I'm curious, is this just me or are other people also doing this?
So whenever I used to not know something, and it could be everything, I would turn to other people for advice. And if there wasn't an answer, I would turn to the internet. And I noticed that a lot of my beliefs about the world come from the outside. Also in part it was books. But it was often like, "Alright, so I have this really specific problem, I just need a quick info on how to do it."
And of course on forums there's malicious people, so I built a lot of malicious and disempowering beliefs into my psyche at those places where I had the questions.
So I have a question, there's basically an opening in my mind to take in the answer, I turn to the internet, or to other people, or to books even, and they gave me limiting beliefs and I built them into my brain.
And up to this day I have a hard time figuring out the truth from lies. I know when people are lying, I know when something is off, but I cannot really pinpoint what it is.
And by the way, if you are hinting at autism and whatever, this is not helpful. Not for me, not for you, not for anybody.
The question is if you can relate. And what you did yourself, if you can or could relate, to get out of this. And only speak from experience, I don't want some "ten rules on how to do whatever" by some guru, but I want your real experience, how you handled this, how you got out of it, and how you started trusting your own opinion more, or how you found truth outside that made you so secure in a solution for problem or gave you a lot of answers at once like an avalanche.
Just in general, what is your source for answers?
PS: Currently AI fills this void for me. It's much better than internet trolls but it's still biased.
I relate. I used to outsource my judgment to whatever seemed most convincing online, which meant I also picked up a lot of disempowering “truths.” What helped me:
Test in reality. Instead of debating which advice was right, I just tried things in small experiments. Reality gave better feedback than any forum.
Write before searching. I’d first note down what I already know or would try. Then compare outside input to that. It built trust in my own reasoning.
Now I treat all advice (AI included) as raw input, not truth. My “source” is a mix of experiments + cross-checking multiple perspectives. The key shift was asking: does this expand me, or shrink me? That filter alone cut out a lot of limiting beliefs.
I surround myself with people I trust. They tell me when I'm wrong and when I'm right. Everyone is right, everyone is wrong, and everything has bias. Instead of trying to discern what is real and fake, I think you should try to decide what you believe, and through that belief, you will find liars and trustworthy people full of valuable information. Most importantly, try to understand people who disagree with you - I grew up with a family with entirely different values and beliefs than I do. Having people around you who agree and disagree with you, with whom you feel comfortable discussing those topics, is vital to personal development and growth.
I prefer having answers to questions and then go on with my life. I'm not into discussing things that matter to me. I'm not into arguing about things that matter to me. I want the right answer that gives me results.
As I said, I have a thousand little questions. A thousand of them. And it's not about what is my vision in life. It's about every little question that you could think of. So what you are saying is, I assume, questions like "Is there a simulation or are we real?" or "Is time travel good".
And that's not at all what I am talking about. Those questions don't lead to useful results especially when asked by laymen who just want to be right and the other party to confirm their view.
That's also what bugs me the most, people think by setting boundaries I wanted to discuss things, or I cared about their unfounded opinions. I don't.
I want applicable knowledge and compassion from others and only that.
Currently what I do is that I am training myself a lot on critical thinking.
Reading a lot of fiction books which are considered classics, philosophy. And of course, meditation.
When I want to get informed about something controversial or very loaded in politics, I check the most extreme sources in both sides that I can possibly find, and because I know that often the 'truth' I am looking for is somewhere in the middle, I make my own conclusions. This includes newspapers, AI, Google, Reddit, X.
I wish I had a good answer to this question for you and for me.
Everything is full of bias, propaganda, partisan activism, and outright lies. Government institutions, educational institutions, the media, Internet forums, social media, books and journal articles by the experts, and everything else. Unfortunately, AI is trained on all of this suboptimal input so it really isn’t any better.
The best thing I’ve been able to do is attempt to find a source on both sides of a topic and attempt to glean the truth that way. It’s still a flawed methodology that leaves me susceptible to biases, most dangerously of which are my own biases.
[dead]