Civil disagreement

[William_Montgomery]

I count myself very lucky indeed that, in my immediate circle, it's still possible to disagree over most given subjects without creating any animosity.
However, I have noticed this seems to be increasingly rare now and disagreements are less about discussing facts, ideas and solutions, but more about whether or not you're a 'good' or 'bad' person and the outward perception that goes along with it.

Of course, this has always been the case, but it seems much more common now, to the point where I've seen people actively hold contrasting opinions dependent on the present company.

Is it more difficult to engage in civil disagreement/debate now than it has been in the past? And, if so, why?

 

[TLM]

Facts seem to be getting more complicated and the sources less reliable. It is easier to attack the messenger.

 

[Chris]

I count myself very lucky indeed that, in my immediate circle, it's still possible to disagree over most given subjects without creating any animosity.
However, I have noticed this seems to be increasingly rare now and disagreements are less about discussing facts, ideas and solutions, but more about whether or not you're a 'good' or 'bad' person and the outward perception that goes along with it.

Of course, this has always been the case, but it seems much more common now, to the point where I've seen people actively hold contrasting opinions dependent on the present company.

Is it more difficult to engage in civil disagreement/debate now than it has been in the past? And, if so, why?

I've found that just talking to people in person yields better results in this sense. Online discourse is all full of opinions stated in manners which people wouldn't dream of using in person.

Tuning out of the news and social media has been a good reminder to me that most people of all beliefs and political persuasions actually have far more in common than that which separates us. We mostly all just want to do a fair day's work for a fair day's pay, look after our families, have enough to do the things we enjoy doing, and for the authorities and bossy people to just leave us alone.

Most people are fundamentally decent, but social media is all performative and it brings out the worst in humanity.

I've got some good friends who are polar opposites to me politically, but I still like them. It seems increasingly common online to display one's purity by being as intolerant of differing opinions as possible. What a sad and boring life that must be for people.

Why? I think a few things, but here are a couple I believe to be true:

Brainwashing by both conventional and social media to suggest that everything is supposed to be airbrushed, simple and perfect. Nice shiny pictures and comments which suggest these perfect lives, which are simply not real.

The internet has reduced the impact of social consequences. If you act like a rude idiot with people in your local community, you face the social consequences of being ostracised, potentially physical consequences (being rude at the pub might see you with a sore nose) and you lose the benefits of being within a polite and respectful community. Online you can sit in a virtual room with all the other idiots spread out across the world and be made to feel like you're actually acting reasonably, because of the false sense of security the echo chamber creates.

 

[Broch]

One of the problems is the 'facts' issued by media science, or in the cause of political agenda, makes everyone think they are experts on the subject. People rant and rave about things they have no real knowledge of and refuse to acknowledge the need to look at things from different perspectives. I'm constantly bewildered by people that feel they have the ability to tell me how global warming works and what I should be doing about it when they don't understand the basic principles of an anticyclone.

I just go through life believing there's a third truth in everything

 

[Herman30]

One of the problems is the 'facts' issued by media science, or in the cause of political agenda, makes everyone think they are experts on the subject.

This was very obvious during covid. "Everybody and their aunt" were medical experts about the virus and danger of the vaccine. It is just amazing why they were not hired by the medical society.

 

[William_Montgomery]

I've found that just talking to people in person yields better results in this sense. Online discourse is all full of opinions stated in manners which people wouldn't dream of using in person.

Tuning out of the news and social media has been a good reminder to me that most people of all beliefs and political persuasions actually have far more in common than that which separates us. We mostly all just want to do a fair day's work for a fair day's pay, look after our families, have enough to do the things we enjoy doing, and for the authorities and bossy people to just leave us alone.

Most people are fundamentally decent, but social media is all performative and it brings out the worst in humanity.

I've got some good friends who are polar opposites to me politically, but I still like them. It seems increasingly common online to display one's purity by being as intolerant of differing opinions as possible. What a sad and boring life that must be for people.

Why? I think a few things, but here are a couple I believe to be true:

Brainwashing by both conventional and social media to suggest that everything is supposed to be airbrushed, simple and perfect. Nice shiny pictures and comments which suggest these perfect lives, which are simply not real.

The internet has reduced the impact of social consequences. If you act like a rude idiot with people in your local community, you face the social consequences of being ostracised, potentially physical consequences (being rude at the pub might see you with a sore nose) and you lose the benefits of being within a polite and respectful community. Online you can sit in a virtual room with all the other idiots spread out across the world and be made to feel like you're actually acting reasonably, because of the false sense of security the echo chamber creates.

I agree, the world of social media (BCUK excluded) is a nightmare and I rarely, if ever, engage in it. I expect it's very easy to let it warp ones view of the real world.

As you say, most people hold nuanced views and the ability to hold a respectful conversation and just want to get on with it. Though, I do see more and more people falling into this approach in real time. I wonder if we've become so complacent we no longer value the ability to freely discuss ideas.

 

[William_Montgomery]

This was very obvious during covid. "Everybody and their aunt" were medical experts about the virus and danger of the vaccine. It is just amazing why they were not hired by the medical society.

On the flip side, there were also many who were very eager to dish out medical advice to those who decided against having a jab.

It's a good example of the kind of subject I was referring to though. Civil disagreement went right out the window on that one.

 

[TeeDee]

The age of emotional entitlement = 'my truth'

 

[Jared]

I don't think we have fundamentally changed.

The number of interactions have exploded, so now just seeing more of the uncivil behavour.

And with the internet, if you have a crankpot idea, there will be a group(s) that are based around that idea. Once a person finds them, they'll start mindlessly repeating responses learnt from the group, and become more resilient to any critical thinking.

 

[GreyCat]

I think society in general has been de-socialized by a combination of COVID lockdowns and the media, especially some forms of social media. Advertising is also very powerful, if it didn't work no-one would pay for it, and there's some very sophisticated psychology involved in it.

There's also an innate trait in humanity to take the "lazy of thinking" route. That can be useful in a situations like "IT'S A BEAR, RUN!" but rather less so when weighing up a situation that's it's more complicated than it first appears.

I think that both advertising and social media tap into those deep primitive parts of the brain that do the "IT'S A BEAR, RUN!" stuff very well, and so the reasoning part of the brain gets pushed into the back seat whilst the fight-or-flight part takes over the controls. Thus we have a polarized and often angry response rather than reasoned dialogue. Then that oft-mentioned adrenaline rush from "likes" makes it addictive.

Of course, everyone likes to think they are "good" and "civilized" so behaviour is rationalized after the event by "my truth."

Thing is, civilized behaviour requires a level of impulse control, self-discipline, and taking responsibility for one's actions; but social media, advertising and the addictive nature of devices (apps on them) has in many cases over-ridden the impulse for self-control. Tie in a level of selfishness and "why should I care?" which probably derives from a lack of a shared code of ethics and a no-accountability attitude to school behaviour, and here we are. It's the classic "marshmallow test" of impulse control writ large,

GC

 

[jimbo75]

Too many commies about these days

 

[Wandjina]

Resource competitiors are exacerbating existing divisions in our society through social media to weaken us.

 

[Nice65]

People, immature people, feel increasingly futile and impotent, and are therefore prone to proclaiming their opinion as truth to bolster their insecurities. Imposing self will with righteous indignation gives them a buzz. In the case of some American politicians it’s visible almost as addiction. Unfortunately, many of us do not own our actions, don’t allow humility, and let the ego run riot. It’s the behaviour of a demanding child, I see it everywhere from our politicians to people I meet in daily life. We lack the guidance and knowledge of elders these days and remain grown up children learning how to be pseudo adults from pseudo elders.

Jung was good at describing it, the 4 basic human archetypes and the balances of them. King, Warrior, Magician, Lover.

Got insomnia again.

 

[August Landmesser]

Internet algorithms have corralled the masses into echo chambers in which their whole world view is cultivated, The serotonin boost provided by likes and shares motivates them to stay in their given echo chamber so espousing opposing views is perceived as a buzz kill and tantamount to stealing a junkies heroin.

 

[William_Montgomery]

I expect parenting/early influences has a lot to do with it. Fostering an attitude of entitlement from an early age and creating a shift in priorities.
There seems to be less concern about being useful to your community and more of a desire to just look the part. Taking the path of least resistence, but expecting the same rewards as those that travel harder roads.

I see this rise of narcissistic internet culture as a symptom of a deeper rooted cultural shift, perhaps stemming from the 60's/70's, and I wonder if we're now seeing the results of that.

 

[Macaroon]

I'm of the opinion that much of the trouble with society in this " new age"
is down to a complete breakdown in what used to be known as a sense of common purpose; I could say a lot more about this, but that'd be politics.......

 

[demented dale]

i blame the parents and, of course, Mrs Thatcher. x

 

[William_Montgomery]

Short snippet of Yuri Bezmenov being interviewed in the 80's, interesting looking back from today's perspective.

The whole interview is on youtube and worth a watch if you find the time.

 

[Paul_B]

i blame the parents and, of course, Mrs Thatcher. x

I blame Blair and the teachers!

Is that an age related difference in opinions?

 

[Pattree]

“Our youth love luxury. They have bad manners and despise authority. They show disrespect for their elders and love to chatter instead of exercise. Young people are now tyrants, not the servants of their household. They no longer rise when their elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up food and terrorize their teachers.”​