1/ The overwhelming majority of people who observably and strongly disagree with strangers due so because of some particular and subjectively salient cue. Their priors fill in the gaps with varying errors.
-
Show this thread
-
2/ That's not to say their aren't people with very good reasons for loudly condemning the actions or beliefs of other people or groups. It's just that they represent a vanishingly small proportion of visible cross-boundary interactions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 Retweeted 💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫
3/ The world is stupefyingly large, and our social compressions are lossy. The best we *can* do is align our social attention with opportunities that afford real agency, while broadly trying to expand the latter space.https://twitter.com/generativist/status/1261325504256200709 …
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
4/ The flip side of this is that your perceptions are limited to your experiences, and that range is narrow. So you very much do need people loudly standing up to say something is fucked up, if it's part of their experience. You'll miss systemic issues, otherwise.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
5/ That's why trust is so important. Because distrust calcifies boundaries by making it easier and easier to dismiss someone else's experiences if they do not comport to your own. It makes ignorance even more seductive.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likesShow this thread
6/ I don't have any technological solutions to this yet, although I do have ideas to implement. But one simple and effective individual-level practice is amplifying the voices of people you trust with direct experience rather than those removed from it (including yourself).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.