Ummm I'm not sure. I think that when an individual forms an idea, then it is better formed if discussed with other humans. I argue quite a lot, I have even been known to play devils advocate from time to time. But as I say elsewhere, I do this in order to clarify my own thoughts, to test them against the thoughts of others. I think that it is imperative that we each do this. How can you know a good idea for what it is without first hearing bad ideas or indeed examining whether or not a better idea already exists?
On Friday, 25 January 2013 07:43:17 UTC, archytas wrote: > > If there is one concept on Earth that has been the absolute bane of > human existence (besides global elitism), it would have to be the > concept of the “majority opinion”. The moment men began refusing to > develop their own world views without first asking “What does everyone > else think?”, they set themselves up for an endless future of > failures. We are, of course, very social beings, and our natures > drive us to seek those of like mind and spirit in what some might call > a “tribal imperative”. However, this imperative to organize is often > manipulated by those who understand the psychological mechanisms > behind it. Oligarchs and tyrants abuse and exploit the inherent > social natures of the people in order to fool them into abandoning > their individuality for the sake of the group, or some abstract and > dishonest ideal. When successful, the organization of a culture > becomes bitter and twisted, changing from a tribe or a community of > sovereign individuals, into a nightmare collective of soulless sheep. > > Human beings desperately want to belong, but, they also desperately > want to understand the environment around them. Often, the desire to > belong and the desire to know the truth conflict. In some societies, > in order to be accepted, one must give up on his search for truth and > avoid eliciting the anger of others. This causes a severe mental and > emotional disturbance within a population. In order to reconcile > their conflicting needs within a system that does not nurture their > quest for transparency, they tend to unconsciously cling to the > “majority view” as if their very existence depends on it. The idea of > the majority view or the “mainstream”, gives people the sense that > they are a part of a group, and at the same time, gives them the > illusion of being informed. > > The above from Zerohedge - is it right? What does it say about our > general ability to argue rationally? I agree with what is said here - > yet believe it suggests we need a radical alternative of education as > we have experienced it. > --
