I don't like the term "polarization" because the reduction to a spectrum, much less a one-dimensional one with two poles, doesn't represent most issues well or

I don't like the term "polarization" because the reduction to a spectrum, much less a one-dimensional one with two poles, doesn't represent most issues well or at all, and even where it might be applicable, the reason why someone is "at one of the poles" matters a lot more than what opinion they have. Someone is adamantly against the death penalty as a result of a lot of weighing and reflection, and is able to argue their opinion, is very different from someone who just holds it because their peers do, and is unable or unwilling to think things through for themselves. So I'd say where people get "more radical" just by being exposed to different views that kind of shows there is something more than just deliberation going on, and that issue seems orthogonal to the world seeming more confusing and confused because we see more of it (which I agree plays a role). And though I agree without reserveration that technology doesn't cause that per se, the way we use it for the most part (and which we seem to have accepted as the way to go, or at least as somehow unavoidable), turn things into headlines and TLDR and memes, and those into things to "share" or "like", seems like an already existing problem put on steroids to me.