Talk:Red pill and blue pill

Band

Red Pill are an Edinburgh based Progressive Death Metal band.

http://www.metal-archives.com/band/view/id/3540323159

First Sentence in Lede is Wrong

"The red pill and blue pill represent a choice between the willingness to learn a potentially unsettling or life-changing truth by taking the red pill or remaining in the contented experience of ordinary reality with the blue pill."

NO. It means that ALL of the electronic indoctrination we are subjected to is a lie. This Lede attempts to water-down the truth of the expansive nature of this statement because the "reliable sources" used to manufacture this false definition, and false reality, are the primary focus of the term's intended meaning. It's not about, has never been about, and will never be about anything other than the totality of the "world that has been pulled over your eyes". The idea that it's a single "truth" or a "potentially unsettling" whatever is both stupid and laughable, and a bald attempt to water-down the term's intended meaning. Here's a logic exercise. If I'm wrong, than what word or term exists other than this one, to describe the idea that every. single. thing. being published today is a manufactured narrative, and a lie. That's right. That word/term doesn't exist, because THIS one does. That's the word/term we use to describe the idea that it's all, meaning ALL a lie. Stop watering down useful language and pretending it's the truth, instead of yet another one of the infinite number of variations on the entire web of lies we are immersed in. In short, stop lying and tell the truth. For once.

2603:8081:3A00:30DF:1891:C5B1:D102:AB78 (talk) 01:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

what? Babysharkboss2 was here!! ^{Dr. Wu is NOT a Doctor!} 19:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Here is a guide for you to craft your argument why the sentence is wrong:

1. Highlight the sentence that is wrong.

2. What is wrong in the sentence.

3. Why is it wrong?

4. What else is wrong?

5. Why is it wrong?

6. Summary takeaway of what you are trying to say

7. Recommend amendment suggestions concisely

8. Explain why the amendment would rectify what were wrong that were mentioned.

-

Use LLM or other AI assistant to correct phrasing, language and imperfections. Avoid using Caps unnecessary just to for the sake to over-express your feelings as facts dont care about feelings.

-

Best regards,

A male early 30s who identified as a 60%/40% red-pill-blue-pill person. Gweiz (talk) 06:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Total Recall

My edit: The 1990 film Total Recall has a scene where doctor Edgemar (a villain, who works for the company "Rekall", played by Roy Brocksmith), held at gunpoint by Quaid (the hero, played by Arnold Schwarzenegger), tries to convince the latter to take a red pill : -if Quaid swallows the red pill right now in what Edgemar warns is nothing but a fantasy, he'll wake up from the artificial dream induced by Rekall's device, with no after effects whatsoever, his mental health intact. -refusing to do so and killing the doctor would make the "walls of reality crash down" on Quaid trapping him in a state of "permanent psychosis" with "no one to guide him out", after which there would be no other choice than to have him lobotomized. Edgemar predicts what the fantasies will consist of before the inevitable: first the hero will become a rebel leader then suddenly best friends with Cohaagen (Mars' dictator, the movie's main villain), followed by wild dreams of alien civilizations "as requested" by Quaid initially prior to enter the Rekall apparatus. Quaid pretends to take the pill but doesn't swallow, Edgemar notices it but at the same time starts to sweat profusely thus showing fear in a situation he himself presented as being nothing but a dream, which leads the hero to believe he's being fooled. Quaid finally shoots Edgemar point-blank in the forehead and spits the red pill in his face.

Member MrOllie ( http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:MrOllie ), who deleted my edit, claims it's an "over detailed account" of the pill scene from Total Recall (1990), yet the article should have more than a short sentence coming from this movie which did more than inspire the creators of the The Matrix (1999) 9 years later. It's not just a detail or two, the whole context is necessary . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E0A:208:4130:103D:1801:AA4B:2686 (talk) 01:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

No, it is way too long. The mention is of questionable relevance in the first place. Wikipedia operates by following reliable sources, which we cite, not an individual's opinion of what did more than inspire the creators of the The Matrix MrOllie (talk) 01:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Freudian psychology

"In Freudian psychology, the corresponding principles are the reality principle and the pleasure principle", I read the cited source and I did not find anywhere that said red and blue pill correspond to the reality principle and the pleasure principle. What the article seems to be talking about is how the red pill scene can be used as a metaphors for how we are stuck in a prison of desire, and that basically we are never in control of our actions or thoughts. From my understanding, Pleasure principle seeks instant gratification, while the reality principle delays gratification in order correspond to reality, and to sustain the pleasure principle. Lesanol (talk) 01:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for checking the source, removed from the lead. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:39, 28 September 2024‎ (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: Are you all so sure? Please try to consider these further sources as well: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. How about reconsidering your hasty judgment? --94.34.41.111 (talk) 09:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done --151.37.235.72 (talk) 02:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Tendency of pro blue-pilling ideologists to make edits to fundamentally reject rationality of red-pills

Some people have used this article to fundamentally rejects the rationality of red-pilling by pushing the idea that red-pilling are of extreme gross immoral practice associated with hate, misogyny, etc . They backed their credibility with citations from pro mainstream media information channels. Often times, pro blue-pilling editors, often more passionate than red-pill counterparts would overweighed their biased supporting citation to reject red-pills fundamentally.

However it is clear that there are a lot of red-pilling individuals are successful, well-respected, people of democratic society of reputation of great integrity and the controversy of blue pills vs red pills is more grey than their and their citation's surface argument.

How can we stop biased edits backed by flawed citations, motivated by agenda to protect the credibility of blue-pilling practice over conveying facts to curious, neutral, intelligent readers?

Example Original ver:

The concept of red and blue pills has since been widely used as a political metaphor in the United States, especially among online culture,

After biased edit ver:

The concept of red and blue pills has since been widely used as a political metaphor in the United States, especially among online hate culture,

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gweiz (talk • contribs) 11:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia follows the mainstream sources, yes. That is how this site is designed. There is no way to 'stop' that - per policy that is exactly what should be happening. We're not going to substitute your opinion of what is 'biased' for the mainstream sources. - MrOllie (talk) 12:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

^ Precisely this. "Red pill" / "Blue pill" are MOS:INUNIVERSE concepts. Wikipedia, on the other hand, describes the world from a WP:SCHOLARLY perspective wherever possible, and where that is not possible it relies largely upon mainstream WP:NEWSORGs. By design it will always be anathema to people who think of themselves as "red pilled". Generalrelative (talk) 14:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)