These are very long articles, and this is long chapter number ten out of twelve. So it's hard to TL;DR with any respect to a series of articles that's trying to TL;DR sociology, politics and polarization over the last half century.
The gist is that we have internal struggles between survival through power compared to thriving through critical thinking. This struggle is affected by the people around us; amplified because being part of a group pulls us in some ways towards survival instincts, and if we're lucky also pulls us towards critical thinking. As groups, we kind of have the same collective struggles as well.
The latest article uses ideas and terminology from the previous nine articles that I've attempted to summarize in a tiny paragraph above. It goes into some depth explaining how our country has slid, politically, from critical thinking and having opinions slightly one way or the other off from center (a center that has shifted over time) to having opinions grouped much further apart. Aka polarization.
And I'm not even done reading it. I enjoy it, and I'm optimistic models like this can help us, but I know that some people believe the models cut too many things out. I think that's problematic, because it is a very complex issue with a multitude of variables, and I think simplified models (and terminology) are necessary to explore the ultimate problem and potential solutions.
The gist is that we have internal struggles between survival through power compared to thriving through critical thinking. This struggle is affected by the people around us; amplified because being part of a group pulls us in some ways towards survival instincts, and if we're lucky also pulls us towards critical thinking. As groups, we kind of have the same collective struggles as well.
The latest article uses ideas and terminology from the previous nine articles that I've attempted to summarize in a tiny paragraph above. It goes into some depth explaining how our country has slid, politically, from critical thinking and having opinions slightly one way or the other off from center (a center that has shifted over time) to having opinions grouped much further apart. Aka polarization.
And I'm not even done reading it. I enjoy it, and I'm optimistic models like this can help us, but I know that some people believe the models cut too many things out. I think that's problematic, because it is a very complex issue with a multitude of variables, and I think simplified models (and terminology) are necessary to explore the ultimate problem and potential solutions.