I think the recent 'Trump lovers believe him but don't take his words literally, while P01135809 haters are sure he's lying but do take his words literally.'Although there is a significant political dimension to this topic, I intend the discussion to be broader. My professional life was lived in the milieu of nuance. In each of my fields of endeavor - journalism, medicine, education, military, and law (yeah, a busy life) - understanding complexity and navigating nuance has been essential to success.
I have noted a significant deterioration in the ability to address nuance in all of these fields, and in just general discussions.
To give examples from each of those fields, just to get a discussion started, I provide the following:
1) The reduction of two-paper towns results in a dearth of local reporting, and the loss of contrary voices, where nuance lived. Cable coverage tends to the black or white, rather than discussion of the intracacies of a situation.
2) The ability to understand the issues regarding vaccination has been subsumed with a political dimension that is simply nonsensical. Vaccines are neither a panacea nor irrelevant (or dangerous), yet people seem not to want to know how they work.
3) So many discussions of history, for example, are derailed by forces that want a particularized and, again, political, answer, rather than an exploration of the intricacies of how different threads interplay in the course of events that have already happened. And in other education-related subjects, any injection of nuance is shut down by zealots of one stripe or another.
4) Surprisingly, even when the equities of a situation are obvious - such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, or Hamas's attack on Israel - forces of extremism and denial will try to disrupt any nuanced discussion of the issue.
5) And, try to have any discussion about the various Trump travails or cases involving 1/6...
As someone who was born after the internet became widespread, I do think it carries most of the blame.I have noted a significant deterioration in the ability to address nuance in all of these fields, and in just general discussions.
Trump is a blowhard but if you don't take his words seriously, you are foolish.I think the recent 'Trump lovers believe him but don't take his words literally, while P01135809 haters are sure he's lying but do take his words literally.'
There is, this day in age, a propensity for commenters on any given topic to treat such commentary as ONLY a binary function. A proffered opinion is treated as either "right" or "wrong" and quite often the ONLY factor given consideration as to which is which is the political benefit the commenter is seeking. I used to think that was just a function of this being a political focused discussion forum and, as such, the political aspects of any discussion were naturally going to have a more significant play than any other factor but, over the past 15 years or so, have seen the politics bleed out into main stream media more and more.Although there is a significant political dimension to this topic, I intend the discussion to be broader. My professional life was lived in the milieu of nuance. In each of my fields of endeavor - journalism, medicine, education, military, and law (yeah, a busy life) - understanding complexity and navigating nuance has been essential to success.
I have noted a significant deterioration in the ability to address nuance in all of these fields, and in just general discussions.
To give examples from each of those fields, just to get a discussion started, I provide the following:
1) The reduction of two-paper towns results in a dearth of local reporting, and the loss of contrary voices, where nuance lived. Cable coverage tends to the black or white, rather than discussion of the intracacies of a situation.
2) The ability to understand the issues regarding vaccination has been subsumed with a political dimension that is simply nonsensical. Vaccines are neither a panacea nor irrelevant (or dangerous), yet people seem not to want to know how they work.
3) So many discussions of history, for example, are derailed by forces that want a particularized and, again, political, answer, rather than an exploration of the intricacies of how different threads interplay in the course of events that have already happened. And in other education-related subjects, any injection of nuance is shut down by zealots of one stripe or another.
4) Surprisingly, even when the equities of a situation are obvious - such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, or Hamas's attack on Israel - forces of extremism and denial will try to disrupt any nuanced discussion of the issue.
5) And, try to have any discussion about the various Trump travails or cases involving 1/6...
There was a book that came out in the 80s by a guy called Allen Bloom that addressed a lot of what you mentioned. "The Closing of the American Mind" was the title and, while social media and 24/7 news were not major factors back then, Bloom kind of nailed the direction we were heading.I remember having the luxury of sitting down at dinner and having dinner with at least one of my parents nightly and watching the news together, discussing it, etc…and having my parents challenge perspectives, opinions, etc. not only of each other, but opinions held by my brother and I.
My high school and college classrooms were filled with lively debate - from all sides - with teachers and professors often acting as mediators and even instigators of debate and discussions.
And I had pen pals. International as well as within the US from places I’d never see. I remember laboriously pouring over my Spanish-English dictionary to write to my Spanish pen pal, in 6th grade.
In all those scenarios - you learned how to debate face to face, discuss face to face….or at minimum with your name attached. To choose your words, to “read” the room…and importantly, you delivered your words TO a person - or at minimum with your name attached. And you learn that there’s a LOT more grey within any topic than there is black/white.
Those face to face, back and forth conversations, in my opinion, led to more nuance. More in depth discussions. More appreciation for different points of view and experience.
I remember at University, many of us would go to the pub, etc to sit and talk and debate. People from all over the world. It was what we did for FUN. (What nerds we were…but what do you expect of history, politics, international studies, etc majors)
24/7 “news” programs, where broadcasting is paid for via advertising dollars…is a problem. It has diluted the quality of information available to inform individuals.
Education that is graded on standardized test scores and geared towards job markets…also has diluted nuance. Standardized testing looks for exact answers - not nuance.
I think the internet and the anonymity that comes with the internet has changed debate - and has led to the death of nuance.
Entire generations have grown up delivering opinions on screens vs. in person. After being taught to take standardized tests and view “education” as a means to an end (job) vs. education for the sake of knowledge.
And the internet has glamorized “likes” and “things” and “wealth” or “beauty” instead of intelligence, thoughtfulness, varied perspectives.
It doesn't help that for-profit news profits from trauma and grievance. Therefore, that is what is covered, and the collection together and repetition of painful and enraging stories of trauma and grievance can easily cause them to be taken badly out of context and take on an enormous degree of importance in the mind of the viewer.I’ve actually been thinking about this topic somewhat today and I have come to the conclusion that our current society focuses on trauma and grievance to the point where much of our population is reacting defensively to political situations instead of thinking about the greater good.
People reacting out of emotional pain doesn’t fully explain today’s politics, but it explains a lot of it, especially the extremes of either party in many cases.
Per the comment by @Lutherf, I think the typical response of “what benefits me” is born of that and the type of scarcity mentality it breeds. Ultimately this leaves people vulnerable to influencer/politician types and being deceived by constant lies.
I am not sure if I am fully articulating my thoughts well here and am still, admittedly, working out whether this is a genuine insight or if I am off the deep end, but it just seems so many people are hurt and want to hurt others right now.
Nuance gets lost in that mentality.
Although there is a significant political dimension to this topic, I intend the discussion to be broader. My professional life was lived in the milieu of nuance. In each of my fields of endeavor - journalism, medicine, education, military, and law (yeah, a busy life) - understanding complexity and navigating nuance has been essential to success.
I have noted a significant deterioration in the ability to address nuance in all of these fields, and in just general discussions.
To give examples from each of those fields, just to get a discussion started, I provide the following:
1) The reduction of two-paper towns results in a dearth of local reporting, and the loss of contrary voices, where nuance lived. Cable coverage tends to the black or white, rather than discussion of the intracacies of a situation.
2) The ability to understand the issues regarding vaccination has been subsumed with a political dimension that is simply nonsensical. Vaccines are neither a panacea nor irrelevant (or dangerous), yet people seem not to want to know how they work.
3) So many discussions of history, for example, are derailed by forces that want a particularized and, again, political, answer, rather than an exploration of the intricacies of how different threads interplay in the course of events that have already happened. And in other education-related subjects, any injection of nuance is shut down by zealots of one stripe or another.
4) Surprisingly, even when the equities of a situation are obvious - such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, or Hamas's attack on Israel - forces of extremism and denial will try to disrupt any nuanced discussion of the issue.
5) And, try to have any discussion about the various Trump travails or cases involving 1/6...
I will check out that book. Don’t know as I’ve read it.There was a book that came out in the 80s by a guy called Allen Bloom that addressed a lot of what you mentioned. "The Closing of the American Mind" was the title and, while social media and 24/7 news were not major factors back then, Bloom kind of nailed the direction we were heading.
People generally want to get the answer "right" instead of to knew WHY it's right. The result becomes the benefit rather than the pursuit being the benefit.
But even that particular situation is SO much more complex and nuanced than just October 2023.Being against Israels killing of civilians in Gaza has made me feel like an antivaxxer in 2021. I'm sorry to you guys, i think you're crazy, but i shouldn't have treated you like the devil.
The situiation in Gaza isn't the Hamas attack. it is Israel's response. Pretty much everyone is against the Hamas attack on civilians. The people who cheer Hamas in the west aren't enough to even deserve attention.
I am against the Hamas attack, and against Israel's 2 week bombing and blockade of Gaza.
Excellent post. Thank you.I remember having the luxury of sitting down at dinner and having dinner with at least one of my parents nightly and watching the news together, discussing it, etc…and having my parents challenge perspectives, opinions, etc. not only of each other, but opinions held by my brother and I.
My high school and college classrooms were filled with lively debate - from all sides - with teachers and professors often acting as mediators and even instigators of debate and discussions.
And I had pen pals. International as well as within the US from places I’d never see. I remember laboriously pouring over my Spanish-English dictionary to write to my Spanish pen pal, in 6th grade.
In all those scenarios - you learned how to debate face to face, discuss face to face….or at minimum with your name attached. To choose your words, to “read” the room…and importantly, you delivered your words TO a person - or at minimum with your name attached. And you learn that there’s a LOT more grey within any topic than there is black/white.
Those face to face, back and forth conversations, in my opinion, led to more nuance. More in depth discussions. More appreciation for different points of view and experience.
I remember at University, many of us would go to the pub, etc to sit and talk and debate. People from all over the world. It was what we did for FUN. (What nerds we were…but what do you expect of history, politics, international studies, etc majors)
24/7 “news” programs, where broadcasting is paid for via advertising dollars…is a problem. It has diluted the quality of information available to inform individuals.
Education that is graded on standardized test scores and geared towards job markets…also has diluted nuance. Standardized testing looks for exact answers - not nuance.
I think the internet and the anonymity that comes with the internet has changed debate - and has led to the death of nuance.
Entire generations have grown up delivering opinions on screens vs. in person. After being taught to take standardized tests and view “education” as a means to an end (job) vs. education for the sake of knowledge.
And the internet has glamorized “likes” and “things” and “wealth” or “beauty” instead of intelligence, thoughtfulness, varied perspectives.
We are experiencing the death of nuanced discourse in many parts of the world today. Instead, we see black or white debate between two sides, each insisting that they are right and the other wrong in every respect. Neither side is willing to give intellectual quarter to the other or even to listen to their counterarguments. Unconditional surrender is demanded. Compromise is unthinkable in this war of ideologies.
Gone are days when friends could disagree and yet respect each other's views. Today, long-term friendships end over an unwillingness to acknowledge that there may be two sides to a divisive issue. Counterarguments are not answered by facts or logic but by ad hominem insults.
... The great American jurist Learned Hand correctly observed that the spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." Certainty and intolerance of opposing views are the hallmarks of intellectual tyranny that easily morph into political tyranny. If one is certain of the absolute correctness of his views, he often sees no need for the right to dissent or the need for due process.
... The road to political hell is indeed paved with certainty that one's intentions are good. Or as the great Justice Louis Brandeis taught us a century ago, "the greatest dangers to Liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal but without understanding." ...
Although there is a significant political dimension to this topic, I intend the discussion to be broader. My professional life was lived in the milieu of nuance. In each of my fields of endeavor - journalism, medicine, education, military, and law (yeah, a busy life) - understanding complexity and navigating nuance has been essential to success.
I have noted a significant deterioration in the ability to address nuance in all of these fields, and in just general discussions.
To give examples from each of those fields, just to get a discussion started, I provide the following:
1) The reduction of two-paper towns results in a dearth of local reporting, and the loss of contrary voices, where nuance lived. Cable coverage tends to the black or white, rather than discussion of the intracacies of a situation.
2) The ability to understand the issues regarding vaccination has been subsumed with a political dimension that is simply nonsensical. Vaccines are neither a panacea nor irrelevant (or dangerous), yet people seem not to want to know how they work.
3) So many discussions of history, for example, are derailed by forces that want a particularized and, again, political, answer, rather than an exploration of the intricacies of how different threads interplay in the course of events that have already happened. And in other education-related subjects, any injection of nuance is shut down by zealots of one stripe or another.
4) Surprisingly, even when the equities of a situation are obvious - such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, or Hamas's attack on Israel - forces of extremism and denial will try to disrupt any nuanced discussion of the issue.
5) And, try to have any discussion about the various Trump travails or cases involving 1/6...
Blowhard or not, you are a fool to take any politician's serious.Trump is a blowhard but if you don't take his words seriously, you are foolish.
The folks on the right take trump seriously.Blowhard or not, you are a fool to take any politician's serious.
Nuance takes work - you have to go out and actively seek the required level of knowledge to perceive it. Most people would rather be spoon-fed.
I think education - or lack thereof - also has a hand. There are a couple of trends that you've both identified. People are inherently lazy, and it's not that ignorance is a new thing, or division, either, but social developments over the last century have exacerbated existing conditions.As someone who was born after the internet became widespread, I do think it carries most of the blame.
At the risk of being blunt...Although there is a significant political dimension to this topic, I intend the discussion to be broader....
Why do you think that? Is it because the media showcases it?The folks on the right take trump seriously.
Maybe because I watched the events of 1/6 unfold on television live? Trump and his supporters ooze hatred.Why do you think that? Is it because the media showcases it?
Showcased by the media....Maybe because I watched the events of 1/6 unfold on television live? Trump and his supporters ooze hatred.
You guys have an unbelievable ability to deny reality. That bad old media, having the audacity to point the cameras at the people 'enjoying' themselves smashing their way into the capitol.Showcased by the media....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?