x

Experience the best version of stumagz by getting the app.

Get College News, Updates
at just 5 MB

Continue to Mobile Website

I've often wondered if the thinkers of yore would have managed to make an impact as big as they did, had they only lived in the information age. I mean, logically and on paper, it should seem obvious that with the internet, they would have a wider reach almost instantly, their words not being written and printed, but published online for the world over to see and read from their vast resources of knowledge. 

But I don't think that would have been the case. 

The internet, instead of bringing us together, has done a fantastic job in separating us. Today, we've formed cliques and echo chambers where everyone agrees with each other on pretty much everything and there are various reasons for that, including the reduction of quality in debates and Arnab Goswami's shouting that has changed the impression of a debate to a shouting match for the entire country. I hate this man so much for dumbing down an entire nation with just his face on the screen, there simply is not a proper debate anymore, people are reduced to insults and worse when someone gets into an argument these days.  

It is still essential for us to challenge our notions so that we may better defend them in the event of a discussion or exchange of ideas. This is absolutely imperative to a democracy: it is obvious that two people may not have the same opinions about certain things, but if these two people are willing to hear each other out, consider the options and agree upon one thing, it means progress for our society. We often complain that our society is regressive (it is) and that we need to do something to change it (we should), but have you noticed that the people you talk to about this, about changing society, are the people who hold the same kind of opinions you do? 

We cannot talk among ourselves and nod vigorously when someone makes a good point, no, that isn't helping anyone and you are basically preaching to the choir. Instead, tackle problems head on, argue with ideologues, self-proclaimed ones at least, and challenge their notions. By doing so, you are also putting your own beliefs in question and will most likely end up making it stronger depending on how well the debate goes. 

Do not fall prey to Arnab Goswami's style of debate where he shouts everyone down and presents his face to the entire country to laugh at, be calm, be patient, debate like educated people and don't fling accusations like a monkey flicking channa.   

Echo Chambers can be great comfort zones where everyone has the same political opinions you have, but change will not come when you tackle only the people in your echo chamber. It is imperative for progress in our society to come from people who are diametrically opposed to each other's opinions, yet come together to work on a single issue. There is a time and place for an echo chamber, but it is to not form opinions and feel bad about where the country is headed. It is, however, great to let off some steam about those who do not agree with you, so there's that. 

Don't box yourself into groups where everyone agrees with you, diversify instead, participate in various talks if you have to. Cheers!  

Message

Responses