Is Bayesian thinking a sham?

There's a common criticism that people who claim to practice "Bayesian thinking" aren't actually doing anything special -- they're just using a fancy term to make their opinions seem more objective than they really are. In this video I explain why that criticism is misguided.
LINKS:
An earlier video of mine, "A visual guide to Bayesian Thinking": • A visual guide to Baye...
"Bayesian" by Zach Weinersmith (Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal): www.smbc-comic...
My podcast, Rationally Speaking: rationallyspeak...

[@jetwim]

Julia has the ability to speak cogently for a long time without a single edit and it is high sorcery

[@z3row0rm]

I was going to comment that I didn't notice any cuts. That's impressive!

[@Melomathics]

This was the 42nd take.

[@evad7933]

Teleprompter?

[@crisprtalk6963]

Highly ordered thoughts.

[@crisprtalk6963]

@@evad7933 ??

[@Liphted]

I can't wait to catch her new video 5 years from now!

[@carlpierce2486]

2 years to go.

[@TimotheeHowland]

1.5 years to go.

[@kensheck2049]

They're worth waiting for.

[@dande3139]

Evidence points toward's Julia's uploads being beneficial and greatly apprecaited. I hope she continues to act according to the beliefs upheld by such evidence.

[@DukeBG]

I've updated my priors on the benefits of these videos

[@righthomosphere7962]

yikes

[@johnnyfarout]

yes, crikeys

[@KarlLew]

It is really really hard to put the world at the Bayesian distance required for rational discourse. Thanks again for a great video!

[@oomenacka]

The words "I don't know" are very powerful. We all need to learn them.

[@peNdantry]

You're not wrong; however, I fear that an erroneous belief, confidently stated, will always sway others far more than can the one who stands upon the pedestal of "I don't know". I think that's how we got to the (IMO totally bizarre) situation where we are now.

[@leefswgoh7558]

@@peNdantry Just out of curiousity, what is the totally bizarre situation we are in you're referring to? And in what way does it relate to people being swayed by confidently stated beliefs (even if erroneous)?

[@peNdantry]

@@leefswgoh7558 Surely you're able to recognise the various crises we face on this planet which have been brought about by the lunatic behaviour of the species I've come to call 'homo fatuus brutus'?§ Much of that has arisen because of avarice, and the beliefs and assertions made by those whose sole purpose is to enrich themselves at any cost. The tobacco, lumber, fossil fuel and financial industries are good examples; all shored up by a bunch of 'expert' economists who confidently push the 'growth is good' mantra at every opportunity, based upon unfounded theories they refuse to shake. § I'd enumerate them, but life's short enough as it is.

[@leefswgoh7558]

@@peNdantry "... because of avarice, and the beliefs and assertions made by those whose sole purpose is to enrich themselves at any cost"? So basically because of greed and greed? haha. Anyway, still not being entirely sure what you're referring to exactly, i think you just think the powers that be are wrong. Which is possible, but seems unrelated to the video. I'm not really interrested in discussing the world's problems, i was only curious about how your real world example would relate to the topic that was being discussed in this video and your take on it. I thought you may have meant covid because that's also a totally bizarre situation we're in, which could have been interresting. The discussion about having to make decisions based on things you don't know is interresting to me, especially if you're responsible for leading a group of people or a nation for example. I don't think confident and (potentially) wrong is necessarily worse than uncertain when it comes to leadership. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be what you were talking about.

[@peNdantry]

​@@leefswgoh7558 I wasn't commenting on the video. I was responding to Oomenacka's assertion. "Confident and potentially wrong" is, in my book at least, definitely worse than "uncertainty" when it comes to leadership, as people are more inclined to believe arguments presented confidently than ones that are not -- I believe that's what I already said -- take as an example those who argue that "scientists can't be trusted because they keep changing their minds". It seems to me that we simply have to agree to disagree on this. And, quite possibly, many other things.

[@Jose-sp4kz]

I am so happy you're back!

[@evad7933]

Would you be happier still if she were black?

[@silverflame8990]

@@evad7933 What are you going on about?

[@evad7933]

@@silverflame8990 BACK versus BLACK. It is called a pun you numb skull.

[@silverflame8990]

@@evad7933 Three options. 1. You are vehemently racist to the point where you bring up race irrelevantly. 2. You are vehemently anti-racist to the point where you bring up race irrelevantly. 3. You use puns that make no sense and convey no proper meaning. "In black" and "black" are DIFFERENT. However, I forgot we were under a video about Bayesian thinking, so I didn't assume you were neurodivergent or anything.

[@evad7933]

@@silverflame8990 Gee are those my the only choices? If I was pushed to go for one it would be (3).

[@larshelmin]

"All models are wrong, some are useful" - George E P Box. A Bayesian model of the world is useful I think.

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Contemplate* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Casual* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as possible with daily hand photo updates Vs Think more the hardest way as honest as how I love myself

[@bocckoka]

I'm not a Bayesian, I'm just lazy, an I just dismiss statistical claims based on individual cases instantly. This way I have time to build little ships inside bottles as a hobby.

[@tgwnn]

that's not consistent with my perception of lazy people

[@brunolanzavecchia5959]

@@tgwnn how so??

[@ehhhhhhhhhh]

LOL

[@brunolanzavecchia5959]

@@tgwnn please explain your perception of lazy people

[@tgwnn]

@@brunolanzavecchia5959 I actually have a lot to say about this and I have a lot of first-person experience with laziness. But this beer isn't getting any fresher and these computer games aren't going to play themselves.

[@le_science4all]

Thanks for clarifying this! This is helpful! About the word "Bayesianism", in my book "The Equation of Knowledge", I distinguish "pure Bayesianism" and "pragmatic Bayesianism". A pure Bayesian rigorously applies Bayes rule upon any evidence. While impractical, I find it to be a nice thought experiment to convince myself that, yes, in a world where computation comes for free, this is the way to go. In practice, we must then resort to being "pragmatic Bayesians". This means that we strive to find good heuristics to approximate Bayes rule. Interestingly, this applies to machines to, and there's a lot of surface tensions between AI research approximating Bayes rule and what Rationalists try to do 😄

[@Avicenna697]

In practice, isn’t the main problem going to be observer bias (or sampling bias in frequentist statistics)? If you’re relying on the media for information, for example about discrimination in the tech industry, isn’t there a bias in what stories get reported or judged to be newsworthy?

[@danieljackson654]

@@Avicenna697 This is precisely the point: there is always observer bias; but, it has a decreasing influence function with time as successive iterations are made. The main reason to think Bayesian.

[@alphalunamare]

Computation is a talent of humanity most baudaciously enhanced this last 80 years and is quite useful today in revealing the Mathematical Truth of Bayesian logic that is neither pure nor pragmatic! It is what it is, elemental, indivisible and most worthy. I am who I am, who would I be if I wasn't Popeye? Rene De FrenchName yonks ago.

[@kevincinnamontoast3669]

Computation comes for free? Wtf!

[@alphalunamare]

@@kevincinnamontoast3669 It is an innate ability of homo sapiens but rare amongst teachers.

[@Shane2020xxx]

Bayesians can play Xcom, be point blank next to an alien with an assault rifle, see the game gives this shot a 96% hit chance, miss, and accept that was always a possibility instead of saying it’s the game cheating.

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Calving* again VS Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Capon* again

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Binary* again VS Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Bloody* again

[@Khyrid]

When I first started to learn coding, each error I kept coming to the conclusion that the compiler was broken because I could swear my code was written correctly. Eventually I learned to think that hard assumptions don't help you much with coding, you need to think in terms of probabilities. There could be multiple reasons some code fails. I started to alter my thinking to not assume causes of problems and solutions, but instead check each possibility to try to reproduce and then isolate the problem. I called it just being intellectually honest when I started to apply this thinking to other views about real life ideologies.

[@dd1278]

I wonder what would be ur take on a scenario like where you are trying to have a debate with a guy/girl, and you are really trying your best to put yourself in his/her shoes as your goal is not winning but to understand the truth but this other person is all about himself/herself and only cares about winning the argument..do we keep on looking at the bigger picture (even at the cost of defeat) or eventually bring ourselves down to his/her level in order to win the debate..I know the theoretical answer obviously but in real life cases I wonder how many would go for the first option.

[@Khyrid]

@@dd1278 If your current state with the debate is that no honest discussion can be had due to their defense mechanism rejecting any facts or insights, you must first deal with that issue before the actual debate can begin. Start with agreeing with them on some point and make them feel you are on their side so they deactivate the automatic opposing view rejection mode. Instead of stating blunt facts, form your words into questions. "I just wonder if argument X is really true though", instead of "argument X is BS!". It takes patience and some encounters are futile.

[@dd1278]

@@Khyrid That's a good enough feedback on the topic..will take it. Thanks 👍

[@thomaslubben8559]

I have fought this battle myself. What a breath of fresh air you are. My own world was as a biochemist in high throughput screening, and explaining why most hits were false positives. I then applied that reasoning to other things in life, just as your examples do.

[@budjohnson2348]

Wow, how enlightening for me, first time on this channel I think. Almost 40 years ago I was early in college taking paleontology as a part of my degree in Geology. I brought a fossil to class I found on the ranch to learn its origin. The prof asked the age of it. I said I don't know because it was found on an unconformity (either 65 or 225 million years ago, Cretaceous or Permian) but probably the younger because rocks roll downhill, turns out I was right and prof said I would be a good geologist because I started with "I dont know" and discussed probability of either. I was surprised by this because by age 19 that statistical way of thinking was completely ingrained, I didn't know another way. I recall similar stories from a much much earlier age. So assuming this is some sort of Bayesian way of thinking, the interesting question is, what is the evolutionary origin of this type of thinking. I suspect it is an inherited trait that is either reinforced or quashed at an early age. And maybe they are selectively chosen by our parents and peers at an early age which explains the difference in our common reactions to weather or politics? What a great video, thanks!

[@MrFungus420]

--deleted because OP edited their post--

[@MrRyanroberson1]

@@MrFungus420 idk what the original comment said but since then it has been edited to say: "prof said I would be a good geologist" which is the opposite to your comment's predicate

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more when I learnt how to hate what I loved curious about just like my past old days Vs Think more when I learnt how to be satisfied in the warmth of your body

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think less as A is for Arrogant Vs Think less as B is for Betrayer

[@vincentdeporter3140]

I totally agree with this. I have a lot of issues with “absolute conviction”... so this is music to my brain. 😊

[@ObsessiveClarity]

Would it be a crazy idea for you to invite guests for video podcasts and post short clips of them to KZbin, and contain a link to the full podcast on your website? I think this would pull more viewers, and thus give you more pull for guests, because visuals are stimulating, personalizing (facial expressions, etc), and promote further attention span.

[@coolsunday6339]

I can always find a reason why I'm right. Sometimes Bayesian thinking fits the bill.

[@AthelstanEngland]

LOL Someone after my own heart!

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Challenge* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Circumstances* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as C is for Construction Vs Think more the hardest way as D is for Demolition

[@chebkhaled1985]

My own experience is that bayesian thinking is not the norm. The amount of ppl I see "not updating" their f*cking priors (lol) is really significant. I think there is more "wishful thinking" than any other type of thinking honestly

[@skynet4496]

Yeah. That's huge in medical science. They pretend like science is this solid chunk of objectivity, but science is meant to be challenged... As with these stupid never ending lockdowns and restrictions, despite no clear data of the benefit, but a clear picture of the issues that it causes. But hey, people like to feel safe, even if it means they suffer more.

[@explrr22]

@@skynet4496 I suspect many among those advising policies know they are dealing with constantly imprecise levels of uncertainty (estimates of probability of various risks). Problem is public seems to demand binary answers. How often do you hear people talk about "is it safe" vs what's the risk probability. Despite her opening example, people still freak out that the weather projections aren't precisely correct much of time, and are in rare instance's significantly off. And weather is something with little inflection from priors, morals, tribalism, ideology, etcetera.... (Except ever popular anti-authority /anti-intellectualism)

[@snoski]

I agree completely. More often than not, people are vilified for having a belief system that is allowed to evolve when new evidence emerges. They are perjoratively labeled as "flip-floppers". Now flip-flopping on a principle out of *mere* political convenience is also common. However, changing one's position based on a change in the direction of the political wind is not the same as changing one's position based on changes in the underlying evidence. However, these two approaches are almost always considered to be the same thing.

[@car0lm1k3]

I think the same thing but in regards to mental models of the world. Most people are not aware that TV depictions of the any time period did not actually reflect that period.

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as A is for Arithmetic Sequence Vs Think more as B is for Binary Digits

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as Q is for *Question* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as R is for *Realisation* again

[@viktorsaurus]

Is an alternative way of thinking about it as having a little devil's advocate on your shoulder all the time?

[@huyked]

I was wondering if it had connection with being a Devil's advocate, too! (As seen in my own comment)

[@iurigrang]

I think it's a bit more specific than that. It's a devil's advocate that argues for how his belief is compatible with the evidence too, and the following process of comparing how compatible the evidence is with either belief.

[@huyked]

@@iurigrang Seems right.

[@RobertHildebrandt]

You can send him on advanced training in order to have a little peer-reviewer instead of a little devil ;)

[@viktorsaurus]

@@RobertHildebrandt haha good one! Although, in my experience, reviewers of my papers have been the real devil incarnate!

[@murrayfountain2092]

I really loved this video because it is such a clear explanation. The example really helped. Just one (tongue in cheek) question - what about the possibility that you are wrong about Bayesian thinking and actually it is a sham?

[@dd1278]

Trick question..You are asking the question using the very basic premise of Bayesian theorem.😂

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as how I know how my mind functioning when I'm out of focussing Vs Think more as wise as how I know I can't pretend I'm okay by being not reasonable

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Bhoirymbong* again VS Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Balat* again

[@RogerHyam]

The issue is applying it to things that are qualitative not quantitative. Not everything in life is fungible and therefore amenable to this kind reasoning so you look stupid when you do apply it - which is the point of the cartoon. It's like Darwin's cost/benefit list of getting married or not.

[@nvman2262]

I'm trying to understand when or why applying it to the quality of something would be a problem? Is it non sensical to apply a cost benefit analysis to marriage because love is so non fungible it can't be weighed against anything like it? What if you have to decide between an art career you love and a person you love?

[@RogerHyam]

@@nvman2262 @Nv man 22 Is romantic love measured in the same units as love of a job? We live in a world totally dominated by market thinking so sometimes it can be difficult to see that things might not be amenable to direct comparison. Bayesian thinking is about probability. How does "slurping their soup loudly" change the prior of deep romantic love? It may be annoying today but endearing in 30 years. Putting a unit of probability on the outcome is possible but is just a silly game.

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as A is for Affected victims Vs Think more as B is for Big-loss

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Hardest way as C is for Central Processing Unit again Vs Think more the Hardest way as D is for Disc Fragmental again

[@ArnoldJudasRimmer]

Imagine a political world where the leaders acknowledged doubt and uncertainty instead of boiling every issue down to meaningless absolutes. Of course, for this to happen, the population has to start looking at the world that way too. Unfortunately, life is just too busy for most people to stop and think. We all like simple exact solutions to complex unsolvable problems. It's a shame.

[@r0sal3sr]

@Alex Even in your comment above, you acknowledge them as "leaders" and not "representatives", implying you are following their lead, even as you acknowledge they are not clear thinkers.

[@ArnoldJudasRimmer]

@@r0sal3sr I'm not entirely sure what you're suggesting but I refer to them as leaders as I expect people in positions of power/influence to lead. I didn't say that I follow them. I think you're making the point that elected officials should serve the population and therefore represent our views. In which case you're correct. But I expect much more than that. I expect them not to blindly follow public opinion but to expertly interpret issues and policies in the light of reason and for the good of the population. However, my point was more about the fact that political discourse is only really about point scoring and pandering to the lowest common denominator, and in many respects, that is the fault of the population.

[@travcollier]

Calling one's self Bayesian is a bit pretentious, but it is a decent aspiration. Most of what you describe could be also described as a scientific mindset.

[@travcollier]

@Super Brain 969 Fair enough... Though I was referring to the "philosophy of science", which is a specific well-established thing. Some dude named Popper (and some other folks) wrote a bit about it ;)

[@seanoconnell1120]

@@travcollier Yeah, but Popper was weird, he thinks that books "know" things, and that is how his epistemology works... How does a book have knowledge exactly Karl??? How about words then, do words "know" themselves??? Knowledge without a subject is inane.

[@travcollier]

@@seanoconnell1120 "knowledge" is a weird concept. My view is that we only have models which work more or less well. A useful term of art from learning theory is "probably approximately correct". I totally agree that knowledge (or information) has to be "with respect to" something else. It is a reduction in the uncertainty about one thing/system given the state of another thing/system. A map is just a bunch of lines on a paper unless those lines correlate with something else.

[@seanoconnell1120]

@@travcollier Also, quite literally I mean that lines on a paper are meaningless to the map itself, it does not comprise or encapsulate or have knowledge. It takes a mind to interpret the lines and give meaning to them and then to have a concept of the map, thus achieving knowledge (although it could be misinterpreted ...) How can an epistemology rely on a book "knowing" things. We could delve a little deeper and ask: does Alexa know things? You can certainly 'ask' Alexa and 'she' will answer (with the preprogrammed responses or call up a google/wikipedia search) But Popper just side steps these questions by saying "If you write 2+2=4 on a rock, now the rock knows 2+2=4" ??? and that is how a kid who reads the writing on the rock now learns 2+2=4, because the rock taught them, not the author who wrote on the rock ... but the rock in and of itself. What a way to get around the issue that knowledge transmission doesn't have to be direct (from subject to subject) but can be via a separate substrate like symbols.

[@travcollier]

@@seanoconnell1120 But does your (or my) brain "know" anything, or just encode patterns? For all I know, you are just a soulless bot (and you can say the same about me) ;) At a practical level it is certainly useful to use concepts like agency and knowing, but that doesn't mean they are well defined or have some really fundamental yes/no existence. Sort of reminds me of the philosophical zombie "hard problem". Imagine you have a bot which is indistinguishable from a conscious person, but is not conscious. Well, my answer to that is that it isn't "hard"... It is nonsense. Either conscious means something which can be distinguished, or it means nothing. I'm rather utilitarian of a sort. Anyways, back on topic... I don't think knowledge in any absolute sense really exists. So saying a map or book knows something isn't bothersome. It's a metaphor, but every time the word "know" is used it is a sort of metaphor.

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as P is for *Praveen* again VS Think more the quickest intuitively way as P is for *Prakash* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as possible with limits of imagination Vs Think more as wise as possible the hardest way to not let others pointed out their hands at me

[@BinanceUSD]

A financial wager always helps focus the mind.

[@thomas.02]

ah, that's such a great way of subtly nudging people, including ourselves, to think in terms of probabilities and uncertainties

[@evannibbe9375]

@@thomas.02 Or of just losing a whole bunch of money without contributing to the economy.

[@samik83]

So, it's like normal reasoning, but more thorough. Got it.

[@fs5775]

Mostly just normal reasoning, ho hum

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as possible the hardest way to be Specifically personal's secret sharing conversation way... Vs Think more the hardest way to let nobody interrupted

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Hardest way as how Communication also has a poetic function which emphasizes the role of the addresser to encode a message in such a way that it could live after the given situation for which it was prepared... Vs Think more the hardest way as Phatic function which manages to keep the channels of communication open and allows people to maintain the relationships as we find that the physical and psychological connections are necessary for any communication...

[@williamolenchenko5772]

Thanks for your permission. I am now glaring at my wife.

[@danielculver2209]

3 days later... tired of sleeping on the couch yet?

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more when I'm wise enough with abandoned wasted wheels... Vs Think more when I'm wise enough with rusting abandoned bridges

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Hardest way as one of the key features of good documentaries is *Actively engaging and challanging the audience* Vs Think more the hardest way as why the Documentaries do not back away from controversy

[@wiadroman]

"Bayesian thinking" sounds like a "keto diet" for a different ecosystem. Wonder if it built already enough of tribalism around itself?

[@nozulani]

no

[@evannibbe9375]

It literally can’t because it’s all about questioning your beliefs in light of new evidence.

[@moenibus]

You are completely right. Everyone wants to feel special or unique

[@TNTsundar]

How are you not getting old? You haven’t aged at all.

[@ignazioacerenza9881]

I was gonna write a comment about how it's remarkable that there's a video of a woman on the internet and not a single comment about her appereance. But fuck, I agree with you completely.

[@spacedoohicky]

Some people just don't age as fast. My mom is one of those people. She looked like a teenager until she was 40. There's no good explanation since my mom does not really lead a healthy lifestyle. I imagine it's something genetic, but who knows. But people on average don't really start aging until around 30 years when their hormones start to decline anyway.

[@StoutProper]

Probably don’t drink or smoke and has a healthy Mediterranean diet with lots of olive oil and fresh veg

[@eternaldoorman5228]

Hey Julia! Happy International Women's Day! ❤️

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as J is for *Jealous* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as J is for *Jointly* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way no matter what.... Vs Think more the hardest way as wise as knowing the efforts I managed to push in a day, even with little duration portion of a day with respect to how I stopped emptying my own hungry stomach

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Character User Interface* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Compact Disc* again

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *Cooperativeless* Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as D is for *Depression* again

[@CONNELL19511216]

About 20+ years ago I read an article/commentary in Nature that confirmed that the brain, as a 'decision engine', is approximately Bayesian - even for people who don't have a clue about principles of belief updating

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as how I know how you framed what I have to reveal with what I have in mind... Vs Think more as wise as willing to do me as you wish me to do for

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Hardest way as how the Journalistic interview is a specific type of informative interview where the interviews one or more 'sources' to gather material and all supporting information required to write a news story... Vs Think more the Hardest way as how in earlier times, a large space in newspapers used to be devoted to various types of reviews

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as E is for equiveleNT Vs Think more the hardest way as F is for frequeNT

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as long as you still managed to think like I have to agree with what I shouldn't be... Vs Think more as wise as how you should know the shyless me who daringly opened to you, will never stop to stay in focus to specifically you to win an argument

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Quickest Intuitively way as C is for *Contendedly* again Vs Think more the Quickest Intuitively way as D is for *Delightful* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as D is for Data Vs Think more as E is for Ellipse

[@CaraiseLink]

Coming in here basically at complete random without a concrete preexisting understanding of bayesian thinking, I'm actually seeing how a person could hear a quick understanding of it (the sort that would fit into a typical conversation) and write it off as being normal thinking with pretentious terminology. Reason being, this kinda is just how I approach the world, because I've been horrifically wrong before and had to decide between preserving my self-image and minimizing the chance of being horrifically wrong again. Anyone who picks the latter option is likely to hit upon similar practices of "assume I'm wrong, does this make more/less/the same amount of sense" sooner or later, simply because that kind of *is* the only way to break out of an unrealistic pattern. Most of a person's beliefs are going to be internally consistent within the context they interact with those beliefs, regardless of whether those beliefs are true. If they weren't, the beliefs would either be impractical to hold or generate cognitive dissonance, neither of which is encouraging the person to keep holding the belief. Forcing yourself to consider possibilities inconvenient to your beliefs is just the only option. Obviously, I have no doubt that anything with terminology behind it has a bunch of very specific ideas about how things work that I have no specific opinion on. It just seemed worthwhile to point out that without asking the specific person their reasonings behind making the criticism, the same words could be making a very different statement than the video seems to be reading into them.

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the wisest way with one thing I'm not happy at... Vs Think more the wisest way with one think with why I always remind to myself how not to be fool

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way with words that end with Y Vs Think more the hardest way as E is for Easy, F is for Fantasy

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Hardest way as wise as how I shouldn't be fool like a person who performed a duly duty when someone else do for me... Vs Think more the Hardest way as wise as how to believe what I did by myself is more important than what others managed their extra additional efforts to help me, yet with expectations

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as F is for *Fountain* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as F is for *Freedom* again

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as H is for *Hyper Text Transfer Protocol* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as H is for *Hyper Text Markup Language* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as C is for Common Sense Vs Think more the hardest way as D is or Difination

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as why Communication can be mediated or direct and why Writing for the Internet has done away with the concept of gate-keeping Vs Think more the hardest way as why the term *Mediated Communication* has led to debate and discussion among Scholars

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as C is for Camera Angle Vs Think more the hardest way as D is for Depth of Field

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more even with the offering choices to pick whatever I like on Internet, even with the desire to fullfill the imagery fleshy needs, with different choices from facebook groups, Google etc... Vs Think more yet with what's makes me to automatically focus on you when I certainly see only the regrets in every sides

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the wisest way with one strictest pattern I managed to discipline myself accordingly even when situation I was framed like I have to be out of control Vs Think more the wisest way even when I have to disagree with everyone included you

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as *Why while selecting a media, one should opt for the one capable of conveying the message appropriately to the target audience* Vs Think more the hardest way as how in the Process of Communication *The receiver gets the message*

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more when I'm wise enough to fool not by deep fake... Vs Think more when I'm wise enough to go beyond deep honesty

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way to figure life Vs Think more to fool not by those who always play with life

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as H is for *Handheld camera* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as H is for *Height of Framing* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as R is for "Riewshemphang" which means Knowledgeable person in our local accent language Vs Think more as S is for "Sarong" which means Pride/Proud in our local accent language

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as T is for *Tag questions* again Vs R Think more the quickest intuitively as T is for *Tense* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think 🏥💎 Vs Think Ambulance, Doctor, Nurse, Patient, Medicine(syrup/tablets), Wards, Nurses, Endoscopy, CT scan, Xray, Injection, Drip, Bed, Prescription slip, Intensive care unit, testing centre, emergency room etc

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Browser* again VS Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Bitcoin* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as disciplined ink with fair conduct handwritten text on paper Vs Think more as wise as honest pointing finger on touchscreen device

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Breaking news* again VS Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Broadcast Journalism* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as E is for #Executive Engineer# Vs Think more as F is for #Fog lines#

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as C is for Conspiracy... Vs Think more the hardest way as D is for Delightful..

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Quickest Intuitively way as E is for *Enormously* again Vs Think more the Quickest Intuitively way as F is for *Fantastic* again

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as O is for *Obsolete* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as O is for *Obtuse* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as cooperative-less until what my thinking process is not a mistake... Vs Think more as human enemy-less until my honesty is more Saintful than everybody else

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Hardest way as A is for Anthropology Vs Think more the Hardest way as B is for Biology

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as V is for *Village* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as T is for *Town* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as how the problems of Grammar can generally be attributed to the levels of words and sentences.. Vs Think more the Hardest way as there are two ways of looking at the rules of grammar -prescriptively and descriptively while dealing with some common Grammatical errors in Media Writing

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as U is for *Understandable* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as V is for *Vulnerability* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the Quickest Intuitively way as B is for *Bracketing techniques* in photography again Vs Think more the Quickest Intuitively way as how in this technique, a photographer takes shot of the same image using different camera settings.

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *To Continue* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as C is for *To Carry on* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as how a director helps the screenwriter visualise the script Vs Think more why he may also work directly with the sound mixers and film scorer for this reason

[@beepbop6697]

"I suggest we refrain from guessing and find some facts. Spock out." -- Star Trek It is astounding how many people live their lives with beliefs based on what they were told, or what they read in their favorite media sources, without taking the time to investigate the "facts" and then alter their beliefs based on the new facts found.

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way as wise as possible with the detail efforts of how I managed to make my Thursday a day ahead than others, no matter how approved or disapproved infront of everybody's eyes through feet, hands, brain, ears, eyes, nose, mouth etc... Vs Think more the hardest way as wise with words that end with C from A-Z pattern, apart from what I couldn't make through with 50% of words that end with B from A to Z pattern

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more when I'm wise enough to learn how to nurture through experiences... Vs Think more but why this lesson just keep me stucked in here even if I dealt with 13500 KM real you daily

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as P is or *Paper* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as P is for *Pivot* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as wise as how how I figured out about myself on developing the habit of continuously commenting procedures even with when a little deductedly wasted minute, to ensure I'm on the right track to choose my way of living in a day... Vs Think more the hardest way even If others may think of me the other way in their own thoughts

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more as theoretically fixturer Vs Think less as practically repairers

[@JimnesstarLyngdohNonglait]

Think more the quickest intuitively way as B is for *Back* again Vs Think more the quickest intuitively way as F is for *Front* again

[@jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait3468]

Think more the hardest way to not be fool Vs Think more the hardest way just like I automatically laid myself on your shoulder and pretend to sleep quietly