This article summarizes an interview with Dr. Andrei Stupu, a researcher of human intelligence, on how the internet is fundamentally altering the way we think, form opinions, and make moral judgments. The central theme is that our thinking is inherently narrative and emotional, a trait the digital world exploits, leading to increased polarization and a decreased reliance on facts.
We Are More Emotional Than We Think
According to Dr. Stupu, human thinking is not logical or paradigmatic, but narrative-driven. We often make decisions based on emotions and construct rational explanations afterward. This reliance on stories makes us prone to internal contradictions, a concept explained by Albert Bandura’s theory of “moral disengagement,” where people act against their values while maintaining a positive self-image.
The Internet Creates ‘Segregated Diversity’
The internet gives the illusion of infinite information, but algorithms create what Stupu calls “segregated diversity.” They feed us content that aligns with our existing beliefs, trapping us in information bubbles. This digital isolation prevents exposure to differing viewpoints, which in the past occurred naturally in families or communities. The result is increased radicalization and moral outrage when confronted with opposing ideas.
Stories Are More Powerful Than Facts
The article argues that major societal debates are not clashes of rational arguments but of deeply emotional, personal narratives. For example, in the U.S. gun debate, both sides are driven by powerful stories rooted in experience and emotion, which cannot be swayed by statistics alone.
Conclusion: How to Defend Yourself
To counter the negative influence of emotional narratives and algorithms, Dr. Stupu recommends a two-step approach. The first is **self-awareness**: understanding your core values and the origins of your beliefs. The second is **critical thinking**: not by over-analyzing everything, but by recognizing personal biases, such as confirmation bias, and consciously pausing automatic judgments to remain open to other perspectives.
Mentoring question
Reflecting on your own media consumption, can you identify an instance where an emotional narrative shaped your opinion more strongly than objective facts? What steps can you take to recognize and challenge your own confirmation bias?
Leave a Reply