The Modern-Day Mind-Killer
Is the thesis of this article: &quot;it&#x27;s important not to consume media or accept popular opinions that trigger cognitive dissonance BECAUSE our preferences are often determined by arbitrary aspects of our environment, bolstered by post-hoc rationalization?&quot; If so, that seems like the exact opposite of a good idea, because the dissonance is probably there because of the exact same arbitrary forces.<p>It also seems to imply that majority opinions are things to reject, rather than interrogate. It applies a sort of inherent &quot;don&#x27;t be a sheep&quot; mentality, but if it&#x27;s very cold outside then covering yourself in wool and keeping your calorie ingestion up might actually be the most reasonable way to stay warm.<p>Maybe I&#x27;m just old-fashioned, but I think this realization leads to the need to challenge everything about your environment, accept the idea that different points of view exist, and carefully evaluate if ideas are good and truthful independently of their popularity. Implicitly siding with the minority opinion every time leaves you just as open to manipulation as trusting the majority every time, and we see both approaches used in many nation&#x27;s politics.