Public discourse rots when humility dies

It may be an age-related perception, but with each passing day I recognize the world in which I grew up less and less. And no, I’m not talking about advancements in science and technology, the liberalizing of societal attitudes (to love, sex, and family), nor am I jabbing a gnarled old finger of resentment at those darn kids these days with their so-called “music”. (Au contraire, much of my favorite music is so-called.)

No, this changed and unrecognizable world I’m describing is our collective mental environment, a world consisting of the confused sum total of our individual filter bubbles (our preferred information sources, and those Big Tech conditions us to prefer) as well as whatever meta-level filter bubble is placed over us as a whole (government- and industry-compromised news coverage, speech codes, and, in Canada at least, compelled speech).

The tangible evidence of this new paradigm can be found in the absolutist nature of so much of the discourse to be found online, as well as out there in meatspace, and can be recognized in what seems to be a growing unwillingness of some to even hear opposing viewpoints, or even allow such viewpoints to be aired publicly.

The argument I’ve seen repeatedly is that by “platforming” people or groups who engage in wrongthink, you’re engaging in “othersidism”, a concept implying that there is no conscionable “other side” worth debating on certain issues, usually in the realm of rights and equality for ______. (Fill in the blank with whichever group’s…