I don't need to search up insane hilarity online; I have people for that. And it's not like they want money for it; it's just a thing they do. It can be assumed that I fill some equally odd functions for others, providing some form of cognitive hoopla that they use as grist for their own internal mills. Which is good!
My opinions on the news are often picked up from others. I don't have time to form complete and coherent opinions on every damn thing out there, so I borrow opinions from people with expertise.
By these mechanisms, a large part of my thinking is done for me by way of social interaction. I suspect that this is true of everyone.
....
It is for this reason that I think we need better "explainers" and "PR people" working in and for science and academia, and basic training in "explaining your shit" for everyone working there.
The expert is our friend, a potential expansion of our ability to think-by-appropriation. The ivory tower of jargon, of bad media reporting, of inability to explain? Those are enemies. In the sense of having a socially-managed mind, those problems are growing failures for my thinking, and I don't like them.
Consider taxes, and what they pay for. If you're not sure what they pay for, I invite you to consider the red labels in the picture below (which was also appropriated, of course):
That lady with the "Zero taxes" sign is not thinking clearly. Whatever social circle she's cribbing her economic ideas from is failing to provide her with some pretty basic information.
This is partly her problem, in that "Taxes pay for at least a few things you like" is pretty damn easy information to lay hands on. It is also partly a problem for her social grouping, because those folks have at least one serious problem in their group thinking. But it's also a problem for all of us.
Anytime you make your discipline harder to approach, you invite social schizophrenia; you risk making other people dumber by denying them whatever expertise you have.
Apply barriers with caution.
