Why can't people evaluate the evidence and THEN decide?!?
It feels like these sorts of things make polarization worse.
Why can't people evaluate the evidence and THEN decide?!?
It feels like these sorts of things make polarization worse.
The details of the argument don't matter. It's pure identity politics and herd affiliation.
I've been exploring some of the politics groups on FB, and the level of interaction in many groups is middle school level. There are a lot of juvenile insults, preachy testimonials to a particular view - usually one that loudly insults the other side - and a lack of interest in nuance, evidence, or curiosity.
HN may not be perfect, but you don't get many comments here that simply say "The other side sucks."
I don't know if it's even possible to move past that. A primary problem seems to be that the concept of evidence-based reasoning is completely alien and exotic to many voters. It looks very much as if they're literally not able to use their minds in that way. Instead of trying to understand an issue they repeat the same insults and cliches over and over for a quick emotional hit which satisfies them they've won the argument.
The Internet - and FB - is terrible for this, because it's much easier and quicker to type a one-sentence put down than to craft an argument.
You can try to fix this by banning flames and trolling, but then a lot of the people you're trying to persuade go elsewhere for their hit.
I have no idea what a solution would look like, or where to start looking for one.
The alternative is giant blocks of text which are off-putting to many, harder to parse, hard to find time for, etc.