334. Crossing distance or crossing it out
In this blog, and elsewhere, I have discussed the
benefits and problems of what I called ‘cognitive distance’, variety of
thought. Too much distance makes collaboration difficult, too little distance
can yield boredom and stagnation. Therefore, there is ‘optimal distance’: large
enough to make contact potentially interesting, but not so large that this
potential cannot be realised. Crossing distance requires effort and experience
in dealing with people who think differently. As this ability grows, one can
deal with greater distance.
One of the problems of present society is that people
isolate themselves in segregated groups, with different group identities, as
discussed in the preceding item in this blog. They become unable and unwilling
to engage in reasonable debate, giving and assimilating constructive criticism,
and see difference as an assault on their identity. Rather than crossing
distance, distance is crossed out.
This due, in part, to the development of the ‘filter
bubbles’ created by internet companies (Google, Facebook Amazon, ….) who tailor
information, in the form of news, gossip, and product offerings, to the profiles
of people constructed on the basis of past choices and contacts. People get
served with what they are used to. This reduces cognitive distance.
Partly, the development is due also to people seeking
their identity in culturally homogeneous groups, as discussed in the preceding
item of this blog.
The romanticism of being nested in a culturally
homogeneous group, with shared blood, soil, and national mythology, wins out
from the romanticism of transcending boundaries and engaging in adventures of the
new.
The process becomes a vicious circle, with lack of
trust and understanding further tightening the noose of cultural identity, and
people nestling deeper in their cultural cocoons. .
Lacking practice in dealing with people who think
differently, at larger cognitive distance, one unlearns how to cope with it.
People neglect to learn to give and absorb constructive criticism. Differences
of view condense and harden in differences of identity, which are less open to
compromise and negotiation.
This cultural
entrenchment is to the detriment of both individuals and society. Individuals
suffer from a narrowing of perspective that stints intellectual and spiritual
development. Society loses its ability for reasonable debate, to reconcile
different views and interests in peace and trust.
No comments:
Post a Comment