Sadly, I suspect this is not an isolated phenomenon. I’ve increasingly encountered anecdotes of political division souring personal relationships. I wonder if there are systematic surveys or studies of whether this perceived trend is real.
An interesting corollary of this, I think, is that it creates bubbles of people who all think the same and agree with each other. Since it causes many people to cut people with whom they disagree with out of their life.
These people see the people outside their bubble (their neighbors, friends and family) as “other”. It’s so divisive, it’s causing everyone to hate each other as nobody sees common cause with their own countrymen. It’s very sad, I hope we figure it out.
They also end up with a very different view on reality due to being exposed to different facts and the same facts with different framing. Filter bubbles be strong.
I know. The useful distinction for a filter bubble would be for when a person is exposed only to a small set of ideas, such as “big government, subsidized everything” is the best way, or “small government, privatized everything” is the best way”. Or “so and so method of education is the best way”, things that don’t have relatively definitive answers, based on reasonable logic and standards of evidence.
Using filter bubbles to talk about people that think the earth is 6,000 years old, it’s flat, the US government is run by a cabal pedophiles, vaccines are harmful, the US election results are false, etc is not a fruitful endeavor.
If you only encounter "other" ideas in a context where they are derided, mocked and otherwise not taken seriously that's still a pretty damn airtight filter bubble.
The information to which I am referring is easily accessible in encyclopedias, university physics departments, CDC/FDA website, wikipedia, state government websites, etc.
The people deluding themselves are choosing to discredit those sources in favor of their favorite celebrity or social group. Or they're pretending for other nefarious reasons. Either way, referring to this as a filter bubble is inaccurate in my opinion.
These people were educated in the US, know English, know how to use the internet, grew up in a diverse country, some are accomplished business people, years long members of the military with lots of international travel. Few people around the world have as much opportunity to be out of their "filter bubble".
The importance of genes for determining intelligence in humans is also available in Nature, etc. But a large proportion of the population still delusionally believe everyone is the same. Mostly due to filter bubbles.
I don't know anyone, prominent or not, that thinks everyone is the SAME. It's trivial for anyone to see identical twins aren't even the same, so unless there is evidence that a "large proportion" of people think this, I assume it's a made up scenario.
I'm also familiar with quite a few cultures around the world, and they all seem to have concepts of being born "gifted" or some version of being naturally talented.
There should be however space for saying that a group of people or ideology is simply wrong on some points. We should not be force to pretend that all ideologies, values systems and theories are equal or right. Or honest.
Agreed you shouldn’t have to agree with anyone you don’t actually agree with, but also tolerance (for _all_ people) is important. We should make an honest attempt to understand WHY these people feel the way they do, and try to address the underlying concerns and fears that motivate them. And if it’s not possible to do that, at least talking about them like they’re not all patently evil would be helpful in building better relationships with our neighbors.
Many portions I expect. And which portion depends on which bits of reality you look at it. If you think the current canon set of facts of the dominant ideology is 100% correct now when it wasn't any time in the past 2000 years, well... it's just not very likely.
Just because we don't have perfect knowledge at any one point in time doesn't mean every single idea throughout history is valid. Overtime, discoveries are made, models are refined, textbooks are updated, and as the evidence presents itself, you keep marching forward with the best available information you have.
You mean the side that claims US elections are 100% safe?
I think that Trump definitively lost, but from the point of view of a European (from a former socialist country no less!) the idea that you can have "secure" voting without seeing a person and checking their ID card is ... laughable to say the least.
Yet claiming that as fact is in line with the current propaganda, so ...
