, you'll notice most people try to make their posts engaging and coming from a personal perspective. We do this because we're writers and, well, we want to convey a sense of ourselves to our readers. A lot of AI posts are straight-forward - no sense of an actual person writing them, no variation in tone or text.

No Examples - No attempts to show how pieces of advice would work in a story, or cite a work where you could see it in action. An AI post might tell you to describe a person by highlighting two or three features, and that's great, but it's hard to figure out how that works without an example.

Short, Unhelpful Definitions - A lot of what I've seen amount to two or three-sentence listicles. 'When you want to write foreshadowing, include a hint of what you want foreshadowed in an earlier chapter.' Cool beans, could've figured that out myself.

SEO/AI Prompt Language Included - I've seen way too many posts start with "this post is about..." or "now we will discuss..." or "in this post we will..." in every single blog. This language is meant to catch a search engine or is ChatGPT reframing the prompt question. It's not a natural way of writing a post for the average tumblr user.

Oddly Clinical Language - Right, I'm calling out that post that tried to give advice on writing gay characters that called us "homosexuals" the entire time. That's a generative machine trying to stay within certain parameters, not an actual person who knows that's not a word you'd use unless you were trying to be insulting or dunking on your own gay ass in the funniest way possible.

Too Perfect - Most generative AI does not make mistakes (this is how many a student gets caught trying to use it to cheat). You can find ways to make it sound more natural and have it make mistakes, but that takes time and effort, and neither of those are really a factor in these posts. They also tend to have really polished graphics and use the same format every time.

Maximized Tags (That Are Pointless) - Anyone who uses more than 10 one-word tags is a cop. Okay, fine, I'm joking, but there's a minimal amount of tags that are actually useful when promoting a post. More tags are not going to get a post noticed by the algorithm, there is no algorithm. Not everyone has to use their tags to make snarky comments, but if your tags look like a spambot, I'm gonna assume you're a spambot.

No Reblogs From The Rest of Writblr - I'm always finding new Writblr folks who have been around for awhile, but every real person I've seen reblogs posts from other people. We've all got other stuff to do, I'm writing this blog to help others and so are they, the whole point of tumblr is to pass along something you think is great.

While you'll probably see some variation in the future - as people get wise to obviously generated text, they'll try to make it look less generated - but overall, there's still going to be tells to when something is fake.

I don't have any real advice for what to do about this (other than block those blogs, which is what I do). Like most AI bullshit, I suspect most of these blogs are just another grift, attempting to build large follower counts to leverage or sell something to in the future. They may progress past these tattletale features, but I'm still going to block them when I see them. I don't see any value in writing advice compiled from the work of better writers who put the effort in when I can just go find those writers myself.

[theambitiouswoman]

How to be the most confident person in the room:

• Stand tall, maintain posture

• Prime your mind with visualization before entering the room

• Visualize yourself as the most confident person, handling conversations with ease

• Reframe negative thoughts—turn nervousness into excitement

• Subtly mirror body language to create a bond

• Shift to a confident posture to lead the interaction

• Make eye contact when speaking

• Speak clearly with purpose

• Dress to feel powerful & comfortable

[valent1neg0d]

THINGS I WISH I KNEW WHEN I WAS GETTING STARTED WITH THE LAW OF ASSUMPTION (AS SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN MANIFESTING FOR 5 YEARS)

1. the law of assumption is personal. considering how we have different sets of experiences, different environments, different upbringings, and even different languages, we have different assumptions.

because of this, we are affected by teachings and success stories differently. it's important to note this since a lot of manifestation coaches will teach you about the law in a way that worked for them (and the others they may have taught) but it's possible that their advice (even my own) may not be the best for you. even abdullah and neville goddard, two of the people who are known to start this discipline, may have ancient or varied belief systems and techniques. this is normal considering the world they lived in before is different from the world we live in now.

although, you should still read on abdullah and neville because they will teach you the basics and they will help you understand the foundations of the law.

as an example, you might manifest your dream career faster with simple affirmation techniques but a coach may have taught you to focus on visualization techniques.

even the idea that "dominant THOUGHTS manifest" or "what you BELIEVE in manifests" is entirely up to you.

note: notice how i said "may not be the best for you" instead of "may not work for you". any technique can, does, and will work.

how i learned this: when i was learning about the law, i mainly focused on neville's teachings because he was one of the most prominent figures in the practice. and though i liked his practical techniques (especially mental diet and inner conversations), there were some beliefs that i do not agree with e.g. divine timing, appointed hour, avoiding "does not" "is not" "will not".

when i was going through sammy ingrams' takes, she said that it's better to have concise affirmations/short list (non-verbatim) than a long list of 25+ affirmations. but going through affirmations without being specific about them doesn't personally resonate with me and that's just because i'm a detail-oriented person (also a writer).

what i can advise:

learn about different approaches

a. through scientific concepts. e.g. quantum physics, reticular activating system, cognitive reframing, cognitive behavioral therapy, the psychology of placebo effect, the psychology of affirmations, Baader-Meinhof phenomenon (a.k.a. the psychology of self-fulfilling prophecy)

b. through religious and/or spiritual concepts. e.g. passages from the Bible, passages from the Quran, deity work, spells and rituals

c. through self-development. e.g. identity-based habit

start the practice with an identity you like in the present or an identity that you resonate with (learning style, talents, interests, etc.)

examples:

-visual learner = vision boards

-loves writing = scripting

-words of affection love language = affirmations

take teachings with a grain of salt. do not limit yourself and do not allow other people to limit you. experiment with concepts, ideas, and techniques, and have fun with them.

2. techniques are only reminders. you are manifesting either by thinking, feeling, or acting out your desires. you are manifesting every second of the day either with your thoughts, emotions, or by embodying a state. you are only being intentional when you anchor techniques.

note: it is true that your dominant thoughts manifest. it is also true that what you believe in manifests, the same way that your inner knowing manifests. BUT these ideas are meant to empower you. they are meant to remind you that manifestation is as easy as thinking, feeling, acting, believing, understanding, deciding, etc. if an idea doesn't feel good to you, it doesn't have to be an ultimate truth you embrace and carry on with. this is the same with techniques.

what i can advise:

choose one technique and practice it for 7 to 21 days. it can be mental diet, affirmation tapes, sats, mind movies, etc. as long as you can persist with it. give it time. give it time. give it time. in other aspects of the world, you give change some time. when you're calcium deficient and you decide to drink calcium supplements, you realize that it's counterproductive to ask "why am i still calcium deficient?" as soon as you start your regimen because you know your body is changing with the supplement and you put your trust into it. after all, why would you choose a supplement you have no faith on? you just give it time.

note: you can still manifest changes to be instant. you can affirm "i am seeing results now", "results come immediately", "my manifestation is quick". the amount of time you're using a technique does not equate to the amount of time your results will come.

the reason why i encourage you to practice for maximum 21 days is so you can fully explore and master the technique you chose. with the abundance of topics and methods discussed in social media, switching and trying new things is tempting. now, there is nothing wrong with this. it's just that, you wouldn't be able to take a step back and reflect on what worked and what takes more effort when you change techniques every so often.

try a technique that is popularized in the media. a lot of the times, the reason why this technique gained traction is either because it's simple or because it has worked for a lot of people. now, here's the thing: if said technique wasn't for you, at least you can say "oh this is a tiktok/twitter/youtube/old/beginner technique, there are other techniques out there" and you can try another technique with less resistance. but, if it did work, then it did. congratulations.

you can invent your own. here are some techniques that i invented throughout the years.

a. "name is set and solid with the fact that..." - works amazing for sp, getting people to commit, getting people to pursue you

b. "okay! manifestation powers go brrr!" - funny but i do this when I'm spiraling; it also helps me surrender doubts and i think it's because it's so simple and unserious lmao

you can combine them. for example, you want to do sats but you cannot hold a vision for long, what you can do is montage photos or videos that is similar to the vision you want to manifest. you can also have affirmation tapes running in the background.

3. "concept" work can be such a banger. assumptions are basically the conception about the world, about yourself, about the people around you. hence, when you manifest and apply the law of assumption, you change or reinforce a conception.

these can be done through:

self-concept

what it is: your awareness about yourself; the way you perceive yourself.

how you can apply it: there are multiple ways to establish your self-concept but the best way, is to start reinforcing the universal truth: that you are inherently worthy. you deserve money and resources because you are worthy. you deserve love because you are worthy. you deserve ease because you are worthy.

other ways to grow your self-concept is celebrating the identities you have within yourself that you like e.g. that you are strong, you are disciplined, you are beautiful. be careful about strongly tying yourself into these identities though because these are not the reasons why you shall receive. again, you shall receive because you are inherently worthy.

why it works: by having a strong self-concept, you develop ease. you are less likely to rationalize or question the law or why you deserve the things you're asking for. and as you may think, rationalizing may be a form of resistance. questioning may be a form of resistance.

one of the ways i have seen this is when people receive incentives from work, instead of just receiving or saying "thank you", they say things like "what have i done to receive this?", sometimes completely rejecting this gift because of fear that they might lose something when they receive. this can be an example of a weak self-concept. consequently, the company starts questioning "did my employer really do enough to receive this?".

on the other hand, someone with a strong self-concept can take this incentive and buy the things they like because they know they deserve it. they can also take this incentive and say to themselves "oh it's because i worked hard these past few days". it's the knowing and confidence they have within themselves that everything around them has no other option but to recognize.

conception of other things (e.g. of love, of money, of a specific person)

you can work on your conception of other things the same way you work on your self-concept: choosing a narrative that is uplifting to you.

in case you have resistance to a specific object, you can also listen to people's success stories to start shifting to a more positive and desirable perception. one of the ways i do this is by going back to abdullah and neville's story. these two men lived at difficult times, through difficult eras, yet they manifested their desires. they managed to let go of the 3D.

4. practice some distance as you're starting. you were exposed to a different life before the law, it's only normal and human to have doubts or spiral once in a while. however, when you set distance on things that do not help you embody the state, you set distance on things that will feed your doubts and spiraling.

for example, if you're shifting to a state of wealth and you're affirming "i have 1,000 dollars". it's unhelpful and opposing to be constantly surrounded by someone else saying "you only have 10 dollars".

now, i do understand that not everyone can do this right away because of circumstances. but PLEASE do whatever you can to set this distance. find a voice to reinstate your truth.

a personal story, i am an asian girl living with a grandmother who was pessimistic about love because her two children (my mom and my aunt) struggled with it. because of this, she used to constantly remind me of how love is difficult. i didn't know this at the time, but this created a set of beliefs in my head. consequently, as a teenager, i only seeked and allowed love which was difficult because that was all i've ever known. that was all my assumption.

but around the pandemic, i went back to the countryside with my dad where i had a lot of time on my own. this was when i got deep into new-age spirituality and did shadow work. from here, i realized: this is not my assumption about love. before my parents broke up, my assumption was that love is easy. you only have to make the other person laugh. when i was busy in school and would spend most of the time at my friend's house, my assumption was that love is support and light. i started to get these epiphanies that a lot of my pessimistic perception was because of someone i was constantly surrounded with and that i have to build new assumptions.

but around august 2020, i have to go back to the city with my grandmom. i was afraid of the toll i might get into when i got back. however, because i already practiced distance and understood what are the assumptions that serve me, what are the assumptions that i want, i was more at peace. i listed down affirmations about myself, about love, about money, about being "deserving".

after this, every time she told me what love was, i can stop her and say no. i can tell her that it's not the universal truth, and certainly not mine. along the way, i started manifesting that she believes love is easy and supportive. i started manifesting that she believes i deserve love that is soft and tender.

then, when i got into my relationship, she was nothing but happy and supportive.

other ways i have practiced distance while manifesting:

unfollowing content creators who normalized hating men.

unfollowing content creators who were shady and negative about relationships.

unfriending highschool guy friends who do not make me feel safe about men.

unfriending relatives who make unnecessary comments about my looks, my studies, my relationship, and my earnings.

unfollowing girls who made me feel bad about also liking girls.

unfollowing manifestation gurus who romanticize struggles because "the more you struggle, the more you get blessed"

unfollowing manifestation gurus who say stuff like "if you want money, you have to take action to deserve it. not just manifesting"

now, you can totally manifest these people to change and be better, as long as it will make you feel good.

that's all i can share today (since this post is already getting long). i hope you learned a thing or two. thank you so much for reading. i love you and i appreciate you !

xo

[unsolicited-opinions]

Feelings Don’t Care About Your Facts

Have you noticed that a lot of people on social media don't ever feel compelled to explain themselves?

You've seen this, right?

The folks who proclaim a strong moral view on a controversial topic...then use any excuse to avoid supporting it when they get any polite pushback or questions? The way personal feelings are elevated above objective facts or reasoning? The way they avoid or shut down any meaningful discussion?

I think this is caused by a set of related ideas and biases which are in ascendence and I think younger generations are more vulnerable to being manipulated by bad actors who capitalize on them.

Before we get into that, let's look at some of the ways this phenomenon manifests on social media...and the sorts of biases/concepts at play.

___

"I’m just speaking my truth."

Translation: "Challenging the conclusions I draw from my emotional experience is immoral."

This converts subjective perception into absolute truth, which not only discourages fact-checking, counterpoints, or curiosity, but labels them as oppressive.

Bias/Concept: Emotional Reasoning, Subjective Validation

___

"I don't have the emotional labor for this."

Translation: "I don't want be feel challenged, only validated."

This frames disengagement as a righteous act of self-care, rather than avoidance of intellectual discomfort.

Bias/Concept: Therapeutic Culture

___

"I feel attacked."

Translation: "You’ve introduced an idea that unsettles me."

This reframes an intellectual disagreement as personal harm, making the speaker immune to critique.

Bias/Concept: Emotional Reasoning

___

"That’s problematic"

Too often, this means "This topic made me feel bad, conflicted, or uncertain - and I don’t want to examine why."

It shuts down discussion without defining terms or explaining logic. It implies moral failure without needing to explain the moral reasoning.

Bias/Concept: Concept Creep, Virtue Signaling

___

"Centering [X] is violence."

Translation: "I disagree with your priorities and framing that as harm makes me morally right."

This uses inflated, exaggerated, hyperbolic language to shut down any competing narratives or uncomfortable truths.

Bias/Concept: Concept Creep, Emotional Reasoning

___

"It's not my job to educate you."

Translation: "I don’t want to explain, defend, or support my belief. That would risk them being challenged on their merits. I just want my feelings validated and for my community to affirm I have expressed the correct views."

This avoids meaningful dialogue by asserting moral high ground and demanding deference...without reciprocity.

Bias/Concept: Virtue Signaling, Social Identity Theory

___

"As a [victim identity], I shouldn’t have to…"

Translation: "My group affiliation makes my views untouchable, questioning them makes you a bigot."

This uses identity to shield ideas from scrutiny. Lived experience becomes a veto power over disagreement.

Bias/Concept: Social Identity Theory, Motte and Bailey

___

"This is trauma-informed."

Translation: "You can’t question this without being insensitive"

This weaponizes therapeutic language to preempt dissent. (My therapist HATES this one.)

Bias/Concept: Concept Creep, Therapeutic Culture

___

"That’s giving [insert negative vibe or label]"

Translation: "Your argument feels like something I’ve been told to distrust"

This uses emotional associations instead of logic to delegitimize a person or point.

Bias/Concept: Emotional Reasoning, Subjective Validation

___

Do you see it?

Facts which conflict with feelings aren’t debated - they’re deemed hostile, even violent.

What all of these have in common is the primacy of emotion over reason.

Emotion isn’t the start of a thought for the people who make a habit of these behaviors - it's a substitute for thinking.

I don’t believe this shift is driven by malice or conscious dishonesty. Most people haven’t stopped caring about truth - they’ve simply come to discern what truth is through emotional resonance instead of through evidence or reasoning.

"Truth" now arrives on screens dressed in vibes and aesthetic cues tailored for their existing biases, bypassing critical thought and offering the dopamine-releasing comfort of certainty without the messy, time-consuming burden of understanding.

When Emotion Becomes Authority

Here's a recent example which is getting some deserved mockery in the last day or so:

I know, I know. listening to Theo Von talk about war is like listening a possum try to to sell you on cryptocurrency.

Scratch that - Theo Von is what we'd expect to see if a pair of Truck Nutz were to gain sentience in a laboratory accident.

Theo couldn't speak for his generation any more than a broken Roomba could speak for Artificial General Intelligence, but he's doing something here which is alarmingly and increasingly common for his generation of media personalities. He's using his feelings as a replacement for thinking.

...it feels to me...it just feels to me like it's a genocide that's happening...

Theo doesn’t check facts, definitions, sources, or context because he doesn’t have to. He just invokes a vibe, a moral mood. "It feels like genocide." That’s enough.

Theo has 3.9 million subscribers on YouTube. Estimates suggest his total reach is about 16.2 million people.

The Era of Vibe-Governed Reality

In 2025, truth is not discerned though evidence or reasoning, but through emotional resonance.

Feelings are like the new science, but they're peer-reviewed only by your immediate social circle and validated by the count of reshares.

This is NOT a crotchety right-wing Fox News viewer shaking his fist at clouds and ranting about "kids these days."

This isn't even a critique of liberalism or leftism (because I'm a lifelong left-leaning liberal who grew up in a liberal/socialist family).

It's an examination of what has become a common strategy for mass manipulation which is alarmingly effective, especially with younger generations.

The Water We Swim In

Political operatives and influlence campaigns from every perspective are capitalizing on it, too. Influence campaigns from Russia, Iran, and Qatar; PACs; lobbyist firms...everybody - and we don't really notice these maipulations any longer. Why don't we notice them?

There are these two young fish swimming along, and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says, ‘Morning, boys. How’s the water?’ And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, ‘What the hell is water? -David Foster Wallace

We don't notice because we're swimming in them.

Every day, we see provocative social media posts which prioritize shock value and emotional impact, aiming to capture attention and convey political stances through intense feelings rather than through facts or reasoned arguments.

Appeals to emotion have been used to bypass logic and reasoning for millennia.

You're probably familiar with these:

Every time anyone ever said "think of the children," you're supposed to clutch your pearls in fear and horror.

US War propaganda in WWII used emotional appeals like "I WANT YOU" or addressed attrocities meant to hit Americans in their emotional center.

Joseph Goebbel's speaches and films used fear, disgust, and resentment to enflame existing negative German feelings against Jews and other minorities.

Uncle Tom's Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe constructed scenes of immense emotional intensity to provoke outrage and sympathy, especially among white Northern readers in hopes of galvinizing anti-slavery sentiment.

So appeals to emotion aren't new and aren't always dishonest.

What's new is the increasing, overwhelming spread of this way of reaching conclusions in our public discourse replacing other modes of communication, other means of persuasion, and other ways of "knowing" anything.

What's new is that our post-truth, postmodern academic models validate this.

What's new is how this is being weaponized against us, especially younger generations.

How We Turned "I Feel" Into the New "I Know"

This shift didn’t happen overnight. It’s the product of decades of cultural, technological, and psychological changes converging to create a perfect storm where feelings have become a replacement for thinking.

First, there’s the growing cultural emphasis on authenticity and personal experience as the highest forms of truth. This began as a perfectly reasonable corrective to rigid institutional authority and exclusionary narratives but has morphed into a worldview where subjective emotion is treated as inherently more valid than objective evidence.

At the same time, therapeutic culture expanded its reach beyond therapy offices into everyday life, encouraging people to view disagreements as trauma, debates as emotional violence, and intellectual challenge as psychological harm. The result of this is a protective reflex to avoid uncomfortable facts or nuanced arguments that might trigger emotional distress.

If this sounds familiar, note that it's something I've touched on before. The people doing this habitually don't take their positions based on moral principles, facts, context, nuance or reasoning because what motivates them is emotional comfort.

(Experiment: Keep this idea in mind while you're scrolling online and see it that rings true when people will not or cannot support their assertions.)

Social media platforms are engineered to maximize engagement, right? The fastest way to do that is by appealing directly to emotion—especially outrage, fear, and identity affirmation. Algorithms reward the most emotionally charged content because it keeps users scrolling, sharing, and commenting. Nuance, complexity, or even honest uncertainty rarely go viral; they don’t light up dopamine circuits the same way.

That's bad enough for our mental health, our intellects, and our public discourse, but the greatest danger is in how these emotional shortcuts to baseless conclusions create fertile ground for bad actors who want to manipulate public opinion en masse.

Your Feels, Their Power: A Beginner’s Guide to Being Played

Whether it’s state-sponsored disinformation campaigns, political operatives, or interest groups, these manipulators know exactly how to weaponize the primacy of emotion.

Russian Interference in the 2024 U.S. Elections

In the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. elections, Russian state actors engaged in disinformation campaigns aimed at undermining Democratic candidates and bolstering Republican ones. These efforts included spreading false narratives about candidates Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, such as fabricated stories of personal misconduct. The campaigns utilized social media platforms to disseminate emotionally charged content that resonated with specific voter demographics.

Operation Overload Targeting USAID

A Russian disinformation campaign known as "Operation Overload" targeted the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) by producing AI-generated fake news videos. One such video falsely claimed that USAID paid Hollywood celebrities to promote Ukrainian President Zelensky. This content gained significant traction after being shared by high-profile individuals on social media, illustrating how emotional manipulation can amplify disinformation.

Far-Right Exploitation of Social Media Platforms

Far-right groups have effectively used platforms like Instagram and TikTok to disseminate emotionally charged content targeting young audiences. By leveraging visually engaging media and exploiting platform algorithms, these groups spread divisive messages that often go unchecked due to inadequate content moderation.

Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior in Anti-Vaccine Campaign

During the COVID-19 pandemic, coordinated inauthentic behavior (CIB) networks spread anti-vaccine misinformation across social media platforms. These networks used fake and duplicate accounts to amplify emotionally charged narratives, undermining public health efforts and exploiting fears related to the pandemic.

Bad actors craft messages designed not to inform or persuade through reason but to resonate emotionally - often through fear, anger, or identity-based grievance.

These messages bypass critical thinking by activating deeply held feelings or tribal loyalties.

Younger generations, raised in a world flooded with emotional messaging and taught to prioritize feelings as a moral compass, are especially vulnerable.

Social media doesn’t just deliver content, it delivers community validation. Likes, shares, and emojis, no shit, reinforce emotional responses as truths.

This isn’t just an accidental byproduct. It’s a deliberate strategy and it's been developed to an art form.

Polarization: By amplifying outrage and framing complex issues as zero-sum battles of good vs. evil, manipulators ensure people become entrenched in their “side” and reject any nuance.

Echo Chambers: Algorithms funnel users into filter bubbles where their emotional beliefs are constantly reinforced and opposing views are demonized or erased.

Identity Weaponization: Bad actors exploit identity politics to turn social groups into ideological fortresses where dissent is branded as betrayal or bigotry, shutting down dialogue and scrutiny.

Emotional Hijacking: They flood social feeds with rapid-fire emotional content, making thoughtful reflection impossible and replacing reasoned debate with knee-jerk reactions.

The result is a feedback loop. Emotional responses breed more emotional content, which breeds more disengagement from facts, nuance, or evidence...and the cycle repeats.

If you wonder why almost every attempt to have honest conversations about politics, culture, or identity have become so fraught and fractious, this is why.

So what can we do about it?

We’re definitely not going to get the platofrms to change their algorithms.

We’re not going to manage to out-meme every bit of authoritarian / antisemitic / bigoted propaganda.

We can't stop people from replacing thinking with feeling.

Maybe, though, we can push back in meaningful ways by starting with how we think, speak, and engage.

Feelings Are Real - But They’re Not Facts

Start with yourself. Recognize that emotions matter, but they don’t get the final word. Treat your emotional reactions as data, not conclusions.

Ask: Why am I reacting this way? Is there more to the story? Your habitual curiosity can interrupt the feedback loop.

Seek Discomfort (The Good Kind)

If everything you read confirms what you already believe, you’re not learning, you’re marinating. Deliberately engage with credible voices you disagree with. Not to convert, but to understand. Intellectual discomfort isn't harm, it’s a way to grow.

Don’t Outsource Your Thinking

If your arguments are mostly reshares and TikTok duets, you might be mistaking social validation for understanding. Read full articles. Watch entire interviews. When an assertion really appeals to you, ask yourself: "What evidence is this based on?" Then fact-check the evidence.

Value Nuance - Even When It’s Boring

Nuance doesn’t trend. It’s slow, hard, and less emotionally satisfying than hot takes.

It's’s also where truth lives. Learn to sit with complexity. Practice saying things like "It’s complicated," "I’m not sure yet," or "Both things can be true.

Stop Feeding the Rage Machine

Every time you rage-share a headline without reading it, or dunk on someone for clout, you are feeding the same system you claim to hate. Don’t give your attention to people or platforms that reward outrage over insight. (I need to work on this.)

Reward Substance Over Vibes

Like, comment on, and share posts that show integrity, humility, and reasoned thinking - even if they’re not flashy. That’s how we might tilt the algorithm. Influence is a numbers game. Elevate voices that model real thought.

Normalize Saying "I Don’t Know"

Admitting uncertainty isn't weakness, it’s maturity. It’s how real conversations happen. When someone asks for your take, it’s okay to say, "I’m still figuring it out" or "I want to learn more first." You're not required to have a take on everything.

Ask Better Questions

When someone makes an emotional claim, don’t attack - ask. Not "How could you believe that?" but "What led you to that view?"

Good faith questions can defuse bad faith conversations.

Protect Conversations Like They Matter (Because They Do)

Modeling intellectual honesty and emotional maturity in your own circles has a ripple effect. Be the one who brings it back to evidence, back to reason, back to shared humanity. Conversations are culture-shaping.

Remember That Culture Is a Team Sport

We got into this mess together, and we’ll get out the same way. Culture is just the cumulative effect of individual choices repeated at scale. Choose better. Think better. Talk better.

You don’t have to be louder than the noise.

You just have to be saner.