Chips wrote:In all seriousness, i don't understand why people take it to one extreme or the other. Rationalism seems non existent.
Rationalism needs competences of thinking, well stocked amounts of verified informations and ability to verify own or third-party attitudes or opinions. That's demanding. And complicated. Hard.
Participating at discussions or shitstorms or campaigns and going to the extremes is based on emotions. Facts are disturbing, veryfying/falsifying needs longer texts than a tweet. Emotions make groups, will result in slaps on the back, provoke reactions [...].
I am positively sure that the fall of public political discourse has been strongly influenced (not to say: caused) by commercial media . I am stating it as a person having worked more than two decades for and having run commercial radio stations.
Almost all categories of journalism have been 'emotionalized'. Within the last 20 years it has become accepted in public discussions that articles or broadcasts are simply 'falsified' only by the name of the publishing company, labeling them als 'liberal' or 'nationalist' or racist or communist (...).
As a result, nowadays, one person can state that all opinions and analysis not conforming to his owns are 'fake' - and such a blatant "ignorantism" has large support. Because there is no more need to think by yourself.
.