I personally see public disagreements as a way to refine the intent of the person under the spotlight rather than a social display of individualism. When I disagree with someone it is not for the sake of disagreeing but rather to refine what I may think is a good idea that has a few weak points. I do this to those I respect and agree with because I hope that others will do this to me.
I think the broader question here is not whether we should encourage widespread agreement in order to create cohesion—but rather if we can ensure that the tenets we collectively agree on are correct conclusions. That is in my mind the main difference between rationalists and what I would call tribalists—in general the majority agree on tenets which are have serious rational flaws or they do simply not raise contest with said tenets. Otherwise if we do follow the leader, then if there are true flaws in that particular modus—we will never discover them.
I agree that it is hard to start a movement based on this—however I see this as a positive attribute. Just as the (flawed) idea of representative democracy was supposed to slow government to a crawl—the rationalist mindset slows group think and confirmation bias to a near halt. It is however a strong movement, however slow.
I personally see public disagreements as a way to refine the intent of the person under the spotlight rather than a social display of individualism. When I disagree with someone it is not for the sake of disagreeing but rather to refine what I may think is a good idea that has a few weak points. I do this to those I respect and agree with because I hope that others will do this to me.
I think the broader question here is not whether we should encourage widespread agreement in order to create cohesion—but rather if we can ensure that the tenets we collectively agree on are correct conclusions. That is in my mind the main difference between rationalists and what I would call tribalists—in general the majority agree on tenets which are have serious rational flaws or they do simply not raise contest with said tenets. Otherwise if we do follow the leader, then if there are true flaws in that particular modus—we will never discover them.
I agree that it is hard to start a movement based on this—however I see this as a positive attribute. Just as the (flawed) idea of representative democracy was supposed to slow government to a crawl—the rationalist mindset slows group think and confirmation bias to a near halt. It is however a strong movement, however slow.