> Sorry, but I have no such duty. We are free to do or not do as we wish.
Well sure, depending how one thinks about it. From an individualist perspective/philosophy, you're correct. But this is only one of many ways of thinking about the matter. For example, would you advocate an individualist approach such as that for someone who is married with children? Could a similar argument be made for overall mankind?
I can agree that it is technically true that we are all individual mammals living on a rock hurtling through space, but I don't think it is also true to say that we are just that.
> After years of fulfilling my "duty" and forever frustrated that the more I learn, the more obvious it becomes that our problems are intractable because most people are only superficially informed enough to know that the other side is wrong and our side is right.
I can appreciate this perspective, you're certainly "not wrong", or at least not entirely. But consider this perspective:
"...the more obvious it becomes that our problems are intractable because most people are only superficially informed enough to know that the other side is wrong and our side is right." Indeed, it seems clearly true that our problems are intractable (not easily governed, managed, or directed; not easily relieved or cured) - but is it conclusively true that they are unsolvable?
How many different approaches have we taken thus far toward cracking this nut, really? From where I sit, the majority of activity at both the individual and political levels seem to consist of people criticizing the (perceived) actions and (perceived) beliefs of their out-group, and the overwhelming consensus seems to be something like "if those other people would just start acting according to my philosophy, all these problems would be solved."
It seems crystal clear to me that this style of thinking is obviously sub-optimal, but at the same time the vast majority of people seem passionately devoted to it. I wonder, might studying the problem from higher, more abstract perspectives such as this yield some new ideas, and how might this approach gain traction?