- Joined
- Jul 28, 2020
- Messages
- 7,962
- Reaction score
- 7,815
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
This post will be somewhat strange (and probably ignored) but I still want to give it to you...
It has been established today that intelligence is declining throughout the Western world. I believe that the internet and the way we communicate here and through social media, blogs and other communication channels contribute to it. We never meet. We adapt to a way of unwritten rules to deal with, be heard and participate that is stupefying. When we cannot see the whole context from which each person "speaks", we cannot take a position other than for or against. A few try to start threads to give themselves a context but most often they are deliberately misunderstood, mocked or ignored. When we cannot see, do not know the background, context or starting point, we obviously cannot handle diversion either. The two opposing "extremes" expressions becomes the dominant and only things that is treated in the process. Without context or knowledge of who gives you the ideas, the arguments that speak most for the extremes' (or standardized) ideas are the ones considered to be the most adequate ones and the admission is given to those who receive so-called likes and thus those are the ones who is judged to be the most important contributions in the debate. Those who stick to the clichés are the ones who become the forum's "heavy" posters.
At the same time, we must all relate to the persona we build up and which of the two sides this persona belongs to. We can thus not reward (like) the items that contain thought activity (and thereby change the rules for participation) without at the same time being associated with the "side" to which the person who those thought belongs or to the opinions expressed. We are thus forced to limit our own ability to communicate, intelligence and our own ability to create the conversations that would develop us. This always concerns everyone who participates in the debate, and anyone who may have opened up to something constructive will in the next post close the communication with a new standardized opinion. Keeping one's persona in the clear light of the extreme is more important than developing. To be clear and consistent in our views and postings becomes more essential than to think and develop ourselves. Everything else can lead to exclusion in the debate.
At the same time, we have stopped “meeting” in the real world. We use our "thinking" and the result of it to communicate here and elsewhere. We then eliminate any conflicts and discussions from "real life". There are a lot of benefits and the only thing that suffers is the intelligent development of ourselves and others. It may seem like a small sacrifice, but it makes the public debate increasingly dumb.
Does anyone understand what I'm on about?
It has been established today that intelligence is declining throughout the Western world. I believe that the internet and the way we communicate here and through social media, blogs and other communication channels contribute to it. We never meet. We adapt to a way of unwritten rules to deal with, be heard and participate that is stupefying. When we cannot see the whole context from which each person "speaks", we cannot take a position other than for or against. A few try to start threads to give themselves a context but most often they are deliberately misunderstood, mocked or ignored. When we cannot see, do not know the background, context or starting point, we obviously cannot handle diversion either. The two opposing "extremes" expressions becomes the dominant and only things that is treated in the process. Without context or knowledge of who gives you the ideas, the arguments that speak most for the extremes' (or standardized) ideas are the ones considered to be the most adequate ones and the admission is given to those who receive so-called likes and thus those are the ones who is judged to be the most important contributions in the debate. Those who stick to the clichés are the ones who become the forum's "heavy" posters.
At the same time, we must all relate to the persona we build up and which of the two sides this persona belongs to. We can thus not reward (like) the items that contain thought activity (and thereby change the rules for participation) without at the same time being associated with the "side" to which the person who those thought belongs or to the opinions expressed. We are thus forced to limit our own ability to communicate, intelligence and our own ability to create the conversations that would develop us. This always concerns everyone who participates in the debate, and anyone who may have opened up to something constructive will in the next post close the communication with a new standardized opinion. Keeping one's persona in the clear light of the extreme is more important than developing. To be clear and consistent in our views and postings becomes more essential than to think and develop ourselves. Everything else can lead to exclusion in the debate.
At the same time, we have stopped “meeting” in the real world. We use our "thinking" and the result of it to communicate here and elsewhere. We then eliminate any conflicts and discussions from "real life". There are a lot of benefits and the only thing that suffers is the intelligent development of ourselves and others. It may seem like a small sacrifice, but it makes the public debate increasingly dumb.
Does anyone understand what I'm on about?
