Conditioning echos; why it's good to be contradicted

[The Barbarian]

Sherman mentioned that there are a lot of liberal forums available for those not happy with the right wing bias here. It's true. And I don't post on any of them. The only one I actually know of now,is democratic underground.

I've been to some, and stayed a while. But I've noticed that the leftists there seem more brainwashed and extreme than leftists on right wing boards. And the conservatives there seem saner than a lot of conservatives here. The opposite seems to be true on conservative boards.

My reason for avoiding boards that are more liberalis because I want to avoid the echo chamber, and I want my ideas to be challenged. Steel sharpens steel. I figured the crazier partisans of each persuasion would gravitate to a place where their misconceptions were reinforced.

But now I'm wondering if spending all one's time in the echo chamber actually makes one crazy like those guys. It's by no means universal; there are some very sane conservatives here, and some very sane liberals on those leftist boards.

But that's not the average, from what I can see. Maybe it's really good for one's mental health to encounter a lot of disagreement.

I see a research project here. I'd need a few leftists and right wingers from the respective boards willing to do a short inventory on political ideas, after which they'd switch boards for a few months, after which there'd be another inventory.

I'm hypothesizing that the second would show more extremism and less healthy outlook than the first.

 

[glorydaz]

Sherman mentioned that there are a lot of liberal forums available for those not happy with the right wing bias here. It's true. And I don't post on any of them. The only one I actually know of now,is democratic underground.

I've been to some, and stayed a while. But I've noticed that the leftists there seem more brainwashed and extreme than leftists on right wing boards. And the conservatives there seem saner than a lot of conservatives here. The opposite seems to be true on conservative boards.

My reason for avoiding boards that are more liberalis because I want to avoid the echo chamber, and I want my ideas to be challenged. Steel sharpens steel. I figured the crazier partisans of each persuasion would gravitate to a place where their misconceptions were reinforced.

But now I'm wondering if spending all one's time in the echo chamber actually makes one crazy like those guys. It's by no means universal; there are some very sane conservatives here, and some very sane liberals on those leftist boards.

But that's not the average, from what I can see. Maybe it's really good for one's mental health to encounter a lot of disagreement.

I see a research project here. I'd need a few leftists and right wingers from the respective boards willing to do a short inventory on political ideas, after which they'd switch boards for a few months, after which there'd be another inventory.

I'm hypothesizing that the second would show more extremism and less healthy outlook than the first.

Ah, so you want to do what Trump did during that gun meeting, but you think you will be able to do what you say Trump wasn't doing. Gotcha. :thumb:

 

[The Barbarian]

Ah, so you want to do what Trump did during that gun meeting,

Don't see how you got there. I'm suggesting that it's not good for one's objectivity to post exclusively on boards that reinforce one's own presuppositions.

but you think you will be able to do what you say Trump wasn't doing.

Again, I don't see how you got that from the OP.

Gotcha. :thumb:

Not even close.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Don't see how you got there. I'm suggesting that it's not good for one's objectivity to post exclusively on boards that reinforce one's own presuppositions.



Again, I don't see how you got that from the OP.



Not even close.

I think you've been successful at self-deluding yourself. Somehow your internal dialogue has convinced you that Trump and his supporters are evil and need to be set straight by your personal generalizations and accusations. You're a man on a mission to find any and all supposed, Trump failures and things he has yet to accomplish according to your timetable. You feel it's your responsibility to inform the citizenry of, just how bad a President he truly is. You have a bloated sense of your importance on the world scene. You earnestly believe you're aiding in the removal of the President by disclosing every little negative bit of information you can get your beady little eyes on. You're basically, a sawed-off rabble rouser with an over-inflated sense of self-importance. That's the bottom line.

 

[patrick jane]

I enjoy talking to like minded folks not bickering and one upping the other person and disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. We know the people here who never agree about anything regarding Trump and it's a sham and a shame. There are folks here that have absolutely NOTHING good to say about the man AND his family and would seem to even go so far as claim Trump is not human. It gets old and has gotten old.

I "fawn" over Trump as AB likes to say, mainly to counter the attacks and constant insults to the President of the nation that flooded the site starting during the campaign of 16. Like Sherman said, that didn't happen for 8 years of Obama on TOL because conservatives are more reasonable and understand politics much better. I know for a fact that since I started here in 2014 I never berated Obama on TOL until last year. It really is summed up perfectly by describing the disease as Trump Derangement Syndrome = TDS

 

[The Barbarian]

I think you've been successful at self-deluding yourself. Somehow your internal dialogue has convinced you that Trump and his supporters are evil and need to be set straight by your personal generalizations and accusations. You're a man on a mission to find any and all supposed, Trump failures and things he has yet to accomplish according to your timetable. You feel it's your responsibility to inform the citizenry of, just how bad a President he truly is. You have a bloated sense of your importance on the world scene. You earnestly believe you're aiding in the removal of the President by disclosing every little negative bit of information you can get your beady little eyes on. You're basically, a sawed-off rabble rouser with an over-inflated sense of self-importance. That's the bottom line.

The OP doesn't say anything at all about Trump. You're so far gone that you think everything is about Trump, and lash out defensively over nothing at all. You've got a bad case of Trump derangement syndrome. You guys claim you don't want Trump discussed, but then you drag him into a thread that has nothing to do with Trump. You're obsessed with him.

The OP is about the observation that partisans on all sides seem to be more extreme and less rational on boards that cater to their views.

You're now exhibit "A."

 

[Gary K]

I enjoy talking to like minded folks not bickering and one upping the other person and disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. We know the people here who never agree about anything regarding Trump and it's a sham and a shame. There are folks here that have absolutely NOTHING good to say about the man AND his family and would seem to even go so far as claim Trump is not human. It gets old and has gotten old.

I "fawn" over Trump as AB likes to say, mainly to counter the attacks and constant insults to the President of the nation that flooded the site starting during the campaign of 16. Like Sherman said, that didn't happen for 8 years of Obama on TOL because conservatives are more reasonable and understand politics much better. I know for a fact that since I started here in 2014 I never berated Obama on TOL until last year. It really is summed up perfectly by describing the disease as Trump Derangement Syndrome = TDS

All of these attacks on Trump are not an organically grown movement. This is centrally organized and driven by people with massive amounts of financial resources. It is nothing more than the deep state attempting a coup on a duly elected President of the United States in concert with the mockingbird media. It is treason, plain and simple. A large mistake is made in attributing this to unorganized individuals that just can't stand Trump. This is a desperate attempt to avoid prison for criminal behavior. It isn't going to work as Trump is always multiple moves ahead of them and as these treasonous snakes find themselves losing more and more ground their buddies in the media get shriller and shriller, and they descend into even more atrocious behavior.

 

[Sherman]

​The reason for the moratorium on the bashing of the president is because it has just gone waay overboard. It has taken over the forum and is even disrupting threads that are not even addressing the topic. This subject has flooded the forum even worse when we had all the problems with the Non-trins.

When a topic, I don't care what the topic is, starts to take over the forum and even disrupt threads that have nothing to do with it, it's time to shut it down. Want to take potshots at Trump? There ACW's thread. I am leaving that one open.

 

[The Barbarian]

All of these attacks on Trump...

This thread is about why people who post mostly on forums that reflect their beliefs, are more extreme than those who don't. Kindly take your obsession with Trump to another thread. Or start one.

Sherman, note that even when we don't want to talk about Trump, they still drag him into the thread anyway.

(0ops, posted before I saw your reply. Well done.)

 

[The Barbarian]

Two months ago, Stephanie McCrummen painted a compelling portrait of online confirmation bias in her Washington Post article, “Finally, Someone Who Thinks Like Me. (link is external)” In it, McCrummen told the story of Melanie Austin, a Pennsylvania woman who repeatedly sought and found online evidence to support her own suspicions and other things she’d heard, such as that President Obama founded ISIS, or that First Lady Michelle Obama was born a man.
...
On a more serious and less partisan note, let’s be clear: fake news, echo chambers, filter bubbles, and confirmation bias are not exclusive tools, traps, or foibles of the right or the left. They’re vulnerabilities for all of us, on either side of the political fence.

Why should we care? Because consuming misinformation within the narrow confines of our online worlds inhibits our ability to know what’s true, to make choices based on the most accurate information, to make informed decisions about what to believe, and to resist the many invisible forces that might not have our best interests in mind. Political differences aside, do we really want to allow ourselves to be misled by Russian trolls (link is external) and Macedonian teenagers (link is external)? Do we really want to allow ourselves to be constantly manipulated by corporate advertising (link is external)?

If we allow ourselves to become passive vessels of a daily deluge of online information, we’ll never learn about our perceived opponents, whether in the spirit of understanding and “reaching across the aisle” to unite the country, or in efforts to mount a resistance or win an ideological war. If we allow ourselves to become slaves to confirmation bias on e-steroids, we’ll lose the ability to distinguish between what’s real and what’s not, and “truth” will be regarded as something that’s endlessly debatable, if not completely unknowable. In short, we’ll never learn anything. Is that how we want to live our lives?

Assuming we’re not already there, what can be done to avoid this fate?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...s-echo-chambers-filter-bubbles-survival-guide

Worth reading. And it explains why a realistic assessment of the world is not possible in an echo chamber where most everyone agrees with you. Even normally sane individuals can be convinced that Obama is gay, alien lizards are running the U.K., and so on.

"If everyone says so, it must be true..."

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Delete

 

[Rusha]

Sherman mentioned that there are a lot of liberal forums available for those not happy with the right wing bias here. It's true. And I don't post on any of them. The only one I actually know of now,is democratic underground.

I've been to some, and stayed a while. But I've noticed that the leftists there seem more brainwashed and extreme than leftists on right wing boards. And the conservatives there seem saner than a lot of conservatives here. The opposite seems to be true on conservative boards.

My reason for avoiding boards that are more liberalis because I want to avoid the echo chamber, and I want my ideas to be challenged. Steel sharpens steel. I figured the crazier partisans of each persuasion would gravitate to a place where their misconceptions were reinforced.

But now I'm wondering if spending all one's time in the echo chamber actually makes one crazy like those guys. It's by no means universal; there are some very sane conservatives here, and some very sane liberals on those leftist boards.

But that's not the average, from what I can see. Maybe it's really good for one's mental health to encounter a lot of disagreement.

I see a research project here. I'd need a few leftists and right wingers from the respective boards willing to do a short inventory on political ideas, after which they'd switch boards for a few months, after which there'd be another inventory.

I'm hypothesizing that the second would show more extremism and less healthy outlook than the first.

Good thread, and my experience was similar to that you have expressed though in the reverse. In nonreligious forums, I am normally too conservative on topics that people tend to be deeply passionate about such as the DP, the right to bear arms, abortion, etc. Insofar as my views changing, they have evolved on certain issues such a gun ownership, public schools, hate crime legislation, etc.

With the current social and political environment, my heart has become more open to the everyday problems that others face ... which I consider to be a good thing.

 

[Tambora]

Your criteria for "extreme" may be biased from the get-go.
Another could go to the same sites you have been to, and come away with a whole different list of who was "extreme".

 

[Tambora]

One reason opposing sides have difficulty communicating is that each side will slant the language to their sides favor.
And then post after post is made bickering over the slants instead of the main point.

My reason for avoiding boards that are more liberalis because I want to avoid the echo chamber

But you bring the leftist echo chamber with you and use the same rhetoric and slant.

 

[Gary K]

One reason opposing sides have difficulty communicating is that each side will slant the language to their sides favor.
And then post after post is made bickering over the slants instead of the main point.


But you bring the leftist echo chamber with you and use the same rhetoric and slant.

It's even worse than that. He claims to be a libertarian and yet cites marxists far more than he does libertarians. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen him quote a libertarian. I've read quite a bit of libertarian thought and philosophy from authors who were very influential in establishing modern libertarianism and I've never seen him quote any of them, or even agree with them. He's far more marxist than he claims.

Rand Paul is a leading libertarian and yet you see he and Trump in agreement fairly often. You see Trump and Barby in agreement exactly never.

 

[The Barbarian]

Your criteria for "extreme" may be biased from the get-go.

Extremists are on the far end of their respective positions. The point is that on forums with a right-wing bias, most of the moderates will be leftists and on forums with a left-wing bias, most of the moderates will be right-wingers.

Another could go to the same sites you have been to, and come away with a whole different list of who was "extreme".

That's one of the issues. No one really wants to think of themselves as extreme.

Rationally, you could produce an inventory, from which you could find liberals, conservatives, and moderates. And some would be more extreme than others.

Gun control, for example, would vary from the NRA to those who want to ban all guns.
Most Americans are in between those extremes.

 

[The Barbarian]

It's even worse than that. He claims to be a libertarian and yet cites marxists far more than he does libertarians.

Can't remember citing a Marxist as a good source of information. On the other hand, I've pointed out that government is not for the purpose of making people good, and I've cited Rand Paul and his father. Perhaps you don't know what "Marxist" means. What do you think it means?

In fact, I don't think I've ever seen him quote a libertarian.

You don't think Rand Paul is libertarian? I think we've located your problem.

 

[The Barbarian]

I'm thinking that the same sort of denial we're seeing here, would happen on left-biased forums. Only it would be the leftists denying the fact, instead of rightists.

So I'll try that. I'll register with a left-biased board, and see if we get the same denials.

I predict pretty much the same.

 

[The Barbarian]

Good thread, and my experience was similar to that you have expressed though in the reverse. In nonreligious forums, I am normally too conservative on topics that people tend to be deeply passionate about such as the DP, the right to bear arms, abortion, etc. Insofar as my views changing, they have evolved on certain issues such a gun ownership, public schools, hate crime legislation, etc.

With the current social and political environment, my heart has become more open to the everyday problems that others face ... which I consider to be a good thing.

Seems to me that having to deal with contrary opinions is a healthy thing, giving one a more realistic understanding of the world. And I can see where some would see that as a threat to civilization and right-thinking people everywhere.

 

[The Barbarian]

Good thread, and my experience was similar to that you have expressed though in the reverse. In nonreligious forums, I am normally too conservative on topics that people tend to be deeply passionate about such as the DP, the right to bear arms, abortion, etc. Insofar as my views changing, they have evolved on certain issues such a gun ownership, public schools, hate crime legislation, etc.

With the current social and political environment, my heart has become more open to the everyday problems that others face ... which I consider to be a good thing.

Me too. It's why it's unhealthy for one to only go where everyone agrees with you. I have also found that my ideas change more often from exposure to others who don't think as I do.

Now, there may be a dichotomy here, with some people more likely to harden down on their original stance when exposed to other ideas. But I'm thinking those are a rather small minority, who generally avoid contact with those who don't think as they do.