Fascinated by people who are convinced that literally everyone agrees with them, when they obviously hold a tiny minority position. Internet echo chambers have really done a number on some people's brains.
Discussion
Agreed and I think π this π£ #nostr protocol is the best antidote out there.
Humble/curious approach accelerates results Iβm finding π€.
That's my hope, certainly!
There's a different degree version of this, where they recognize people don't agree with them. It goes like this: if everyone knew what I knew, everyone would agree with my ideological conclusions.
This reminds me of the βwe are so earlyβ mantra among people who are incredibly optimistic about Bitcoinβs future trajectory.
Yeah, as a pro-bitcoin person myself, I take the increasingly unpopular position that it is something that has to be fought for, and argued for. Others roll their eyes and believe the die is already cast. That, bitcoin has basically already won, and it's only a matter of time. I am incapable of seeing the world this way on basically anything.
Agreed. The fight is on.
early was a decade ago or so lol
I had a socialist economics professor in college who was going on about the harmful effects of online echo chambers years ago and most of us in the class scoffed at him. I see him proven right every day on social media.
Many such cases.
Waitβ¦you mean thereβs more than one possible opinion on the internet?
When it comes to intelligence, yeah.
But opinions make no facts, do they?
No, but people confuse the two regularly.
Not only people, scientists too.
Technically, everything we believe are opinions. Including things generally considered facts. It ultimately comes down to degrees of credence.
Funny enough, facts turn into fiction when the underlying science turns to be false and the opinion that we had becomes gibberish.
Those moments are just hilarious.
I would venture to guess that part of the problem is that individuals feel as though they are captives to their audience.They are so concerned about their follower count and their βinfluenceβ that they are afraid to say something that may be considered βwrongβ. So a big account has thousands of followers who just agree with them. True influence comes when you can convince someone who disagrees with you.
Yes. Audience capture plays into it for a lot of people.
I also believe echo chambers are not always βbadβ. If one spends most of their day debating and attempting to convince others of their ideas, itβs nice for them to be amongst people who agree with them π. Almost a reprieve from the war of ideas, to regroup, replenish and then return to battle.
One just needs to remain humble and realize that their echo chamber is exactly that.
Disagree. I think echo chambers are always a net negative. If you believe something strongly, you'll learn more about your own opinions and beliefs by having them competently challenged. And if you cannot defend your opinions and beliefs in the face of challenge, then perhaps you should consider changing your mind.
Why canβt someone participate in both worlds? I follow individuals who challenge my ideas, and when Iβm tired, I seek refuge amongst my people. If I am aware of those dynamics, I get benefits from both.
"The only way to make yourself stronger is to remove your safety net." - Chris Matakas
How would you define "my people"? For me, I would define it as my friends and family. I generally don't have a definition of "my people" that is based on ideology.
Wrong choice of words. I meant individuals who simply want to βplayβ and not engage in ideological debates. It could be anyone.
Iβm going to make an assumption, please forgive me if Iβm wrong. I see that debating your ideas energizes you. It fuels your mind and you revel in testing your cognitive limits. As it does for me, but sometimes I just want to chill and relax with people who agree with me. I donβt think it says anything about the conviction of my thoughts, or the willingness to change my mind. Itβs simply a balance for me.
I am just outright fearful of the downsides of groupthink and out-group demonization. I think it's dangerous and leads to dark places.
I definitely agree with that. I would argue that this has, and continues to be, one of the root causes of the worldβs worse atrocities. I agree with you that online echo chambers fuel it, but I was taking the other side, to see if I could find some benefit to them.
sikto, youβre confusing your emotional needs/wants with what it is to actually be able to argue purely with reason & logic (with what merits a probability of something being good & true or not).
indeed, an intractable problem that humans canβt seem to rid themselves of.
The real cringe happends irl. Guilty as charged and very surprised that normies and etatists in form of my (former) friends don't "vibe" on my libertarian and bitcoin maxi ideas.
Finding loads of like-minded people on the internets somewhat reformated my brain. And Nostr is a supercharged version of that.
Is this how "the network states" begin? When you have more in common with this fuzzy groups of people in the cyberspace than with people you're geographicaly close to.
I mean, real life *is* real life.