Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#91

Post by zeth__ »

asabjorn wrote: post #37
empraptor wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The article seems in a very indirect way to make argument that violent reaction to and ostracizing of people that hold opposing opinions is ok when you hold the correct opinions and not when you don’t I'm having trouble seeing how you got this impression.

In a case study like this I was hoping for an understanding of how we on the left contribute to a climate where it is ok to be non-factual, as it is much easier to change yourself than others and NY Times audience is clearly the left. Especially since it concludes that everyone "rushes for the safety of their ideological battlements". What are those embattlements? What are the factual nature on each side? My question…

Calling the NYT the "left" makes about as much sense as calling the Catholic church the "left". The NYT is capitalist first with a large dose of liberalism second.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#92

Post by zeth__ »

smcl wrote: post #45
adriand wrote: post #39

It's become vogue to talk about social media in this manner but the problem is much more generalized. Sensationalist news from mainstream/traditional media outlets does exactly the same thing. And the sensitivity around issues of race, gender, sexuality, and so on, is destroying our ability to engage in civil discourse with one another - not just on social media, but even in our classrooms. Here's an example of what…

I know where you're trying to go with this and your heart is in the right place, but the example is awful and does not help in the slightest. I have a feeling that I'm gonna get "ugh, replies like yours are exactly the problem, smcl!" but to me asking children to come up with some good side of slavery is up there with trying to find the good side of the holocaust. Whether "good" or "bad" is in quotes doesn't really c…

The reason why you can't have this conversation in America is because this is the factual basis of Socialism. To put it in terms Marx would understand: explain what material conditions of the antebellum south lead to slaves being 2/3rds of all capital investment in the US.

At which point it isn't a discussion about good or bad, but about class power in relation to the means of production. If the tractor had been invented in 1820 we could have well had a Northern slavery based sweatshop based industrial revolution and a south free yeomanry based agricultural revolution.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#93

Post by adriand »

smcl wrote: post #80
baud147258 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is more how the question is poorly asked. I think one could find economical, political or logistical reasons for the existence of slavery, but that does not change how evil slavery is. It might be interesting to have an idea of how people could have rationalized slavery as something good and see if the same rationalisation do not persist in our society. But to do so, you have to be able do discuss…

OK but "Why was the Confederacy pro-slavery?" or "How did the Nazis justify their actions?" are different questions than "give 3 ‘good’ reasons for slavery and 3 bad reasons" which was the example given. I'm not sure the answers to these questions are as stimulating as people think though. I suspect the real reason behind the question given in the example was that the teacher was oversimplifying the language of the q…

> I suspect the real reason behind the question given in the example was that the teacher was oversimplifying the language of the question for his/her students to the point where all nuance was lost ... which suggests they're maybe not ready for it.

This is a good observation and you may well be right, although, I've been surprised by what kids are "ready for" in the past. For example, my son was in grade four last year, and his teacher started reading them The Diary of Ann Frank. My immediate reaction to this news was that I didn't think they were ready to learn about the Holocaust, but I did some research and discovered that, in fact, introducing them at that age isn't a bad decision and can be done well.

In any case, I think that your reaction to my comment actually proves my point. I'm not going to say "ugh, replies like yours are exactly the problem, smcl!" because replies like yours are not. You did not, for example, call me a racist. You engaged with me respectfully, I did the same with you, and now we're having an actual conversation. That's because HN is one of the few places where I think productive conversations like this still happen. By and large, we make a conscious effort to engage with one another respectfully, and to be open-minded and open to persuasion.

Even things like accepting that when someone voices an opinion, it's just that, an opinion. It may not always be entirely thought-out. Far better to react to poorly thought-out opinions (of which I have many, I'm sure) with "here's where you're wrong" in a respectful, persuasive way, than what we see playing out in society at large.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#94

Post by smcl »

adriand wrote: post #93
smcl wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK but "Why was the Confederacy pro-slavery?" or "How did the Nazis justify their actions?" are different questions than "give 3 ‘good’ reasons for slavery and 3 bad reasons" which was the example given. I'm not sure the answers to these questions are as stimulating as people think though. I suspect the real reason behind the question given in the example was that the teacher was oversimplifying the language of the q…

> I suspect the real reason behind the question given in the example was that the teacher was oversimplifying the language of the question for his/her students to the point where all nuance was lost ... which suggests they're maybe not ready for it. This is a good observation and you may well be right, although, I've been surprised by what kids are "ready for" in the past. For example, my son was in grade four last y…

Oh totally, I'm continously surprised by what kids are capable of and they're generally smarter they're given credit for. I just thought that if it's not possible to phrase a question or concept because a kid does not have the vocabulary required to understand it or then it's probably not worth it.

Then again maybe I'm wrong and that's why I'm not a teacher :-)

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#95

Post by baud147258 »

smcl wrote: post #90
baud147258 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OK but "Why was the Confederacy pro-slavery?" or "How did the Nazis justify their actions?" are different questions than "give 3 ‘good’ reasons for slavery and 3 bad reasons" which was the example given. You are right, that's why I said that the question was poorly asked. > the teacher was oversimplifying the language of the question for his/her students to the point where all nuance was lost ... which suggests the…

> You are right, that's why I said that the question was poorly asked. Yikes - not sure how I misread or misunderstood that

No problem! ;)

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#96

Post by prepend »

smcl wrote: post #87
prepend wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think depending on the exercise trying to explore the “good” side of the holocaust would be useful too. The purpose is not to try to list why the holocaust is good, it isn’t obviously, but I can think of at least two exercises where this is useful for a fourth grade class. 1) to use an extreme example, likely the worst in the world’s history, to make it hard or impossible to find positives is harder to think. 2) to…

OK enough people are replying this way that I'm wondering if this is maybe an American-English vs British-English thing. When you say "find a good reason for " ... do you mean "Why does justify doing "? If so then we're all talking at cross purposes and misunderstanding each other - but I'd really suggest phrasing because BOY that original version sounds so bad. We are in agreement re the media angle. This is clearly…

This is a good way of looking at it linguistically. I’m really only familiar with en_us so I can’t speak about U.K. versions.

But when I see good in quotations that usually means that it’s not actually good, but someone says it is. So I don’t know if the context is exactly “why does person x think it’s good” but it seems close and let’s you respond and think about something without actually agreeing it is truly good or the instructor recognizing it is good.

An example may be “describe how anchovies are ‘delicious’” although of course anchovies tasting horrible is in no way close to slavery. But might show how you ask the question by actually biasing that anchovies suck but you’re going to say they are delicious for the sake of thought.

If anything putting good in quotes signals that slavery is not good and biased the discussion. For most topics I think that will yield worse results, but slavery is fine to bias students against. I don’t really care if people keep open minds about slavery.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#97

Post by nwah1 »

afpx wrote: post #7

It shows how far the US has shifted to the right when the NYT would describe Pinker as a liberal. Twenty years ago his views were considered more center-right (in the US at least). But, I am off-topic ... The biggest problem with social media is that it massively amplifies radical (and, often ignorant or misguided) opinions. This especially disturbs me, because I sort of helped cause it. As a kid, I wanted the more r…

Pinker is a liberal, in almost any sense you could come up with, either by present standards, or the standards of twenty years ago.

I don't want to seem harsh, but unfortunately it seems warranted. Perhaps you have a poor familiarity with his work, and with the landscape of political thought, and intellectual culture in general.

Or perhaps you are the type of increasingly common individual that this piece is concerned about... an overly tribalistic individual for whom empirical reality conforms to politics.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#98

Post by Consultant32452 »

asabjorn wrote: post #83
Consultant32452 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that the left is less guilty of being counter-factual than they are of censorship. But that's really two sides of the same coin. The contents of the James Damore memo comes to mind. Twitter verified status has become a political weapon to punish people who don't toe the party line. Youtube de-listing, demonetization, and banning.

I think this is less about left and right, and more about extreme elements on both sides arguing for actions supported by rhetoric use of factual statements that are easily questioned and where studies are available that would put their view into doubt.

So you feel that the majority of our national media with its treatment of DaMore, Twitter, and Google are extreme elements of the left? Or did you only mean to refer to DaMore and the banned people on various social media outlets are extreme elements?

Of course some of the things in Damore's memo are easily questioned. But that's not the problem. The problem is that his memo, which is well within the mainstream of accepted modern psychology/sociology was treated like the Nazi manifesto. If it can be easily questioned, then easily question it rather than censor it. And there's no need to put the national spotlight on this poor schlub to try to ruin his life, even if I totally support Google's right to fire him.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#99

Post by debt »

The other day I started reading a book and fell asleep almost instantly because it was so boring.

So instead I started listening to a lecture on YouTube and I fell asleep almost instantly.

So then after that I opened that Instagram explore page and was engaged for hours.

Social media is definitely making us dumber. It's 15-60-second hits of all the good parts of everything and that's it.

No context, no substance, just the good stuff.

Re: Social Media: Making Us Dumber?

#100

Post by humanrebar »

asabjorn wrote: post #49
boomlinde wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a normal and widely held opinion that kids should have good parents, but it's not a normal and widely held opinion that bad parents deserve to be killed or threatened with violence, at least not outside self-defense and law enforcement. It's not "I believe that fair taxation, transparent government and high standard public services" that is the extreme, abnormal opinion—it's "because you don't, you should be sen…

I think this comment is a bit off base as we are clearly not talking about physical violence. The violent intolerance I was pointing out is the pattern of seeking to ostracize and remove the livelihood of people that don’t agree with your view, or question factual statements used to justify it.

I'm not sure I would call anything that's not physical "violence". There are other words for that: oppression, tyranny, bullying, verbal abuse, corruption, etc.
Post reply on HN