this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
1061 points (90.8% liked)

Showerthoughts

30032 readers
567 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
vatlark@lemmy.world
forkball@lemmy.world
quinten@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
1061
They use to tell us we couldnt trust Wikipedia. Now we know. Wikipedia is the only website you can trust. (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by Daft_ish@lemmy.world to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
332 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For example there were pages that would state that "Scholars agree that the gospel of ____ was not written by _____ but was written by an anonymous author" when the original sources never discredited the original claim of authorship, but were essentially "I can't be sure who wrote it", never actually saying/discrediting that it wasn't written by said evangelist.

I think the anonymous perspective belongs there, but when the original source says "I cannot be sure who wrote it" then that's not saying it wasn't written by them.