Nymeria said:
I would argue we may be shifting from organized control to chaotic control. When media came from a few sources the gatekeepers did have the ability to manipulate. Now, with no gatekeepers, people seek out validation of world view to manipulate themselves. It's going from Orwell to Huxley type of distopia. The key in both is critical thought that constantly asks why we reach the conclusions we do. |
And this is literally the only thing I care about as far as conversations go. I don't care about someone's title, whether they are Socialist, Capitalist, Communist, Fascist - Atheist or Religious - Red or Blue, it only matters what your view is and how you reached your viewpoints.
I would argue that chaotic control is a much better environment with which thought can be transferred. Title's allow for a more organized thought process. The mind isn't an organized machine though. The mind appreciates organization because it makes things easier but easy is very rarely the most fruitful avenue.
There is a reason why two Atheists can disagree with each other, two religious people can disagree with each other, two Communists can disagree with each other. This is because a title has extremely limited value (if any at all) in the understanding of information. But people will always argue from a titled standpoint i.e., "You liberals are all the same" or "Conservatives don't know how to argue".
Point being, people will always act this way, always have, and information will always be propagated in bias fashion. This isn't the problem however. The problem stems from those who subscribe to these standards of thought as opposed to critical thought that constantly asks why we reach the conclusions we do, exactly like you say.
