Ah, so this is about faith in humanity, and whether the story is true or not does not matter -- as long as we believe. I can live with that. I have to say though, I've met plenty of non-poor, non-immigrant folk that like to help people out.
All we can do is speculate about whether the story is true or not, and in practice, its veracity is completely irrelevant to our lives. You said "I really don't believe it." What I understand that to mean is "I am as certain that story false as I am certain that I'll suffocate without air." To the extent that you are saying the story is certainly untrue, I am confused by your skepticism. What about the story seems that unbelievable? That in all the billions of people in the world, that four of them didn't end up in a van on the highway with the means and and impetus to help a stranger?
"I have to say though, I've met plenty of non-poor, non-immigrant folk that like to help people out."
Sorry... I hate how much it seems like I'm just categorically slamming everything you're saying, but I'm honestly not gunning for that: When did anyone claim that non-poor, non-immigrant folk don't enjoy helping people out? In my grandparent post, I was only contending that the likelihood of someone helping may be unintuitive. I fancy myself a non-poor, non-immigrant fellow who likes to help people out... so it clearly can't be impossible. :-)
Like I said, I am sure there is some truth to this and people are nice and all, but I think the story was embellished. It's ok for me to believe this, it doesn't mean I'm a misanthrope or anything. :) The story certainly hit an emotional chord with everyone, as it was designed to do. People are really upset that I don't just believe it outright!
You know, I almost feel like we are both saying "believe," but that we both mean something different.
When someone says "I really don't believe that," what I hear is, "I am certain that more of this story is false than true." Based on this post, though, that doesn't seem like what you're saying--it seems like you are just asserting that the story has just been modified to become a little bit "larger than life." For example, maybe in real life the tire iron didn't break, but in the Redditor's Magical-Love-Compassion-Universe, it snapped and the Mexican man's wife was on the road to get a new one just seconds later, still all smiles.
When it comes to stuff like that, I have what I would call "Schrodinger's belief" in those details. It's not that I believe or disbelieve; I simply wouldn't be surprised either way. Turns out the details were embellished? No shock there. Turns out it was patently true, through-and-through? Well that's just spiffy.
I was upset when I thought you were certain that the entire thing was fabricated. I didn't understand how anyone could come to possess a world-view that precluded the possibility of such a simple kindness. And, as we all know: Humans fear the unknown; Americans yell at it and accuse it of terrorism. So, to the extent that you were just saying "This seems embellished," I'm sorry I called you a spiritual terrorist.
When I re-read your OP now, I think I see what happened.
This was my thought process when I originally read it, and I bet the downvoters felt similarly:
----
> That's a good story but a little over the top.
I can buy that. Obviously I'd like to believe it's 100% true, but everyone loves to embellish.
> If the author had dispensed with the $20 bill in the tamale the suspension of belief would have been a little more effective.
Wait, what? "Suspension of disbelief?" This guy doesn't believe the entire story... and it's because the Mexican wouldn't take the poster's money? That's crazy. I've turned down money after helping a stranger before; why wouldn't the good samaritan in the story? This guy is either crazy, misanthropic, racist, or a combination of all three. My disgust must be broadcast to the world... dear colkassad, who was foolish enough to be wrong on the internet, I downvote you with the fury of a thousand suns!
----
Okay, maybe that last part was a little over the top. But the gist of it is: I think that when you explicated a potential embellishment that everyone else had ostensibly already accepted, they thought you were taking it one step further.
Or, I dunno. Maybe people were just pissed 'cause we're all optimistic hippies and you were harshing our rainbow love groove. The world may never know.
Thanks for continuing to explain yourself in the face of my opinionated ranting, by the way--I love Hacker News most of all for its tendency to nurture discussions like this.
