I have noticed recently that people are talking and writing more in cliches than actually participating in meaningful discourse. Perhaps it is easier it the weeks before an election to have surrogates speak in catch phrases and slogans than to actually look a voter in the eye and speak from the heart. But this phenomenon is not limited to politicians.
The advertising world is, obviously, replete with examples but that is their entire purpose. Isn't it? Picking a catchy phrase, evoking an image, associating a catchy little tune with a product and saturating the airwaves/print media/internet. Communicating through minimalism.
As a result, meaningful human discourse is suffering. Stock questions invite epigrammatic answers. "'Morning, Joe. How you doin'?" "If I was any better -- I'd be you, Bill." is a typical exchange. No one really answers questions anymore. And, sadly, no one asks questions for which they care to have an answer. It is just that people are expected to talk to each other so they do . . . after a fashion.
I spend a lot of time talking to people on vacation and I understand that they want to leave their day-to-day stuff behind, but I overhear and am involved in the most inane conversations you could imagine. And the thing is, they seem to be pre-packaged conversations bought at some wholesale opinion store. I have joked around about deja vu in this blog but I swear I've had the same word-for-word conversation with ten different people. Doesn't anyone have an opinion of their own, anymore?
People used to tell stories, reminisce, philosophize, teach. We used to honestly seek out others ideas and view points. Now we are divided into camps of pre-packaged thoughts and opinions. But, worst of all, they aren't even our own, well thought out, struggled over, weighing the issues and consequences, heart-felt opinions. They are someone else's ideas that we pass off as "what we believe."
Schools dispense pre-packaged, sanitized, politically correct factoids to the students and hotly debate, outside the classroom, whether conflicting ideas or theories should be taught. Shouldn't some of that intellectual energy be going on inside the classroom? If the students never hear about conflicting theories, how will they learn to think for themselves?
We have the ability to live in a golden age of enlightenment. Communication is instantaneous. Our body of knowledge is broad and deep. Yet, our experiences and intellectual pursuits are shallow and repetitive. We live in a world that tries to niche people for marketing purposes; controlled by politicians who demonize conflicting viewpoints and are educated by politically motivated teachers who try to limit free thought.
No wonder I can't find a decent conversation any more.
No comments:
Post a Comment