You can measure one’s emotion stability by whether they get offended by the truth or not

Read the Story

Show Top Comments

Individual differences on how that information is presented like tone and relationship etc Source of “the truth” matters and how much of that truth is personal opinion over fact. Personal opinions don’t matter to most people and may offend because why are they even commenting over the content too.


Sometimes the truth is offensive, in spite of one’s emotional stability.


This is ridiculous. Content matters as much as accuracy. Roughly seven million people died from starvation in 2020, despite humanity having every resource necessary to prevent that for almost a century now. Our world is burning while ultrabillionaires attempt to play space tourist. Convicted rapist Brock Turner got a lighter sentence because he is able to move more quickly through water than the average person. It would be perfectly reasonable to be offended by any one of these statements. The sky is blue, Mars is red, geese can fly, and Usain Bolt is the fastest human alive. All unoffensive truths.


How narrower could this type of reasoning get?


I find people who are disrespectful or rude elicit an emotional response from people regardless of the truth of the matter, and does not necessarily reflect overall emotional stability of the person offended.