by Jessica Reed
Eduardo Ferreira wants readers and contributors to think about why (and how) they participate in online debates:
I would like to debate the philosophical and psychological issue of personal motivations to act, "why we do things". It is an ambitious subject, because it relates to what makes us tic. The responses we might have in this matter are mainly through a voyage of introspections into our psyche, what I would call the "undiscovered continent".
I would start by an apparently simple question: why do we post in oD?
I said elsewhere "there must always be some element of self-importance for one to conceive that his ideas are significant enough to be made public".
It is presumptuous indeed to assume that we know enough of anything to state our position. Even a lifetime of study would not lead us to the full understanding of a subject therefore our views are all necessarily incomplete and maybe wrong. How dare we to state them?
And even a full understanding of a situation does not authorize our intervention without the full understanding of consequences.
Obviously our actions may account for nothing, and participation on oD has hardly far-reaching consequences. It's not like we are about to "change the world", as Billy_Coconut said. However, and in the same sentence, Billy also said that "the world is disfunctional enough". Does that mean our contributions would increase the disfunctionality or they will be lost in the middle of it?
I guess that a rational one can use is that others, also without full understanding of issues and consequences, have no problem in stating their position, so why not us?
Another rational is that our opinion may be wrong, and in that case others will rapidly point it out. The diversity of ideas is always positive and leads to the opening of horizons. Uniformity and conformity are lethal to evolution of anything. So, right or wrong, we should put our ideas to the test, and learn from the consequences.
That obviously requires a predisposition to change and learn, something that is not common, unfortunately...
And then there is the irrational, the emotional and instinctive. Personally I am driven by the need to respond to certain ideas that I may think are wrong and harmful, under the immature fear of the influence they may gain if not countered.
So, what does really drive us, the rational or the irrational?
