Well, 'extreme iii sides to every story' is a rather strange phrase. If we assume 'iii' is just a wrong way of writing 'three', it could mean that every story has not just the obvious two sides, but an extreme third side. For example, in a conflict between two countries, there are the two official stances, but there could be an extreme view from a small but influential group within one of the countries that really changes how the whole situation is perceived.
It might be a misspelling. Usually, we say 'there are two sides to every story'. If it's 'extreme three sides to every story', it could imply that in addition to the common two opposing views in a story (like two people's different accounts), there is an extreme or unexpected third aspect that also needs to be considered, perhaps a hidden factor, a greater context, or a third party's perspective that changes the whole understanding.
The phrase 'extreme iii sides to every story' is quite unclear at first glance. If we take it to mean three extreme sides to every story, it could suggest that every situation or narrative has three very distinct and perhaps radical perspectives. For instance, in a story about a new law being passed, there could be the side of the people who strongly support it for very extreme reasons (like it being the only way to save their livelihoods according to them), the side of those who vehemently oppose it for equally extreme reasons (maybe they think it will completely destroy their way of life), and then a third side which might be an extreme view from a group that has a different cultural or ideological take on the law that no one else has considered.
It means that in any situation or story, there are more than just two sides (like the common 'two sides to a story'). There's often a third perspective that might be overlooked, perhaps a neutral view or a view that combines elements of the other two.
Well, it means that every story has more than just two sides. Usually we think of two sides like right and wrong, but there's often a third extreme side that might be unexpected or overlooked. For example, in a dispute between two neighbors, one side might seem right, the other wrong, but there could be a third aspect like an external factor affecting them both that changes the whole perspective.
Sure. In a business deal gone wrong. One side might think they were cheated. Another side might think they were just following normal business practices. And the third 'extreme' side could be the view of the employees who are now at risk of losing their jobs because of the deal. Their view might be extreme in the sense that they see the whole situation as a complete disaster for their lives, while the other two sides are more focused on financial or contractual matters.
In my understanding, 'extreme three sides to every story' suggests that for any given story, there are three sides that are highly significant or extreme in some way. Take a political event for instance. There are the political parties involved, which represent two sides. But then there's also the public's perception, which can be a third side that is extreme in terms of its influence on the event. The public might have extreme reactions, which can change the course of the political event. And these three sides together form a more complete view of the story.
Sure. Let's say there's a fight between two neighbors over a tree that is on the border of their properties. One neighbor says the tree is his and he wants to cut it down. The second neighbor says it's hers and she wants to keep it. The third side could be the view of the local community that values the tree for its beauty and environmental benefits.
It usually means that for any story, there are three perspectives: the teller's, the listener's, and the objective truth that might be different from both.
It probably implies that there are many different perspectives or aspects to each story, not just one or two.
It means that in any situation or event, there are typically three different perspectives. For example, in a conflict between two people, there's the side of person A, the side of person B, and then there's an objective or outside view that might consider factors neither of them initially thought about.
Basically, '2 sides to a story' implies that there is always an alternative view. Take a news event. The media might present it in one way, but there could be people involved who have a completely different take on it based on their own experiences, motives, and understanding of the situation.
Basically, it suggests that when something happens, there's more than one way to understand or explain it. For example, in a conflict, each person involved might have their own reasons and views, and both could have some validity.