A bunch of tensions that have been bubbling underneath have risen to the surface so it’s a bit more acute than usual.
Perhaps. I think a lot of those tensions are are created by the outrage producers. And we have stopped thinking for ourselves.
1 Like
My answer seems beaten to death, but obvious answers can’t be ruled out. Maybe the prevalence of the internet? It is a lot easier to attack someone personally online than to their face.
Excellent point.
What would your opinion be of the golden years when we did think for ourselves?
It took more effort to confirm our biases. I like to think we weren’t so sure we were good and they were bad. It wasn’t so personal.
1 Like
maybe.
But maybe there is just a correlation there with something the researchers missed. It’s a human trait… it is the need to fix things. When nothing really needs fixed the status quo bias kicks in. The attention to bad news may be caused not so much by an aversion to bad news as it is a trigger that something needs fixed. Related fur sure but not the same.
in your example… put a visiting exec from another company in the room. Say he has nothing to win or lose by what you are briefing. But tell me… if he is given the opportunity to speak, you think he won’t focus on the same thing? He will. Because in his mind, his tools, his knowledge, his authority and power can be used to “fix things.” And THAT gives him a sense of purpose.
My experience in the workplace reinforces that hypothesis. I solve problems best by talking them out. So if I am trying to get some sounding board from an director, or director-wannabee, I have found - DONT TRY. The “I’m-here-to-fix-things” training kicks in and the director thinks they are failing if they don’t get involved to try to fix things.
I think this relates to man’s instinctual need to make tools but really don’t know.
Just my 2 cents.
1 Like
Good post.
True. Now, one can think of any position they feel is right and have a confirmation of that bias found within 20 seconds. And after a quick 60 second skim, one has all the resources they feel is necessary to argue against someone they dont perceive as a person they are having a conversation with but instead as a sort of self created challenge to themselves. Their is a a ‘feel good’ button associated with arguing ones point to another irregardless to truth or accuracy.
And and even greater threat, are those that choose to argue against any position they come across regardless of their own personal beliefs. Both parties are full of bad faith contrarians.
1 Like
And no thinking required.
But they portray themselves as news…“Facts you won’t hear anywhere else etc”
Not “news you won’t hear anywhere else etc.”?
Facts…News…What’s the difference? They’re putting it out cherry picked facts from their sources as news.
There’s a huge difference. I love how you keep illustrating my points.
1 Like
And the difference is?
People are predisposed to lean more towards one side or the other, though it is not clear that we are born that way. Childhood experiences could play a bigger role than is appreciated. People with larger amygdala in their brains more often than not lean conservative for example, and then there are people like me who fall somewhere in between. The article below is but one of many similar trains of thought and not really controversial.
I used to lean a lot more Conservative. Until I actually started to see what “Conservatives” in government actually stand for. There’s nothing remotely Conservative about the lot of them. Plenty of hypocrisy though.
