You may argue with the content of this article in one way or another, but the main fact - that all this communication, access to information, has resulted in al

You may argue with the content of this article in one way or another, but the main fact - that all this communication, access to information, has resulted in almost zero global discursive improvement - is something blaringly obvious to reflect on: "Were did these assumptions were wrong?" >This sounds counterintuitive. Debate sharpens the mind, right? Exposure to different viewpoints broadens our perspective. That's what Socrates taught us, what our schools drill into us, what every "how to think better" course preaches. But something fundamental has been broken in discourse, I wouldn't say it is "counterintuitive" because it wasn't "intuitive" to begin with: this is some artificially-constructed wisdom, but it is generally accepted, has been built up upon centuries of not millenia, and is fundamental to the way many core aspects of modern society are designed, like freedom of expression and democratic institutions.