Controversial Opinions (For Everything Other Than DC Comics)

[JackDaw]

My mother died from lung cancer, so I'd put cigarettes second, MILES ahead of social media.

“And curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git...”

My best friend had years of ill health, made profoundly worse by smoking. As well as lung cancer...smoking has tons of other adverse health effects.

One of those things where because they have been around for many years they are allowed to continue...a similar new product coming to market wouldn’t pass health regulations.

[WillieMorgan]

Social media is the 2nd worse invention mankind has ever come up with behind the nuclear bomb. Some people would say the gun, but I can see some positive benefits to firearms(wild animal attack deaths plummeted after the invention of the rifle). Nuclear weapons and social media are two inventions with next to no pros and a whole lot of cons. Cigarettes are in third place.

I don't know about social media being the second worst invention of humankind behind nuclear weapons. That's probably a bit of an exaggeration. Don't forget, we've been also responsible for creating hideous chemical weapons and then turning them on our fellow man. That's unforgivable. You mention cigarettes also. They are and forever will be disgusting, health destructive artefacts that would never have been given the green light to mass produce and market nowadays. I'd rate those higher than social media too.

I do loathe social media culture though. I agree that it's had a negative impact on modern society overall. Rational debate is finished, both sides of the political spectrum have weaponized it and often attacked moderates simply for being so and a 'my personal feelings and beliefs will always trump (forgive the choice of wording there) quantifiable facts' mentality is becoming increasingly common. Idiot groups like the Flat Earth Society, a particular bugbear to me, have thrived thanks to social media.

[DrNewGod]

Social media is the 2nd worse invention mankind has ever come up with behind the nuclear bomb. Some people would say the gun, but I can see some positive benefits to firearms(wild animal attack deaths plummeted after the invention of the rifle). Nuclear weapons and social media are two inventions with next to no pros and a whole lot of cons. Cigarettes are in third place.

Like others responding, I might quibble with the rankings, but agree with the general assessment of social media. It's been particularly harmful in allowing hate groups and extremists of every stripe to more easily organize. If that weren't enough, its promise to democratize has turned out to be another means of surveillance and control.

[Gray Lensman]

My mother died from lung cancer, so I'd put cigarettes second, MILES ahead of social media. Also ahead of social media:

--chemical weapons
--guns
--DDT
--asbestos
--GMO's

And that's just off the top of my head.

I only put modern guns on the list (as opposed to all of them)- back when one had to reload often and rechamber after every shot things were far less lethal.

Likewise, some GMOs (golden rice) have incredible potential, unlike roundup ready soybeans which seem to only create chemical runoff.

[The Darknight Detective]

I think the difference between the excesses of social media and the other bad things posted here are that the latter can hurt you physically, while the former, if you are caught in its crosshairs, can do it mentally or spiritually. I'm very glad I grew up during the '70s than now, at any rate.

[dancj]

My mother died from lung cancer, so I'd put cigarettes second, MILES ahead of social media. Also ahead of social media:

--chemical weapons
--guns
--DDT
--asbestos
--GMO's

And that's just off the top of my head.

GMOs are good - and probably necessary if we want to be able to feed our ballooning population.

IMO, Social media probably does more good than harm too.

[The Darknight Detective]

IMO, Social media probably does more good than harm too.

I would agree with that, too, but the bullies of our society make me question that every now and then.

[Starter Set]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

[jetengine]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

Very incorrect I'm afraid

[The Darknight Detective]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

A good biographer can overcome those obstacles completely or almost so, though a bad one is indeed guilty of all the things you say.

[DrNewGod]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

Depends on whether you're reading something by an entertainer, or a scholar. Sadly, the former has been doing most of the writing since the 1980's.

[C_Miller]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

Yeah, that's pretty objectively not true. Sure, most biographers do have some interest in the subject they're writing about, but good ones actually spend a lot of time doing research and sourcing similar to how historians due their work.

[Zauriel]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

Paula Broadwell's All In: The Education of General David Petraeus is a good example of an author's hero worship. Petraeus had an affair with his biographer.

[Kirby101]

Biographies are written by two kind of people.

People for love too much what they are writing about or people who hate too much what they are writing about.

In both cases, it's pointless to read.

Talk to Robert Caro, he'll explain why you are wrong.

[TheRay]

Talking about politics does not lead to fights. Immaturity and lack of perspective does.