Nowadays people spend less time to passively consume content, and more time interacting (and clashing) with each other in public debates. [...] could we expect that this change will eventually result in a renewed appreciation of objectivity and logical reasoning?
Unlike the ancient Greeks, we have internet, where the easiest way to win “public debate” is to join the bubble that already agrees with your conclusions.
It would be quite ironic if the cancel culture turned out to be the savior of public discourse, by making people realize that they cannot keep hiding in their bubbles forever, because sooner or later someone will come and unplug their computers.
Even without Internet, greek agoras had their deal of mobs, tyrannids and groupthink. Logic is only one of the many weapon of rethoric, but it is an useful weapon (it struck me to notice that even 4chan/pol now has a table of logical fallacies in evidence at the top of the board).
Yes, if we have to be optimistic in the long run cancel culture could help society by developing anticorps.
Unlike the ancient Greeks, we have internet, where the easiest way to win “public debate” is to join the bubble that already agrees with your conclusions.
It would be quite ironic if the cancel culture turned out to be the savior of public discourse, by making people realize that they cannot keep hiding in their bubbles forever, because sooner or later someone will come and unplug their computers.
Even without Internet, greek agoras had their deal of mobs, tyrannids and groupthink. Logic is only one of the many weapon of rethoric, but it is an useful weapon (it struck me to notice that even 4chan/pol now has a table of logical fallacies in evidence at the top of the board).
Yes, if we have to be optimistic in the long run cancel culture could help society by developing anticorps.