Charles Elias VanPoppen writes: “Kenneth Udut I listen to people that don’t say what I think all the time. It’s how to be informed and objective. Seems like you stay sheltered in an echo chamber based on how you curate your information. Maybe I’m wrong. But you very easily write people off based on very little. “Sone friends said Dore got weird so no thanks”. I’ll put this again here because it’s a pattern you’ll see with me that instead of batting heads with it I have philosophical reasons I curate through people I talk to online I do what I think they call “surveying” – just a natural habit I’ve done since I was young – To get a variety of different opinions from different perspectives but – I do it through people I can talk back with in two way conversations. It doesn’t matter whether it’s politics or literature or philosophy – and I do it that way because I like the back and forth of conversation. I see conversation as a scaffolding and people go back and forth building and deconstructing each other’s opinions until they eventually reach a bridge and understand each other It’s negotiating for meaning and I love the process This stands in contrast to broadcasted opinions. Sound bites, news shows, comedians, documentaries, etc – these are one way. And we could do a reading room where everybody reads the same piece or watches the same clip and then shares opinions, But unfortunately it’s usually: “isn’t this person correct?” And so it’s more like a pedagogical situation for the person who shares the clip wants to teach an opinion. I call it parroting sometimes but that’s not a nice way to put it. And I’m not looking to be converted because I have a set of opinions important to me

Charles Elias VanPoppen writes: “Kenneth Udut I listen to people that don’t say what I think all the time. It’s how to be informed and objective. Seems like you stay sheltered in an echo chamber based on how you curate your information. Maybe I’m wrong. But you very easily write people off based on very little. “Sone friends said Dore got weird so no thanks”.

I’ll put this again here because it’s a pattern you’ll see with me that instead of batting heads with it I have philosophical reasons

I curate through people I talk to online

I do what I think they call “surveying” – just a natural habit I’ve done since I was young –

To get a variety of different opinions from different perspectives but

– I do it through people I can talk back with in two way conversations.

It doesn’t matter whether it’s politics or literature or philosophy – and I do it that way because I like the back and forth of conversation.

I see conversation as a scaffolding and people go back and forth building and deconstructing each other’s opinions until they eventually reach a bridge and understand each other

It’s negotiating for meaning and I love the process

This stands in contrast to broadcasted opinions.

Sound bites, news shows, comedians, documentaries, etc – these are one way.

And we could do a reading room where everybody reads the same piece or watches the same clip and then shares opinions,

But unfortunately it’s usually: “isn’t this person correct?”

And so it’s more like a pedagogical situation for the person who shares the clip wants to teach an opinion.

I call it parroting sometimes but that’s not a nice way to put it.

And I’m not looking to be converted because I have a set of opinions important to me

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


two + 7 =

Leave a Reply