An Inspired Thought

Monday, 11 July 2005

I had an inspired thought today (my many critics are laughing at the tiny potentiality that Koko the Marketing Gorilla managed to squeeze a thought out of the chunk of teakwood that is his skull) about blogging and the future, and I wanted my numerous readers to give comment (myself, my wife... my dog ):

Is blogging the ceaseless exposure of your intellect to that which confirms what your prejudices already are? Is this an unhealthy support of your own misconceptions? The highest goal of communication is when you persuade others, or when their ideas persuade you, to believe in something new. Simple confirmation of what you already believe is stroking of your ego. Unless, of course, you're right all the time. I don't know anybody like that, even my wife.

Are we doing that here? Are we stroking our own egos? Someone look around at my blog, and see if you feel compelled to persuade me (or conversely, are swayed by my ideas) to expand my/your mind.

I am afeared (as they used to say in ol' Kentuck) that blogging has made us MORE insular, swayed as we are by reading the words of the loudest few, and believing that those words represent what the great number of the unwashed masses believe. We are, perhaps, mired in our own personal mudbogs of thought.

Now, the real question is, what becomes, positive or negative, as a result? I don't have an answer, but was hoping that the two drunken fools who read my vacuous ramblings might sound off.

posted by: underwhelmed at July 11, 2005 16:37 | link | comments (3) |

Comments:

#1 12 July 2005 - 08:25

I agree with everything you just said. Heehee.

I think that some blogs fall into the catagory of "our own personal mudbogs of thought", but yours and most of the other blogs I read avoid that trap. The way you and others avoid it is by linking to not only articles and other blogs that agree with you, but also to sites that disagree or have a contrary opinion that is well thought out.

The biggies on the the right (Insty, RWN, and LGF) link and quote Kos and the DU on a fairly regular basis. Usually it's to point out how stupid or venial they are but when you hit the link you tend to browse around to find out what the other opinions are all about ( or at least I do). This tends to make the original site seem less masturbatory.

Also, comments are very important. The big blogs get their share of trolls, but they also get some well reasoned discourse from the opposition. It's odd that you posted this when my own thoughts have recently turned in this direction, just this past week I promised myself to become more engaged in commenting, especially on smaller blogs and ones were I disagree with the host on some particular topic.

In the end, I will still read the blogs that are "echo chambers" because I do like my point of view backed up (who doesn't?) and because they offer talking points for when I'm discussing a subject with a non-believer, but the blogs I'll click on 4 or 5 times a day are those that offer a glimpse of what people on the other side of the aisle are thinking.

Anonymous

#2 12 July 2005 - 08:27

Sorry, that last comment was by me.

Brass.

Anonymous

#3 12 July 2005 - 19:42

Thanks for the reflection. Your post expanded on my thoughts, and I am glad for it.

I'm gonna start perusing blogs that I don't entirely agree with. It's not a challenge to get Eric Cowperthwaite to agree with me; my friends love me because we see so many things alike.

The real benefit to the WWW is communicating with people whose thoughts are somewhat more diverse than your own - to encourage a gentle competition of ideas, without a "victor" being called. I'm no moral relativist, but I don't always see in black and white, and believe that healthy stimulation can be brought about from vigorous but pleasant discussion about your differences, not your similarities.

underwhelmed

Comments:

About me

Links

Counter

An Inspired Thought

posted by: underwhelmed at July 11, 2005 16:37 | link | comments (3) |

Recent comments

Archives