Even though the pocketbook is important, many Americans are concerned more about the low quality of their lives, the constant fear of violent assault and cruel insult, the mean-spiritedness and coldheartedness of social life, and the inability to experience deep levels of intimacy. These are the signs of a culturally decadent civilization.
I see a connection between this concept and the decline of empathy. When did we lose our ability to care about other people?
Black intelligence is always guilty before proven innocent in the court of the life of the mind
This is an interesting way to put this concept. It's impossible for someone who is not black to fully grasp the black experience...there are so many layers. This is why it's important to empower black voices; they are the only ones we can really learn from.
In a healthy information commons, people would still be free to express what they want—but information that is designed to mislead, incite hatred, reinforce tribalism or cause physical harm would not be amplified by algorithms. That means it would not be allowed to trend on Twitter or in the YouTube content recommender. Nor would it be chosen to appear in Facebook feeds, Reddit searches or top Google results.
Not spreading hate is definitely important. What we consume in the media has a huge impact on our subconscious, whether we realize it or not. This reminds me a lot about 'body positivity' trends...the only reason there was ever body negativity is because that's what we were taught.
Trust in institutions is falling because of political and economic upheaval, most notably through ever widening income inequality. The effects of climate change are becoming more pronounced. Global migration trends spark concern that communities will change irrevocably. The rise of automation makes people fear for their jobs and their privacy.
It's interesting how so many parts of our lives are connected like this. Everything effects everything else, which, a lot of the time, means we need to be really careful about what we're doing.
that humans are wired to respond to emotional triggers and share misinformation if it reinforces existing beliefs and prejudices.
Yes, humans are wired to have emotional responses and often times we respond in a way that matches our belief system, whether it's true or not...but, this isn't necessarily bad. It certainly can be, but understanding this tendency can help us avoid negative outcomes.
Powered by social media, rumors and misinformation would be rampant.
This conclusion can be come to only if we assume that social media is a place only for misinformation. We shouldn't overlook the possible benefits of social media--fast, instant communication, live footage of events, etc.
“to do something that cannot easily be done in individual isolation.” The current divisions in society, while dispiriting, don’t have to be permanent. They may be opportunities for us to radically re-define what vision of community we want—and work toward getting there.
Ultimately, we need to redefine community and build a better, more inclusive one.
In 1953, sociologist Robert Nisbet proposed that the search to forge stronger communities should lie at least in part in establishing new forms of community that “are relevant to contemporary life and thought.” This notion still holds true, though today, it might mean considering how religious, political, and community participation can be best tailored to respond to the realities of Americans. That could entail investing in spaces, like parks and recreation centers, so that they’re more inviting and foster community-building. This, in turn, means highlighting and elevating models of organizing that look to empower people—that give them the tools to take power back.
Offering solutions! Unfortunately, like I said, is common ground really possible? How do we determine what really should be done?
Class-mixing institutions are less and less common, as school re-segregation has made children’s exposure to diversity less likely, and geographic and demographic sorting means that people are more likely to interact with people who are like them when they visit their local library, park, or church.
Examples of causes of division.
For one thing, churches, unions, schools, political parties, and even the military have long challenged the myth of the American as a completely self-reliant individual, one whose well-being and success depend almost exclusively on her efforts alone. Class-mixing institutions like public schools, libraries, parks, community centers, Harvard political philosopher Michael J. Sandel explains, place a higher premium on the well-being of the community over that of the individual.
Evidence! Also, it's really a false belief that Americans can be self-reliant. Everyone needs everyone. Why are we trying to deny this every time we perpetuate the individualistic mindset onto an entire society? It's okay to need other people.
While the prevailing political ideologies—liberalism and conservatism—celebrate different aspects of the primacy of individualism, conservative political analyst Yuval Levin writes in The Fractured Republic that both are also grappling with its negative consequences. The former, for instance, applauds “social liberation, cultural diversification, and expressive individualism.” The latter prizes “economic liberalization, dynamism, and prosperity.” And both are challenged by ballooning inequality and the atrophying of some of America’s fundamental institutions
It's interesting how different belief systems can stray so far from each other when it comes to what's valued. IS it even possible to find common ground? Specifically, in the US political system?
Putnam contends that “the quality of public life and the performance of social institutions are indeed powerfully influenced by norms and networks of civic engagement.” That means that the features of social organizations—like networks, norms, and social trust—“facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.” These features also form a type of social contract between individuals, through which “habits of the heart,”
Evidence!
spend less time in social settings
Considering the pandemic, this probably applies even more now. I wonder what the social repercussions will look like long term after the pandemic.
“Community” is one of those terms that gets tossed around a lot. These days, it can mean so much and also mean nothing at all. Sociologist Robert N. Bellah and his colleagues have observed that “lifestyle enclaves” tend to be misunderstood as communities. “Whereas a community attempts to be an inclusive whole, celebrating the interdependence of public and private life,” they write, “lifestyle is fundamentally segmental and celebrates the narcissism of similarity.”
I suppose they mean that smaller, tight-knit communities are more like lifestyle enclaves. Let's say, racial communities, LGBTQ communities, even clubs or groups--are these not communities? I guess the definition might be subjective. People can be a part of more than one community, though!
It’s high time, then, to interrogate this modern notion of the individual as unencumbered and self-driven—largely removed from all attachments.
This reminds me of my reflective essay...a huge factor in bringing back community is also bringing back empathy! If we cared about each other, it would be easy to be close and supportive in a community.
Americans—77 percent—believe that the country is divided. Ideological silos have, in recent years, become more common among liberals and conservatives alike, affecting how, and with whom, they interact
This is true! Even consider social media platforms like Facebook--there is so much political divide that people aren't even willing to listen to each other anymore.
Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam’s seminal Bowling Alone made a similar argument nearly two decades ago—the political tenor of the past few years has added urgency to the issue
Evidence!
civic organizations, like the church, political parties, and community groups of all types.
Interesting how communities and their ties can be drawn back to an economic perspective... I never made the connection that social institutions like churches would be impactful in that way.
increasingly liberating ourselves from social bonds in nearly every aspect of life—familial, neighborly, communal, religious, and even national—has meant that, more and more, we’re losing out on the sense of connection
Definitely true...but why? I suppose it's because we all find our own smaller, closer communities within our larger community. I think a lot of it has to do with so many people not feeling like thy belong in the larger community. How did we get there and how can we change that feeling of unbelonging?
people are, in important ways, as divided as they’ve ever been.
Claim! This point is very interesting....we have so many tools and opportunities to learn from each other and connect, and somehow we still grow more dividd each day.
Others can perceive our errors more readily than we can
Yes! It's naturally so difficult for us to recognize anything that may bruise our egos or put us in the wrong. However, it's really important to be humble and intelligent enough to take a step back from ourselves.
Confirmation bias shows up most blatantly in our current political divide, where each side seems unable to allow that the other side is right about anything.
Very true...it's hard to find a middle ground when nobody can even truly listen. Granted, it's difficult to take people seriously when the divide and disconnect between their beliefs is largely moral...where do we draw the line between being tolerant and letting injustice unfold?
Optimism bias leads us to consistently underestimate the costs and the duration of basically every project we undertake. Availability bias makes us think that, say, traveling
Having zero bias is impossible. How do we separate our bias from what we are seeing? Is it even possible? Maybe it's just a matter of recognizing our biases and 'taking the risk'.
as we automate the work of our minds, as we cede control over the flow of our thoughts and memories to a powerful electronic system, is ... a slow erosion of our humanness and our humanity.”
The constant flow of information towards us makes it difficult to differentiate between what's important and what's not. We tend to accept what we're given without truly thinking about it ourselves and coming to our own conclusions.
What exactly is assimilation when it comes to research writing?
Assimilation is the process of putting the ideas of a source into your own words and taking those ideas further by connecting them to your specific topic or research question. Assimilation connects outside information to your own thoughts on a given topic to help you expand these thoughts.
To what extent can limiting voters be considered abuse of voter rights? It's important to consider what could go wrong in any situation in order for us to avoid making decisions based on self-interest.
This talk of political authority reminds me of an idea in philosophy. The term 'philovictor' is used to describe someone who argues only to be right, not to learn. Those with political authority tend to do this...its as if too much power gets into the head and makes us lose sight of what is right and wrong. Being in charge should not make anyone exempt from learning and being reasonable.
If democracies have a good track record, then their supporters must do what they can to defend their democracy. Making information accessible and educating people is a good way to preserve a true democracy.
Instead of restricting ballots, it would be much more beneficial to put that effort into helping people get educated. Literacy tests perpetuate discrimination and systemic racism.
Why prevent certain types of literature? I'm not understanding the connection here...Promoting any type of reading will lead to a more successful society.
Part of the problem with America's participation in politics and government is the fact that so many people are uneducated about these topics.